Is the Single Bullet Theory plausible?

A middle-schooler in Birmingham, Alabama, writing a paper for English class, recently asked me for my thoughts on the famous Single Bullet Theory,  the keystone of the official theory of the Lone Gunman.

I referred him to the most balanced and concise appraisal on the Web, which is found on the 22 November 1963 site: The JFK Assassination Single-Bullet Theory Explained.

403 comments

  1. Well, I have to agree, the digest on the page referred to seems to cover all of the major points quite well.

    The point the WC apologists have contested with the most vigor is the position of Kennedy’s back wound. This article has it correctly placed at the Third Thoracic Vertebrae.
    \\][//

    • Steve Stirlen says:

      Why don’t we hear from someone who was ACTUALLY at the autopsy for his views?

      On 11th September, 1997, Sibert provided a deposition to the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB). He was also interviewed by William Matson Law for his book, In the Eye of History: Disclosures in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence (2005). Sibert rejected the account given by Arlen Specter about the single-bullet theory: “What a liar. I feel he got his orders from above – how far above I don’t know.”

      • Steve Stirlen says:

        How about another piece of information from someone who was ACTUALLY present at the autopsy:

        Sibert: Well I-that single-bullet theory-when they had me come up to the ARRB deposition there at College Park, I said, “Well before I come up there, I want you to know one thing. I’m not an advocate of the single-bullet theory.” I said, “I don’t believe it because I stood there two foot from where that bullet wound was in the back, the one that they eventually moved up to the base of the neck. I was there when Boswell made his face sheet and located that wound exactly as we described it in the FD 302.” And I said, “Furthermore, when they examined the clothing after it got into the Bureau, those bullet holes in the shirt and the coat were down 5 inches there. So there is no way that bullet could have gone that low then rise up and come out the front of the neck, zigzag and hit Connally and then end up pristine on a stretcher over there in Dallas.”

        Law: You don’t believe in the single-bullet theory. Period.

        Sibert: There is no way I will swallow that. They can’t put enough sugar on it for me to bite it. That bullet was too low in the back.

      • “It’s at C7/T1.”~John McAdams

        The picture McAdams provides clearly shows that the bullet wound in Kennedy’s back is NOT at C7/T1.

        C7/T1 is at the beginning of the “Leatherneck” just at the the first deep crease just above the top of the ruler.

        This picture shows the wound at T3.
        The same location on the Death Certificate, the shirt and coat, the ‘dot’ on Boswell’s face-sheet, and the testimony of SSA Sibert, who attended the so-called “autopsy” and stood less than an arms length from that wound while it was measured.
        \\][//

        • Gerry Simone says:

          Willy, not to defend McAdams or the SBT, Corsi’s book emphasizes that Boswell said ‘about’ T3.

          This pic by Paul Seaton might give a better indication.

          http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/diagrams/kennedy_graphics2.htm

          Now, the X-rays do show that there was a fracture to the Transverse Process @ T1 (not showing in Seaton’s illustrative x-ray over-lay)

          McAdams has another presentation here showing an alignment using the ear as a reference measurement guide, however, it also has problems which I will show in a bit:

          http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/angle.jpg

          This article by Dr. Aguilar & Kathy Cunningham in History Matters explain that an alignment at T1 requires JFK’s head to be leaning forward for the ‘revised’ SBT to work, which is not the case based on the photographic record. Furthermore, the bullet would have deviated to the left of where it’s supposed to hit JBC. The WC and Dr. Nichols calculate the downward angle of the Magic Bullet to be 17 degrees thru JFK, but McAdams’ reference page has it at 21 degrees (is that fudging?).

          http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_6.htm

          BTW:

          To get a better idea of the distance from the top of the collar, one should examine the full back autopsy photo (like in the History Matters’ bootleg copy), not a cropped one like McAdams’ one above, although his link shows a larger photo, but you can Google to find a larger uncropped photo.

          ALSO, DOESN’T EVERYONE NOTICE HOW THE BACK OF JFK’S HEAD LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE COLORED IT IN WITH A BLACK MARKER. THE SHADOW DOESN’T LOOK NATURAL! (Geez, I wonder why?)

          ONE MORE THING, IS THAT AN ABRASION COLLAR AROUND A SMALLER, BUT PERFECTLY CIRCULAR ‘HOLE’ BELOW AND TO THE LEFT OF THE OVAL BACK ENTRY WOUND?

    • olle reimers says:

      I have recently found something that could put an end to this discussion. A question from a Lone Nutter had me reading the Warren Report on the subject another time. What I found took my breath away. The Warren Commission has deliberately deceived us. They have done it in such a brazenly fashion that we have not been able to see it. We wouldn´t believe that they would have had the nerve. But they had. However, after discovering this fraud; the whole Warren Report is in doubt.

      When you read the beginning, at p 96, the Commission refers to the autopsy report and all their measurements in determining the location of the wound. Then they go on for several pages; describing the wound to alternately be in the “neck” and in the “back”; sometimes even the “upper back”.

      When arriving at the conclusions, at p 107, however; the Commission introduces Rydberg´s sketch. According to the Commission this sketch is based on the data “provided by the autopsy doctors”.

      So what do we have? We have the autopsy report that was produced long before mr Tague came to the scene and distorted the original script. The autopsy report contained a sketch by Boswell based on the measurements in the autopsy report. After the emergence of James Tague the original script , including the autopsy report, was useless. It showed a bullet that must have exited (if at all) in Kennedy´s chest (this is also what FBI:s reenactment shows)! It had to go through the throat.

      So what did the Warren Commission do? They asked their most cunning lawyer to find a solution.

      Since the original autopsy report now is useless the new script contained the following: 1. Humes has burnt his notes (which later is detected to be a lie by Jeremy Gunn that Humes confessed to have committed); 2. the Kennedy family forbids the WC to use the autopsy photos and 3. Rydberg is introduced and makes some drawings.

      When the Warren Commission comes to it´s conclusion they don´t mention the autopsy report again. Instead the say “data provided by the autopsy doctors”! Would anyone even think that there should be any difference between this and the autopsy report? Of course not! But is a sly and cunning way for plausible deniability if someone should discover the fraud.

      However; the deliberate fraud is confirmed by the interview that is held by Dan Rather on CBS News with James Humes at the time for the release of the Warren Report. In the interview (which still is available on You Tube), by the end of it, Dan Rather holds up Boswell´s face sheet and Rydberg´s drawing to the public. He asks Humes if these two depictions show the identical location of the wound. Humes says: “yes”; although everyone can see that those depictions show two different locations 5 inches apart. But the fraud is completed.

      • olle reimers,

        Splendid commentary and reasoning. I find this point particularly perceptive:

        “When the Warren Commission comes to it´s conclusion they don´t mention the autopsy report again. Instead the say “data provided by the autopsy doctors”! Would anyone even think that there should be any difference between this and the autopsy report? Of course not! But is a sly and cunning way for plausible deniability if someone should discover the fraud.”~olle reimers

        Thank you for your input on this!
        \\][//

  2. Charles says:

    Well this is bound to be a barrel of fun isn’t it?

    It is a very good overview, but lacking discussion of CE 399, which for me provides the decisive answer. The bullet could not have performed as claimed and sustained so little deformation. My view is that the bullet was planted to tie the rifle to the shooting and that the Hiddel I.D was planted, per Simpich’s wallet discussion, to tie Oswald to the rifle. This also justified attaching a photo to the I.D. card.

  3. Charles says:

    One other thing. The limo itself likely would have provided compelling physical evidence for or against the single bullet theory but that too was eliminated. How odd.

  4. David Regan says:

    No, it is not. The Edgewood Arsenal tests proved this in 1964 and there are indications CE399 was not the only recovered bullet.

    Special Agent in Charge of the Dallas Field Office, Gordon Shanklin wrote a memo on the 22nd that seems to refer to two recovered bullets. In it he writes that FBI Assistant Director, Allan H. Belmont “advised that they have made arrangements with Secret Service to secure the bullet that apparently killed President KENNEDY and that Secret Service in Washington was calling SORRELLS here and instructing him to turn the gun over to us and that I should after receipt of the gun, also secure the bullet that shot Governor CONNALLY and have an Agent get on the plane and take the gun and the other bullet to Washington.” http://www.jfklancer.com/hunt/mystery.html

    FBI Assistant Director, Allan H. Belmont wrote a memo to his direct superior, Clyde Tolson, “stating that Secret Service had one of the bullets that struck President Kennedy and the other is lodged behind the President’s ear and we are arranging to get both of these.” A notation in the memo indicates the time to be 9:18 PM, which is after FBI agent Robert Frazier and Special Agent Elmer Todd claim to have accepted custody of CE 399. http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=707

    FBI agents James Sibert and Francis O’Neill, who were present at the autopsy, signed a receipt on the 22nd saying, “We hereby acknowledge receipt of a missle (sic) recovered by Commander James J. Humes, USN on this date.” http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/medical/md69_0001a.gif

  5. Neil says:

    Plausible? Yes. Under the right circumstances, the SBT is plausible

    The dispute about the theory centers mainly around the differing interpretations of the JFK and John Connally Medical Evidence. Some of the problems with the Medical Evidence are:

    – The debate over the correct location of Kennedy’s Back entry wound
    – Was Kennedy’s throat wound an Entry or Exit wound?
    – Did the bullet which entered Kennedy’s back hit his spine?
    – Is Governor Connally’s Back Entry wound evidence of a Tumbling or Yawing bullet?

    The photographic evidence and witness accounts have also raised doubt about the theory

    Due to all the disputed evidence, I don’t think it’s possible to state with absolute certainty that the circumstances needed for the SBT to have happened, were present on 11/22/63

    • Photon says:

      Charles,I sm sorry but your impression of how much damage the Carcano round should have sustained is simply incorrect,as has been previously demonstrated by the video that I referred to previously and previously documented experiments. Repeating a falsehood doesn’t make it correct
      Was the round tumbling when it hit Connolly? Robert Shaw’s Nov 22,1963 operative report clearly states” The wound of entrance was approx. three cm in its longest diameter” and makes that description prior to any surgical procedure. That is a written legal record-and proves within 6 hours of the assassination that it was known that the round was tumbling.
      The autopsy pictures document where the back wound was-as does the autopsy report in relation to anatomic landmarks. Burkley’s death certificate states that the back wound was ” about at the level of the third thoracic vertebra”-NOT that it was AT the level of the 3rd thoracic vertebra. The same report beloved by conspiracy advocates totally neglects mentioning the anterior neck wound-which makes it obvious that Burkley did not believe that a shot to the neck came from the front.
      It is unlikely that a bullet hit any part of a vertebra in the neck of JFK. The shock wave of the round passing through the neck was enough to chip off a piece of bone, as well as to create a spinal cord injury sufficient to generate the arm reflexes seen in the Zapruder film.
      The site is great for mentioning the standard and for the most part erroneous conspiracy claims about the Single Bullet fact. But it is short on actual facts and long on speculation and misinterpretation.

      • Neil says:

        Are you really going to keep ignoring Dr Shaw’s testimony and Governor Connally’s clothes?

        The bullet did not create a 3cm hole

        http://www.dallasnews.com/news/jfk50/explore/20131016-suit-worn-by-gov.-john-connally-wounded-by-jfk-gunman-gets-rare-public-display-in-austin.ece

        • Photon says:

          Picture 5 of your source refutes that claim.

          • Neil says:

            I agree that the photos of Connally’s clothes prove he was not hit by a yawing bullet

          • Gerry Simone says:

            Hole looks round to me and less than 3 cm in diameter (2.54 cm is 1 inch – no way that’s 1 inch wide)

            BTW, you can even read from Shaw’s testimony, herewith reproduced on McAdams’ site, that the wound of entry into JBC was described by him as 1.5 cm in length, not 3 cm. It was ***enlarged*** to 3 cm by incising the rough edges of the wound. (This explanation is more precise than the operation report).

            He also goes on saying that the bullet didn’t have to be tumbling* since it could have entered at an oblique angle (tangential).

            http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/shaw2.htm

            *Tumbling malarkey. Chapter 3 of the WCR mentions wound ballistic experts firing test rounds through a simulated neck which showed that the path of the bullet was straight and stable (192).

      • Steve Stirlen says:

        Photon:

        I think we have just experienced—again—“Photon’s mantra” or more correctly “Photon’s double standra.” Pray tell, what is the difference between AT the third thoracic and the level of the third thoracic? It surely does not say at the level of the first thoracic, does it Photon?

        This site may be short on actual facts, but it allows the WO to continue to live on because it allows your twisting of the English language to keep it alive.

        Here is something to chew on about the “Single Bullet fact.” You may not wish to read, because it comes from a man that was ACTUALLY there, not sitting at the local Starbuck’s.

        Sibert: Well I-that single-bullet theory-when they had me come up to the ARRB deposition there at College Park, I said, “Well before I come up there, I want you to know one thing. I’m not an advocate of the single-bullet theory.” I said, “I don’t believe it because I stood there two foot from where that bullet wound was in the back, the one that they eventually moved up to the base of the neck. I was there when Boswell made his face sheet and located that wound exactly as we described it in the FD 302.” And I said, “Furthermore, when they examined the clothing after it got into the Bureau, those bullet holes in the shirt and the coat were down 5 inches there. So there is no way that bullet could have gone that low then rise up and come out the front of the neck, zigzag and hit Connally and then end up pristine on a stretcher over there in Dallas.”

        Law: You don’t believe in the single-bullet theory. Period.

        Sibert: There is no way I will swallow that. They can’t put enough sugar on it for me to bite it. That bullet was too low in the back.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Know what amazes me, Steve? How America can still exist in a state of denial for all of these decades with the existence of statements such as this.

          Wake up, America, you’re dreaming.

      • Charles says:

        Again, I agree with Photon…“Repeating a falsehood doesn’t make it correct.”

      • “Robert Shaw’s Nov 22,1963 operative report clearly states” The wound of entrance was approx. three cm in its longest diameter” and makes that description prior to any surgical procedure. That is a written legal record-and proves within 6 hours of the assassination that it was known that the round was tumbling.” ~Photon

        We have been over this countless times and you damn well know it. Shaw corrected his operative report during SWORN TESTIMONY to one & one/half cm, saying that after cleaning and trimming it was the 3 cm he had put on his operative report.

        Your argument that once written on the Op Report, it is a binding legal document is false. The Doctor himself corrected it and explained where the 3 cm number came from.

        Your squabble about the T3 position of Kennedy’s back wound is desperate jabberwacky. This has been shown conclusively too many times to carousel it.

        There is also the lack of chain of custody for the Parkland Bullet, to be connected to CE399. This is the grand slam that flushes the Magic Bullet down to septic tank it belongs in.
        \\][//

        • Photon says:

          Even if you assume that perceptions stated four months after an incident ( refreshed several times during the interview by referring to the operative report) trump a written record dictated immediately after the procedure, you are ignoring what else Shaw said. While during his March,1964 interview he used the the term elliptical to describe the wound, 1.5 cm in diameter. As that distance is over twice the diameter of the Carcano round it was obviously tumbling when it hit Connolly-even based on the March interview.
          Willy, the Operative Report is most certainly a legally binding document, as is the entire medical record.Having reviewed hundreds of Operative Reports I have yet to see one that describes the post-operative dimensions of a wound prior to documenting the initiation of a procedure, particularly in a thoracic surgery case.
          Which doctor involved beside Burkley states unequivocally that the entry wound was at the third thoracic vertebra?

          • “Which doctor involved beside Burkley states unequivocally that the entry wound was at the third thoracic vertebra?”~Photon

            Boswell in the face-sheet notes and line pointing to the third thoracic vertebra.

            Now you are going to argue against the context you argued about changing an initial operative report and claim that Boswell “replaced that dot on his face-sheet with an ‘X’ later. And he did this NOT under oath as Shaw did, but in a response to a newspaper reporter.

            Again, you have Burkley’s death certificate, the most authoritative document in the case of death. You have the jacket and shirt, that STILL EXIST showing the position to be at T3.

            You are inventing a controversy here that does not actually exist.
            \\][//

          • 1.5 cm in diameter. As that distance is over twice the diameter of the Carcano round it was obviously tumbling when it hit Connolly.~Photon

            I have a 380 automatic bullet on my desk in front of me at this moment, it is larger than a quarter inch in diameter. That being slightly larger than your 1.5 cm.

            Shaw also said that the entry wound in Connally’s back was a tangential puncture wound. This would account for the slightly oval shape of the wound.
            Anyone who knows shapes and physics knows that a circle entering at an angle can only be the width of the circle, but for the angular dimension being elongated.
            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            “Burkley’s death certificate, the most authoritative document in the case of death.”
            So this general statement trumps the autopsy report with its specific documentation of wounds,organs, anatomic findings?
            You have a basic misunderstanding of the death certificate, which in some jurisdictions can even be filled out by funeral directors. It is not a record of a forensic investigation of cause of death, but instead a general impression ( often completed by the family physician) of the proximate cause of death.
            Again, which physician unambiguously stated that the wound of entrance of the back was at the level of the third thoracic vertebra? Boswell certainly didn’t, despite your misinterpretation of what his schematic autopsy report actually documented.

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Willy, Photon didn’t invent the controversy. Future President at the time Gerald Ford did this by moving the back wound up. Future Congressman Arlen Specter from Pennsylvania of the Warren Omission then dreamed up the Pristine, Magic, Single bullet.

          • “So this general statement trumps the autopsy report with its specific documentation of wounds,organs, anatomic findings?”~Photon

            Fact:
            The original autopsy report of JFK was destroyed in the fireplace of Dr Humes recreation room.
            A felony act of destruction of evidence in a case of “Murder in the 1st Degree”. Obstruction of justice. No statute of limitation.
            \\][//

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Dr. Shaw also testified that, while the bullet destroyed much of Connally’s 5th rib, as it ploughed through 10 cm. of the outer surface of this rib, the intercostal muscles above and below the 5th rib were remarkably untouched. Considering the relative narrowness of the width of the 5th rib, a long bullet such as the 6.5mm Carcano should have damaged the intercostal muscles, if it was tumbling.

        Consider, also, that SA Robert Frazier of the FBI testified to the WC that the exit hole, in the front of Connaly’s suit coat was a ROUND hole 3/8″ in diameter; less than 1/8″ greater in diameter than a 6.5mm bullet.

        Does this sound like a tumbling bullet? No.

  6. Is the “Single Bullet Theory Plausible?” — if you believe in magic:
    Coincidence Theory demands a huge flock of Black Swans to appear viable.
    . . . . .

    Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
    Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness.

    Notes:(Pub. L. 93–595, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1932; Apr. 26, 2011, eff. Dec. 1, 2011.)

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_406

    This is an important rule to keep in mind as a general concept when considering malfeasance of certain government agencies (indeed the entire so-called “government” itself)

    Rule 406, is based on the older term of forensic investigation, MO, Modus Operandi – the known routine practices of individuals and organizations. The reason that this concept should be kept in mind, is that there are several organizations; agencies of the “United States Government” that have well established MO’s or habitual routine practices, that have to do with covert operations, domestic and abroad. These practices are well enough known historically. And despite statutory restrictions of many of these ‘habitual routine practices’, the real world of Realpolitik is clearly seen for what it is. At least by those willing to look with their own eyes unencumbered by indoctrination.

    Of course, there is no case in-which the consideration of Rule 406 becomes a wholesale context, than the JFK Assassination.

    Unless all of the activities of all the authorities are inspected with this MO of the intelligence services in mind, a realistic assessment will be impossible, and the jejune naivete of those deluded by state indoctrination will prevail in obscuring the facts of the “Crime of the Century”.
    \\][//

  7. Arnaldo M. Fernandez says:

    The simple fact that WC member Ford changed the first draft of the report for placing the back wound up without any quantum of proof is enough for discarding the SBT as a cover-up makeup.

  8. Charles says:

    An investigative principle that I encountered in Tink Thompson’s work that I really like is that when an apparent fact pattern does not make complete sense it is likely that one of the “facts” does not belong. Once removed, is the coherence of the remaing facts improved?

    Remove the “fact” of a single shooter and the consequent beliefs about entrences and exits. If there was a second shooter from the front, does EVERYTHING not fit together much more comfortably?

    In my view, all of the forensic problems are the created by the conclusion of a single shooter dictating the evidence, rather than letting the evidence dictate a different conclusion.

    • leslie sharp says:

      Charles, precisely: the investigation followed a pre-determined conclusion instead of allowing the facts to dictate the direction of the inquiry. Allen Dulles set that in motion officially on December 16th, but Hal Hendrix put the ball in play within hours of the assassination. Can we establish a direct link between those two men?

      Without the miraculous bullet, investigators with integrity would have pursued other courses including the likelihood there were shots from other directions given the rush by a crowd of people up the GK and the immediate and spontaneous testimony of the direction of the sound of gunfire.

      The alleged path of the single bullet is metaphorically speaking the exact convoluted path of the Warren Commission investigation and conclusion, as it enters and exits mass, passes thru open space, turns, reenters, and turns again. A Jungian scholar would have a heyday with this.

      • Charles says:

        leslie sharp writes:

        “The alleged path of the single bullet is metaphorically speaking the exact convoluted path of the Warren Commission investigation and conclusion, as it enters and exits mass, passes thru open space, turns, reenters, and turns again. A Jungian scholar would have a heyday with this.”

        This gets my vote for next comment of the week !

    • “In my view, all of the forensic problems are the created by the conclusion of a single shooter dictating the evidence, rather than letting the evidence dictate a different conclusion.”~Charles

      Yes! Start fresh on everything. Reject the WC nomenclature as well.
      Recognize that the ‘Parkland Bullet’ is not ‘CE399’, so do not refer to it as CE399.
      Recognize that the Book Depository Building is only one of many behind the limo during the shots in Dealey that day, additionally nothing necessitates a building as the spot for a sniper. Both Kennedy and Connally suffered shots from the rear, and both shots seem to come from a trajectory that is somewhat level with the targets, not shots from extreme high spots.

      Kennedy’s throat and head shots seem to be fairly level trajectories as well. The throat shot seems the most level trajectory. The head shot seems to be from a slightly elevated position. Thus wouldn’t necessarily mean different shooters though. As the car was coming toward that shooter down a slight incline – so as the car came toward the shooters position at the S/W end of Dealey just before the RR overpass the angle of the trajectory would change accordingly for that single shooter.

      I think the throat shot went through the front windshield from a shot from that position. The head shot being the same sniper firing now over the windshield. I think the many small pin like holes in Kennedy’s face the coroner mentions filling with morticians wax, was from his face being peppered with tiny pebble sized shards of windshield glass.
      \\][//

      • Mariano says:

        “Yes! Start fresh on everything.” – Willy

        One phrase sounds the antidote for the truth expressed so succinctly.

        Leadership by the nation in uncovering the truth about JFK’s assassination will never atone for the decades long litany of criminal behavior by governments/institutions/military/corporate/intelligence organisations/ and so called pillars of society, however, it may instill some faith in the possibility of representative democracy with integrity and a prevention of the immune corruption that absolute power affords.

  9. It is not only Josiah Thompson that claims that neither Tomlinson nor Wright could identify the bullet, but the FBI itself. And further, the two Secret Service agents the Parkland Bullet were given could not identify it either:

    According to WC Exhibit No. 2011, Chief James Rowley could not identify CE 399 as the bullet he received from Special Agent Johnsen and given to Special Agent Todd.
    Let me remind you once again: A memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas on June 20th to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet”
    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59607#relPageId=29
    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59607#relPageId=86

    Photon has also asked this:
    “Why is the picture of this bullet on exactly the same type of background as we see with the Carcano 6.5 mm bullet?”

    There is no background to the photo with the pointed tipped bullet photographed by Thompson that has anything similar to any photo of CE933 I have ever seen. Ask him what he means by that.
    https://i0.wp.com/history-matters.com/essays/frameup/EvenMoreMagical/images/Slide4_thumb.jpg

    It should be noted that neither Rowley nor Johnsen marked the Parkland Bullet, despite the fact that it was standard law enforcement protocol at the time.
    So even if we discount Tink Thompson’s input in its entirety; just from the government’s input on this matter, there is no valid chain of custody from the Parkland Bullet to CE399
    \\][//

  10. bogman says:

    What I’d like to see is a plausible alternative scenario to the shooting. If two shots came from behind (according to this site), one hitting JFK in the back and the other Connally, where is the likely location of the shooters? If we assume one was in TBSD, was another shooter there too?

    I did a “scientific” look at the shooting that showed the Dal-Tex bldg. is a possible spot for a shooter from behind.

    • David Regan says:

      According to this documentary, the Soviets conducted their own top secret investigation and concluded there were two shooters firing from behind (neither one being Oswald).

      The Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files https://youtu.be/WB-Li6jztPA via @YouTube

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      Really? Well hell. You know this website is based on Fact’s and not speculation? Can you provide a link to the Dal-Tex “scientific” look? But regarding it I’ve read about Eugene Hale Brading’s presence there. And that of Chuck Nicolleti per Jimmy Files (ah…). Somewhere else about going in and out via the loading dock (which I’ve investigated and is a very convenient hidden getaway from the area).
      Zapruder’s dress shop was located there and he was a 32nd degree Mason…Ironic?
      Then there’s the Altegen’s picture. I don’t see a shooter in the darkness of the window. But there’s something there, I think. The point is, this broom closet beneath the fire escape with the window open would have been a natural selection for an assassination team. Thus it should have been noted and investigated by the local police and Warren (in this case especially) Omission.
      Jim Braden’s presence is the clincher for me on this aspect, when you learn his history as Eugene Hale Brading.
      Check him out on the Education Forum.

    • leslie sharp says:

      bogman, According to Wm. Weston in this The Fourth Decade piece, Polk’s directory indicated that in 1962, the [Texas School Book] depository business and the publishing companies were still located at 501 Elm, the Dal-Tex Building. The same directory indicates that 411 Elm is vacant.

      Weston opines that the discrepancies (Truly says the company had only been in 411 Elm for a few months while a branch manager of MacMillan Publishing thought the move took place in ’57 or ‘58) indicate that the issue is a highly sensitive matter.

      http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=48681#relPageId=24

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      Yeah, at least two shots came from behind. One hit JFK in the back. Another wounded James Tague.

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      “a plausible alternative”? One involving back and to the left and a throat entrance wound?
      He was hit in the throat first per the Z film and his raising his hands towards it in the film. Further supported by the experienced Parkland Emergency Room Doctors Perry, McClelland and Carrico.
      Next in the back from the TSBD or Dal-Tex. He leans slightly forward after the throat shot and grabbing for it in the Z film.
      The coat and shirt prove a a back shot at T3.
      Back and to the left, third shot, from the front right.
      More shots? Yeah, at least one hit Connally.

    • phil bowman says:

      If you have ever been to Dealey Plaza, The Dal_tex Building has the best views of the street and is a more natural place for a shooter than the TSBD

  11. Tim Nickerson says:

    The site linked to in the OP in no way offers a balanced appraisal. It is most decidedly an anti-SBT tract. Actually, the whole structure of the site is conspiracy oriented.

    If one is truly interested in balance, then you will likely find no better than that found at the following:

    http://jaylipp.com/JFK/siteMap.html

    • Bill says:

      As the new crop of scholars begins to understand more of the physical layout of the Limo, the Angles from the window, and the movements seen from more clear films they will come around to the same conclusions. The reality is that there are people who have been tainted with the silly Oliver Stone images, or the Mark Lane diagrams, depicting bullets moving and turning etc in mid-air.

      Scholarship will demonstrate, over the next 50 years through technology advancements, what the true positions of the occupants of the Limo were and how they aligned to positively show that only one bullet injured two men and it was fired from the 6th Floor of the TSBD, by the man who purchased the rifle, went home to get it, and abandoned it after the shooting. Lee Harvey Oswald.

  12. Fearfaxer says:

    It might be germane to point out that the Single-Bullet Theory would never have been developed if James Tague’s minor flesh wound not become public knowledge. The WC was going to go with the FBI’s report saying two bullets hit JFK and one hit Governor Connolly. Once Tague’s story became known, it was obvious that one bullet had missed, thus necessitating something that could explain how only two bullets caused all the wounds Kennedy and Connolly suffered. Either that, or admit there’d been more than 3 bullets fired, which could only mean . . . well, we all know the answer to that, don’t we?

  13. Sandy K. says:

    Impossible. The Z film shows JFK has already been hit as the limo clears the sign. Connally is not yet hit. He simply cannot move the way he does, turning to look backwards at JFK, with a bullet tearing through his torso. But when he is hit by another shot, boy does he ever react! Like Connally himself said to his grave, he was hit by a different shot than any that hit JFK.

  14. I noticed a few things.

    “If the single–bullet theory is false, at least one shot must have been fired by someone other than Oswald. In other words;

    either Oswald had at least one accomplice,
    or Oswald fired none of the shots himself.”

    There is nothing to indicate (on that page) that Oswald couldn’t have fired three bullets and hit somebody every time and that would make the SBT false.

    “Governor Connally testified to the Warren Commission that the bullet which struck him in the back was fired later than the bullet which caused at least one of President Kennedy’s non–fatal wounds.”

    In his first interview after the shooting Connally said he turned and saw the president was slumped and then he was hit. He told the Warren Commission that he never saw the president though the Z film seems to show otherwise.

    “The film shows President Kennedy emerging from behind a road sign at about frame 225, with his hands reaching to his throat.”

    His hands do not reach to his throat. They cover his mouth as if he is coughing or gagging or maybe even choking. That’s important.

    “Connally, however, shows no sign of being shot in the back until two–thirds of a second later, at about frame 238, when he starts to twist and fall to his left.”

    He turns to see the president and then leans back to see him better. He doesn’t fall over until after 290 or so. You know, when he is actually shot.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Hi David

      You wrote: “His hands do not reach to his throat. They cover his mouth as if he is coughing or gagging or maybe even choking. That’s important.”

      I’m very interested to know why you think this is important.

      • “I’m very interested to know why you think this is important.”

        We can see JFK’s hands go up to his face well enough to judge that it is a sudden move. If this sudden move resulted in JFK grabbing a wound, then it would seem likely that it was an immediate reaction, but it doesn’t lead to that result. Both the anesthesiologist at Parkland and the pathologists said that JFK’s trachea was nicked by a bullet and the anesthesiologist at least said there was frothy blood in the trachea. I think JFK is reacting to what is happening in his trachea. Hands up in front of mouth seems right. He might not have experienced whatever he felt in his throat until enough blood collected or he inhaled or maybe until he inhaled the second time. His response could be both abrupt and delayed. I think that is the case because I think he was hit about 197.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Hi David

          That is all quite possible but, how about considering a slightly different possibility, that still puts the lie to the SBT? If you will keep an open mind for a minute, I will try to explain.

          Let’s pretend that JFK was not reacting to the throat wound as he emerged from behind the sign, and that, in fact, the throat wound had not occurred yet. Also, let’s pretend the back wound was not a “shallow” wound from a “short shit” but, rather, was a wound that went well into the top of JFK’s right lung, where it stopped. The reason it stopped, and did not exit the front of JFK’s chest, was that it was a type of disintegrating (and extremely lethal) bullet called a “frangible” bullet. These bullets, like hollow points, are designed to open up as they pass through organ tissue, and disintegrate into the powdered lead from which they were made.

          Could the raising of JFK’s arms and hands to his face not also be the sign of a man suddenly deprived of much of his right lung’s capacity to exchange oxygen, due to a hemothorax and pneumothorax in his right lung? In other words, might he not feel like he was asphyxiating at that moment?

          Just a thought.

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            Oops, I’ve made it sound as if a hollow point bullet will disintegrate into powdered metal My bad. A hollow point bullet has about as much chance of disintegrating into metal powder as a full metal jacket bullet does.

          • No, people don’t start asphyxiating after a couple of seconds but why go so exotic with something for which there is no evidence? After all, he did have a hole in his throat and blood in his airway.

        • David Whimp,

          My opinion is that your whole theory here is based on the fallacy that a strike to the throat by a penetrating bullet would not be painful enough to cause the reaction we see in Kennedy.

          In martial arts that point in the throat is a “pressure point” you can cause an opponent to literally leap backwards with all of their might by a simple spear-hand jab to the throat.

          The choking and gasping for breath comes later.
          I have done this in real fights. I have witnessed the amazing results firsthand.
          \\][//

          • “My opinion is that your whole theory here is based on the fallacy that a strike to the throat by a penetrating bullet would not be painful enough to cause the reaction we see in Kennedy.”

            I can’t imagine how you formed that opinion. What I am saying is that JFK’s reaction when he emerges from behind the sign is not his initial one not that it couldn’t be. I believe the shot came before that. His initial reaction was just before he went behind the sign.

          • “I believe the shot came before that. His initial reaction was just before he went behind the sign.” ~David Wimp

            Now I get where you are coming from David. It just wasn’t clear the way you stated it.
            I couldn’t agree more. I think there are indications in Z-film just before the limo goes behind the sign that he has already been hit. I have made this observation on this site before as well.
            Thanks for clearing that up for me, and I apologize for any frustration I may have caused you in the interim.
            \\][//

          • Gerry Simone says:

            I agree with you gents that when JFK emerges from behind the sign, he has already reacted to a shot. According to one doctor, at least at Z-221 (roughly 200 milliseconds before Z-225), and maybe even much earlier (perhaps, even 2 shots?).

    • Jean Davison says:

      Concerning JFK’s arm movements following Z225, here’s a different take on it from an old alt.c.jfk post on John McAdams’ site:

      “According to Dr. Kenneth Strully, a neurosurgeon from New Hampshire, JFK’s movements following the neck shot were the result of direct stimulation of the relevant nerves, not spinal trauma to C6.

      The following are excerpts from a letter sent by Strully to Dr.
      Robert Artwohl, dated April 9, 1994:

      “Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck. This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck. This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity [….]
      As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet’s path took place first; — right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps [….]
      Kennedy did not reach for his throat. All movements seen in
      the films, occurring relative to the bullet’s passage, were
      involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands.”

      Post by Chris Ferrar
      http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/strully.txt

      This brief video, unrelated to JFK specifically, shows the location of nerves along the spinal column — nerves at C6 and C7 connect to the biceps and triceps, respectively:

      http://www.spine-health.com/video/cervical-radiculopathy-interactive-video

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      I’ve not studied the Z film it the detail of some others, on a big screen, frame by frame. But on a 40″ tv in slow motion… his hands never reach his mouth, his reaction to pain as he comes from behind the sign seem instantaneous. Before his hand’s can reach his throat, or mouth, he is driven slightly forward (the back shot?). Then he is driven back and to the left (a shot from the front?).

  15. The MO of Intelligence Agencies in political pressure:

    The importance of Rule 46 cannot be overstated. It has the potential to explain much in the JFK case; in particular how certain individuals who changed their testimony under obvious outside pressure; Boswell, Perry, Finck, and Humes.

    Humes is a very special case, in that he actually committed felonious crimes in the blatant act of destroying material evidence in a case of Homicide 1st degree. This is known as ‘Obstruction of Justice’. And the JFK case is strewn with many instances of such, from Crime Scene fabrication, to the fabrication of Chains of Custody, to destruction of evidence concerning the Presidential Limousine.

    There is a clear line of such habitual activities and testimonies indicating such coercive pressure from above, that the known routine practices of the Intelligence Services simply must be taken into consideration.

    The agenda of the cover-up was run through the White House, where Lyndon Johnson was under the control of the military and intelligence operatives that actually carried out the murder of Kennedy.

    The principals designated for such coercive pressure would be first and foremost, the doctors and others with intimate knowledge of dangerous details of the case.
    See: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rule_406
    \\][//

  16. Eddy says:

    I think the strongest argument against the SBT is the simplest. How did a bullet go from the back JFK’s neck to the front without hitting his spine? If you see a cross-sectioned rear view of a neck you realise that can’t be done. Credit to Robert Prudhomme for this observation.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Thank you for that, Eddy, but, I must humbly point out that this observation was being made many years before I began studying the assassination.

    • tim nickerson says:

      Eddy, showing a cross-sectioned rear view of a neck and claiming that it can’t be done is a far cry from actually proving that it can’t be done. I’ve asked Bob for numbers but he’s been avoiding me.

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Willy supplied the number for the vertical clearance between the transverse processes of vertebrae C7 and T1, Tim. Did you not see it?

        As Willy pointed out, the vertical clearance amounts to about 3 mm, less than half the diameter of a 6.5mm Carcano bullet, so it is quite obvious the Magic Bullet ad to go outside the extreme right tip of the right C7 transverse process.

        However, as I pointed out, the actual height of this clearance is somewhat of a moot point, due to the way the transverse processes are stacked atop of each other at the C7/T1 juncture. The so called “gap” actually slopes downward toward the rear, so as to completely occlude any gap from a posterior perspective. This would only be made worse by a shot originating from high up on the 6th floor.

        Sorry to say, Tim, but you are stuck with the bad evidence the Warren Commission supplied you with, and that evidence makes the SBT an impossibility.

        • tim nickerson says:

          Bob,

          I didn’t ask Willy. I asked you. So, where does that 3mm come from? What is the actual source for that figure? What are the specific points of reference on each vertebrae that the measurement applies to?

          • Photon says:

            Tim, the problem with Bob,Willy and so many conspiracy theorists is that their ignorance of medical and anatomic facts can lead them to false conclusions. The greatest problem I see repeated over and over again is coming to conclusions based on two dimensional representations of three dimensional objects. Despite Bob’s belief that you can use illustrations from anatomic textbooks to create absolute measurements reality proves otherwise. There is a reason why Medical Schools require Gross Anatomy lab with dissection of the human body and not just a lecture series discussing Frank Netter’s illustrations -the reason being that it is not possible to accurately portray all aspects of human anatomy in a two dimensional format as Bob repeatedly does.
            Bob is unaware of the anatomic variations that can make his assumptions incorrect. He also is unaware that JFK did not have a normal neck.

          • “JFK did not have a normal neck.”~Photon

            What is that supposed to mean Photon?
            \\][//

          • bogman says:

            “He also is unaware that JFK did not have a normal neck.”

            Yeah, he stuck it out for peace during the hysteria and paranoia of the Cold War and paid the price.

          • ed connor says:

            Paul, what are you talking about?
            Exactly what evidence supports your assertion that “JFK did not have a normal neck?”
            He did not have a normal lumbar spine. He underwent an L5 S1 fusion in 1954, when that was a new and controversial surgery. (It is now performed routinely, with minimal morbidity/mortality).
            He never had surgery to the cervical spine. His cervical architecture was normal.
            And a bullet traveling at a 30 degree downward angle, striking to the right of T-3 could not cause a neat midline exit wound above the knot of the necktie (C-1 or C-2), without causing major damage to the vertebral bodies of the cervical spine.
            Paul, you are a quack. I wonder if you decline to identify yourself to avoid a testimony research on TrialSmith.com.
            Have you ever been licensed by any medical authority? Have you even been qualified as a diplomate in any medical specialty? Have you even been sued for malpractice? Are you a pretend doctor, or have you ever treated patients?

          • Steve Stirlen says:

            Photon:

            I am guessing you want us to believe that JFK’s neck was three feet thick pine, or whatever number your expert supposedly gave us. You talk about the conspiracy theorists and their crackpot ideas. Well, JFK not having a “normal” neck is as goofy as ANY idea floating out there right now.

            One thing is FOR SURE. His neck may not have been normal, but his tailored suit coat jacket WAS normal. And that jacket has a hole about 5 1/2 inches down from the collar. And I have yet to see an illustration that shows how his jacket could have possibly been high enough to create a bullet hole at the first thoracic, when fired from a sixth floor window.

          • Photon says:

            You folks are entirely stumped. Interesting.
            I hinted at this issue previously, Any physician who has seen the autopsy photos would have to agree with me; assuming that they actually treat medical conditions.

          • Bill says:

            In contrast to the analyses involving Kennedy’s wound pairs, the two-man wound combination required focusing on the positions of the two men relative to each other and to their surroundings in Dealey Plaza, rather than just on individual details of posture and orientation. This analysis was accomplished by reviewing Zapruder frames 180-207, the Croft photograph, and photographs taken by Hugh Betzner and Phillip Willis, two witnesses who were bath standing behind and to the left of the Presidential limousine.
            Two independent determinations of the lateral relationship between the two men were made. The first consisted of a photogrammetric analysis of several pairs of pictures taken from the Zapruder movie between frames 182 and 200. These pairs were viewed together in a stereoscopic viewer so that together the pairs would project a single, three-dimensional image that could be evaluated for the relative depths of the objects that they portrayed.* The stereo pairs clearly showed that Kennedy was seated close to the right-hand, inside surface of the car, with his arm resting atop the side of the car and his elbow extending, at times, beyond the body of the car. Connally, On the other hand, was seated well within the car on the jump seat ahead of Kennedy; a gap of slightly less than 15 centimeters separated this seat from the car door. (See fig. II-19.) (58)

            Two independent studies confirm what it obvious. The Single Bullet Trajectory is exactly what occurred. They just can’t bring themselves to accept that fact.

          • Fearfaxer says:

            “You folks are entirely stumped. Interesting. I hinted at this issue previously, Any physician who has seen the autopsy photos would have to agree with me; assuming that they actually treat medical conditions.” – Paul May/Photon

            “Full Definition of MEGALOMANIA
            1: a mania for great or grandiose performance
            2: a delusional mental disorder that is marked by feelings of personal omnipotence and grandeur.” — merriam-webster.com

            Full definition here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/megalomania

            Note to Comment Monitor: If you think Paul/Photon’s quoted comment is worthy of approval, I expect to see the one I made earlier today still lurking in limbo approved also.

          • Photon says:

            I refer to Bill Bebee’s Aug 19, 1962 picture of JFK that Pierre Salinger desperately tried to kill.
            It actually was on the front page of the L.A. Times.

          • So here it is, Kennedy’s supposedly highly unusual neck:
            http://smdp.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/112213_OPN-Laughing-Matters.jpg

            I know you aren’t kidding Photon, that is what is baffling about your commentary here. There is not a thing that is unusual or unnatural to JFK’s neck. WTF are you talking about???
            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            Willy, why do you think Salinger would want to kil a PR agent’s dream picture?

          • “Willy, why do you think Salinger would want to kil a PR agent’s dream picture?”~Photon

            I don’t know Photon, why don’t you make up something out of whole-cloth – that seem to be your shtick here.
            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            I don’t wish to be in support of censorship on this site, but is the Nov. 13 @ 10:16 comment from Ronnie Wayne really appropriate ?

        • We seem to have a very pointed .30 caliber bullet here:

          https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/SSA_7.62mm_143gr_AP.png/300px-SSA_7.62mm_143gr_AP.png

          7.62 mm caliber is a nominal caliber used for a number of different cartridges. Historically, this class of cartridge was commonly known as .30 caliber, the Imperial unit equivalent, and was most commonly used for indicating a class of full power military main battle rifle (MBR) cartridges. The measurement equals 0.30 inches or 3 decimal lines, written .3″ and read as Three-Line.[1]

          7.62 mm refers to the internal diameter of the barrel at the lands (the raised helical ridges in rifled gun barrels). The actual bullet caliber is normally 7.82 mm (.308 in.)
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62_mm_caliber#Pistol_cartridges_in_7.62_mm_caliber
          \\][//

      • Eddy says:

        Please, please ,anybody reading this just look at a rear view section of the neck/spine.
        You don’t have to be an expert so don’t fall for that game. Don’t be put off by technical smokescreens, just look at a realistic representation.

        Anyone new to this debate should be warned : Argument 1 is ‘You’re not an expert’. Argument 2 is ; ‘its technically complex and contradictory’. Argument 3 is ; ‘ let ME make a point that distracts people from YOUR point’.

        • Tim Nickerson says:

          Eddy,

          You don’t have to be an expert to fall for the game that looking at a two dimensional image of a rear view section of a neck/spine offers a convincing representation of a “6.5 mm bullet could not have passed through” theory.

  17. Gaeton Fonzi quotes Vince Salandria:

    “Instead, they picked the shooting gallery that was Dealey Plaza and did it in the most barbarous and openly arrogant manner. The cover story was transparent and designed not to hold, to fall apart at the slightest scrutiny. The forces that killed Kennedy wanted the message clear: ‘We are in control and no one – not the President, nor Congress, nor any elected official – no one can do anything about it.’ It was a message to the people that their Government was powerless.”
    \\][//

  18. Bill says:

    Let’s TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT today:

    Let’s discuss this another way in this thread. Let’s keep any opinions about the SBT (or not) out of the equation and just look at a position at a specific time as marked on the Zapruder film or other photo, and discuss from this aspect only. Maybe we can determine what a common ground is and then make some rational observations about them as we proceed (or not).

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWHdEeHNbXY

    This is/was, for its day, a high quality version of the Zapruder film). And for whatever it’s worth there may/may not be another copy with the frames numbers intact) but I am using the one I provided in the link above.

    Here are some details you may notice about JFK’s position as he rides down Elm Street and BEFORE he disappears behind the Stemmons sign and then after it. Keep an open mind, no yelling and sceaming (we agree to use rational viewpoints ok?).

    Essentially we can see JFK doing the usual waving and turning to the crowds up until the car is screened by the sign from Zapruder’s camera. I’ll start on Elm Street.

    Notice that JFK is doing two things as he glides down Elm Street on Zapruder’s film. The first thing we see JFK doing is pushing back his hair. We see him first with his right hand approaching his hairline and brushing his hair at frame z133. He completes this motion by frame 139/140.

    Between frame z140 and frame and frame z153 JFK brings his right hand (waving hand) down AND left hand upward until they meet and align to each other in his own fashion. Factually, JFK’s left hand has risen up to the level of his heart by this point. JFK’s left hand has begun it’s upward journey starting at frame number z137.

    • Bill says:

      In the second motion we see JFK then bring his right (waving hand) down and lays it onto AND over over top of his left (opened left hand) at about the level of his chest. He seems to almost rest his right hand on top of his left. He does this maneuver twice while on Elm Street.

      Then we see him simply complete a long wave beginning at z169 which is just about completed when he goes behind the Stemmons sign. It should also be noted that JFK begins to wave to a group of people, also starting at z 169 that causes him to turn sharply to his right while continuing to wave to the point where he is tracking people to wave toward.

      This last JFK wave occurs between z169 and z207. In each case he brings his left hand upward to his chest area (almost to serve as a rest for his constant waving) and he brings his right hand down to place over it. We can see his left hand last in frame z 198. We can see JFK’s right hand has moved higher upward, toward his hair again. You can clearly see his right shirt-cuff is actually at the same level it was, about ear level, as it was as he first appeared to us in frame z133.

      ON ONLY WHAT WE SEE ON THAT FILM TO THIS POINT should be pretty clear. We have a man smiling and waving. Can we agree that this is correct?

    • “Let’s TRY SOMETHING DIFFERENT today”~Bill

      Just what is “different” about the Zapruder film today, that hasn’t been in the Zapruder film for years Bill?

      Nothing but your interpretation of it. And that interpretation has been rebuked for years as well.

      This is another fruitless carousel from the obfuscation team of the ‘Three Provocateurs’.
      \\][//

  19. Bill says:

    Now comes the point(s) of contention that we are discussing varying points of view on:

    The next time we see any part of JFK is at frame 224. What we see on the Zapruder Film is the appearance of JFK’s hands just beginning to move/reflect upward toward his throat.

    His right hand, which was actually higher (because he was waving then fixing his hair again) than his shoulder, ACTUALLY CAN BE SEEN BY AN OPEN-MINDED VIEWER moving LOWER as between z224 and z225. On the Zapruder Film you can literally see JFK’s hand motions demonstrate that his right hand drops in that 1/18th of a second and his left hand does as well. It literally drops about 2/3 inches LOWER. Then, between z225 and z226 JFK’s hands ROCKET UPWARD (also 1/18 of a second) and cover much more distance than they did between 224-5.

    It is important to actually freeze the film at z224 and put some type of a shield/tape at the level of JFK’s right hand to appreciate how much lower it does move. If you’re not willing to do this little experiment that you probably have a very closed mind and we will be stalemated again. Ok?

    Then of course both hands move upward to the level of his mouth/cheek (right hand, chin for the left hand). Up until the conclusion at z313.

    My posture on this:

    Carefully watch the film link I’ve included here. Stop it and rewind it using your spacebar. Use a ruler to make straight lines watermarks for visual references.

    JFK and Connally are responding to the same bullet that literally strikes JFK and Governor Connally at frame 224 (not earlier and not later).

    JFK is responding with his hands swinging upward at the PRECISE MOMENT Connally’s face suddenly flushes and his jacket lapel pops open.

    JFK is hit as he is completing his standard waving action, and is stopped in his tracks and reverses direction to bring his hands up at exactly the same moment as Connally is struck as demonstrated by the sudden reaction/feature change of Connally at 224.

    Factually…both Kennedy and Connally begin to react at precisely the same moment. We see Connally reacting because he is in the open and easily seen. Kennedy’s hand motions gives us the indication of the precise moment he was hit. Both at 224.

    Please notice that I’ve not even bothered to use the testimony of Governor Connally with regards to his motions at the first (missed shot), nor Jackie Kennedy’s statement about turning, Nor the Croft photo which comports to z-161 about when those inputs (shots) began. I’m strictly looking at the wounding of two men by one bullet.

    Thank you for taking the time to review this.

    • Charles says:

      Bill, the bullet in Governor Connally’s leg was not yet removed according to his surgeon, Dr. Robert Shaw, at the 4:50 mark in this video https://youtu.be/D-CDLl82n-E

      Where then did CE399 come from?

      • Fearfaxer says:

        Well, it just worked its way out of his leg without anybody noticing while he was being massaged elsewhere on his body, or flipped over, or something, I mean, where else could it have come from?

        What really gets me is Lone Nut Buffs have to account for these ridiculously implausible things to have happened, and carry on as if they’re typical of things that happen all the time, and how could anybody possibly question them?

        • Bill says:

          You mean it is suspected to do what Dr. Gregory said it did? Oh, I forgot. He did after all alert the staff to search for the projectile because that is exactly what he thought happened and he was an attending physician.

          Thanks.

      • Bill says:

        Charles: The bullet in Connally’s leg was a mystery that began to unfold as quickly as the Dr. in this case, Dr. Gregory, began work on him. In fact, Dr. Gregory goes into great detail in his testimony about the fact that, in his opinion the bullet probably didn’t even fully enter the left thigh. He surmises that it is completely probable that a bullet that was tumbling (backward) could have entered his thigh and deposited some of the metal from it exactly where the X Rays showed there was a piece of lead.

        In any case, Dr. Gregory actually instructed staff to search the Governor’s Clothing and places he was to see if they could locate the bullet. Here is Dr. Gregory’s testimony about it:

        r. GREGORY – I think again that bullet, Exhibit 399, could very well have struck the thigh in a reverse fashion and have shed a bit of its lead core into the fascia immediately beneath the skin, yet never have penetrated the thigh sufficiently so that it eventually was dislodged and was found in the clothing.
        I would like to add to that we were disconcerted by not finding a missile at all. Here was our patient with three discernible wounds, and no missile within him of sufficient magnitude to account for them, and we suggested that someone ought to search his belongings and other areas where he had been to see if it could be identified or found, rather.
        Mr. SPECTER – Had the missile gone through his wrist in reverse, would it likely have Continued in that same course until it reached his thigh, in your opinion?
        Dr. GREGORY – The missile that struck his wrist had sufficient energy left after it passed through the radius to emerge from the soft tissues on the under surface of the skin. It could have had enough to partially enter his thigh, but not completely.
        Mr. SPECTER – In the way which his thigh was wounded?
        Dr. GREGORY – I believe so; yes.

        In the end it comes from out of Connally’s leg, onto a stretcher, out of some clothing that was pulled and cut off of him. Before that it came out of his wrist…out of his chest before that, out of his chest before that, out of JFK’s neck and before that…located with clarity and valid science…out of the window of the 6th Floor of the TSBD.

        • Oh how tidy Bill,

          Your only problem is that that bullet was a pointed 30 caliber bullet, not CE399. What a pity for your little fairytale.
          \\][//

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Sure, Bill, but you still can’t explain how a bullet travelling from right to left at an angle of 26° through JFK’s neck could make a sharp right turn and head for Connally’s right armpit.

          • Bill says:

            Bob. You’ve decided to not read any of the HSCA report I gather?? I guess the issue is directly in front of your eyes. It was not the bullet that made the move. It was Connally doing just what he said he did and just what the films and photos show him doing.

            Peace.

        • leslie sharp says:

          Bill, are you serious? This is one of the more incredible synopsis I’ve read related to the allegation that a single bullet was responsible for injuries to Kennedy and Connally. I’m astounded you would venture here. In all of the 600++ comments on the recent thread on this site, and in all of the hundreds of online debates over decades about the ballistics, I’ve never read such a summation. Thank you. The lay-est of the layperson will tell you how laughable this is.

          “In the end it comes from out of Connally’s leg, onto a stretcher, out of some clothing that was pulled and cut off of him. Before that it came out of his wrist…out of his chest before that, out of his chest before that, out of JFK’s neck and before that…located with clarity and valid science…out of the window of the 6th Floor of the TSBD.”

          Let’s start with the stretcher, Bill.

          • Bill says:

            Leslie. Ok. Thank you for pointing out to me that Dr. Gregory, you may remember him, the Dr. treating Connally as well, was not thinking that the superficial wound to the leg…the one that was barely needing a stitch or two…may not have the butt end of bullet sticking his leg wound as is suspected by the Dr. and then that same Dr. began a search for his clothing…and places he was upon entering the hospital…

            …because you were there? Right? So the Dr. is lying too???

            Peace.

    • Charles says:

      I see no evidence that Connally was struck at Z-224. I see him reacting at JFK being struck and this is consistant with his testimony. https://youtu.be/cP04_lGjkO0 and https://youtu.be/0Q40kO48nrs

      Nellie Connally also seems certain that her husband was struck noticeably later than JFK. especially considering the speed of sound and of that of the bullet. https://youtu.be/YfR09lJ4H6U

      Connally’s surgeon Dr. Robert Shaw rejected CE-399 as causing Connelly’s injury. https://youtu.be/m8PVffA2EGg

      In consideration of the timing, the appearance of Zapruder, and the Connally’s testimony, Connally struck at Z-290 is a simpler and more natural conclusion. This would mean at least two shooters to have enough time to shoot again at Z-313.

      It is only the political requirement of a single shooter with a magic bullet that would torture the evidence in the fashion of the Warren Commission.

      • Bill says:

        Charles: I looked at that interview. Seem’s kinda out of whack with reality on his part. I say this since Governor Connally did not see Kennedy BEFORE frame 224’s impact on his person. At best it is only a confused jumble of SOME his recollections at best. In an interview a couple of day’s later he was also condensing shots as well. Just the fog of war.

        For example:

        It is party true that Governor Connally did turn a couple of times when he arrived on Elm Street.

        a. It is possible that Connally had already responded to the input of a first shot earlier than z 133 because he is looking to the right as the Zapruder Film moves forward after z 133. Only a possibility.

        b. Between z 133 and a 161 he then begins his turn to the left AGAIN.

        c. At z 161 he begins to make his second attempt to turn but does not locate Kennedy (and this COMPLETELY REFUTES his own hospital statement because felt Kennedy had been shot but we can CLEARLY see Kennedy continues to wave to the crowd, smile to the crowd, until he goes behind the Stemmons sign. Connally is clearly concerned because he is seriously focusing on looking past perpendicular to locate Kennedy or see the source of the shot.

        The problem is that Kennedy is not hit yet (because he’s waiving and smiling).

        d. The real issue is this: Are you telling me that you do not agree that Connally is not beginning to react, first with his face grimacing, in z 224, then with his body being driven downward beginning at z 224 and continuing to react to that shot until he is facing Kennedy at z 278…then being pulled to his wife by z 290???

        e. Nellie is just simply repeating a version of events she believes is true. She can be seen through the front window the the Limo at z 167 doing just what the Governor says he did (and she says he did). The problem with he recollection is that JFK, at NO TIME BEFORE z 224 has his hands up in front of his throat. CLEARLY AT z 229 you can see the SUNSHINE GLARING off of her forehead because she had returned to normal riding position.

        These are not just numbers here. They can be verified by looking!!

        Dr. Shaw changed his story. z 290 for Connally? Um WHHHHAAAAT?

        Ok. I tried. Peace.

        • Bill Pierce says:

          Bill asks:
          “Are you telling me that you do not agree that Connally is not beginning to react, first with his face grimacing, in z 224, then with his body being driven downward beginning at z 224 and continuing to react to that shot until he is facing Kennedy at z 278…then being pulled to his wife by z 290???”

          Connally’s body is not being driven downward. After Z235 (still facing forward) he BEGINS his fully-controlled turn all the way around to the right to see what happened to the president. Unsurprisingly Connally’s turn is not graceful and elegant. He was a big guy sitting in a jump seat against the right side of the limo, and his movements were restricted accordingly.

          At frame 271 (and following frames) Connally clearly is looking for JFK. http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z271.jpg This coincides with his testimony. Connally’s body is upright and self-controlled.

          According to the official story, by frame 271 Connally has been struck near the right armpit by a bullet that caused a serious rib injury. Did the bullet *spin* Connally – a big guy – all the way around to the right, INTO the direction of the bullet? That’s nonsense! [In the retrograde WC universe, the laws of physics are always defeated!]

          Charles is right. Connally was struck at ~290 or afterwards.

          • Bill Pierce,

            Yes this is the clincher starting at Z-271; Connally turning to look at Kennedy who has already been hit in the throat.

            Anyone who can deny that Connally is not conscious and looking directly at JFK has to be delusional. [in my obligatory opinion]
            \\][//

          • Tim Nickerson says:

            Connally was struck at ~Z223. The Zapruder film and toggling gifs of frames from z224 to z227 leave absolutely no doubt about that. Connally’s testimony supports a z223 strike and completely rules out a strike at Z290 or afterwards.

          • “Connally was struck at ~Z223. The Zapruder film and toggling gifs of frames from z224 to z227 leave absolutely no doubt about that.”
            ~Nickerson

            Nickerson, I am not going to believe anyone else’s eyes but my own. Connally was sitting up and aware at frame Z-271, and is not hit until around Z-290 or later.
            In fact it is hard to tell if Kennedy’s head explodes or Connally drops first the shots were so close together. That is obviously where the double bang in the dictabelt and witness testimony took place.
            \\][//

          • Bill says:

            Ok. If you insist. So the face going blank. The shoulder being driven down. The lapel flap. The cheeks blowing out. Not beginning at 224 and so on? Ok. Best Wishes.

          • Bill says:

            Governor Connally and his wife are and were very nice people. However, they have been a part of history and to the degree they were they deserve our attention. End of Story.

            Yet, at the same time they are truly completely unaware of the event that occurred because they too have drunk the cool aid.

            1. Governor Connally: Had no clear recollection of the event, has been misquoted by some here, and despite the best efforts to have his insistence that he was hit by the 2nd Shot ( a fact to which we all agree with btw) become the lynchpin of the conspiracy to kill JFK it all falls short.

            2. Nellie Connally: She mentions what Kennedy did in the seconds ‘before’ Connally was shot. Her recollection and her motions that ‘she said she did’ are not verified by the Zapruder Film at all. She says she saw JFK holding his throat. Well…if she saw that she had eyes in the back of her head.

            The Zapruder Film CLEARLY demonstrates that Nellie Connally did exactly what she said she did. Only she did all of it after her husband was hit. At no time before her husband was hit does ANY of her STATEMENT get any visual verification.

        • Charles says:

          My point is not to declare what happened and when but to note that “facts” are discarded or selected according to whatever story one wishes to tell. It’s the same in any trial and I have never met a lawyer worth their salt who couldn’t make a decent case about anything.

          In this case, you are choosing to discard Connally’s statements which troubles me because he was lucid up to the very moment of surgery. As others have pointed out, the WC would have gone with something closer to my version until Tague showed up. Then the political imperative of a single shooter forced the WC select and discard a new set of “facts.”

          I can’t state much with certainty but the totality of the WC account does not add up and the state of CE399 is a FATAL flaw. Whatever really happened, it is clear to me that politics drove the interpretation of forensics and the WC fact pattern as a whole. This is why the WC is DOOMED to fail in the longer historical record.

          I embrace my doubts; they reassure me that I am not drinking anybody’s kool-aid. Conversely, the certainty, the insistence, the dogmatism of WC supporters is alarmingly false to my sensibilities.

          An Officialdom that had genuine confidence in the truth would be content to let the chips fall where they may but I usually smell fear, anxiety and a desire to control reality in WC supporters which suggests that a political or perhaps a personal psychological agenda is in play. I have often wondered if this characteristic along with religious fundamentalism in the American body politic is a legacy of the Civil War.

          • Bill says:

            Charles. You said lucid up until time of surgery? Did you forget his testimony where he said he was in and out of regaining and losing consciousness in the limo ride to Parkland?? Hello?

    • Tim Nickerson says:

      Bill,

      It’s possible that the strike occurred at Z224, but that puts Kennedy’s reflex reaction time at the low end of the range. His right hand is still dropping from Z224-Z225.

      http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy291/kegeshook/jfkhandsdrop.gif

      Z225-Z226 is where it jerks upwards.

      http://i801.photobucket.com/albums/yy291/kegeshook/simultaneous.gif

      I think the strike was at Z223.

      • Bill says:

        Tim. I actually agree with that completely. I think it occurs in the span from 222/3-224.

        I think that you may have thought that i was stating that Kennedy was struck at 224. This is not what I was writing. Kennedy was struck at 223/4 and his flinch response to that is apparent because he clearly was lowing his hands in the 1/18th of a second between 224/5.

        Just as JFK was performing his hand motions in response Governor Connally is also hit at 224 and his response is his clearly seen in the lapel flapping closed, and his eyes squinting (let alone his reaction of being driven down).

        It is pretty obvious that the wounding of both men, JFK and Connally, was by the same bullet simply be judging the reactions of the human body to the stress responses applied by the projectile on the sensory system. JFK had soft tissue injury at this moment…and Connally had the ribs and wrist blasted.

        Anyway. The Angles and juxtapositions of real humans, and not the Autopsy body angles are what were found to prove the SBTrajectory valid. Two separate investigators for the HSCA came to the same conclusion.

        Thanks for taking the time to look it over Tim.

        • Bill says:

          Ha. Tim. I just realized I probably should have just written that the reaction is visible at 224 (the same moment as Connally’s filching face, and his lapel flap).

          This would put Kennedy and Connally in just the spot where the SBTrajectory would lead directly back to the 6th Floor where just about every real study puts the shooter anyway.

          🙂

    • But Bill,

      Something does happen just before JFK goes behind the sign. The images of him are not very good, but for a while his head was turned to the right and his hand was in a waving pose and then starting at 201, as I make it, his head begins to turn toward the front. Something happens with his hand but I can’t tell what it is doing. This would not be of great significance except that we have very good evidence from the Willis’s that there was a shot in the late 190’s. Either JFK was hit by a bullet fired shortly after that first shot or what happens at 224 is not JFK’s immediate reaction. That happens before he goes behind the sign.

      “JFK and Connally are responding to the same bullet that literally strikes JFK and Governor Connally at frame 224 (not earlier and not later).”

      JFK is responding to something happening in his throat. JBC is trying to pull his hat up to get is out of the way. He is in a very cramped situation and it’s a big hat. The hat is stuck somehow. His leg is on it, its pinned to the side of the car, it’s hooked on something… It releases suddenly and that’s why it pops up like that. That’s also why his shoulders roll over and he falls against the side of the car. His pulling on it is the reason, not its releasing.

      Connally is hit at least three seconds after JFK so the whole SBT feasibility argument is moot.

      • Bill says:

        David. The HSCA decided to use frame 190 simply based on the idea that the impulse of a shot was detected on the dictabelt (and this was then completely disqualified by new information when it was determined that the noises were not connected to the assassination at all ). This is the origination for the shot starting point. The movement you see is the waving arm of Kennedy reaching the same APPROXIMATE position it did in frame 133.

        Kennedy continued to lower his arm to his standard position….placing it atop of his left hand…and it is in the movement between comparing 223 to 224 that you can see JFK react….and at 224….Connally too.

        • jeffc says:

          That is simply incorrect. The HSCA photo panel had made its determination of a shot at frame 190 well before the late arrival of the dictabelt evidence. Their determination was based on visual clues. Their determination is also bolstered by numerous eyewitnesses.

          • jeffc,

            The HSCA may have determined that a shot came at Z-frame 190. But that doesn’t prove that bullet went through both men.
            See:
            Z-271 Connally turning to look at Kennedy who has already been hit in the throat. Connally is obviously conscious and in control of his movements and show no signs whatsoever of having been shot.
            The shot that hit Kennedy in the throat was clearly some 3 seconds prior to Connally getting hit.
            \\][//

  20. Psychological Stress Analysis / Voice Stress Analysis Proves Oswald Innocent

    Reporter: Did you shoot the president?

    Oswald: I didn’t shoot anybody, no sir.

    Oswald’s answer above was deemed a truthful statement by the top expert in ‘Voice Stress Analysis’.

    http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/O%20Disk/O'Toole%20George/Item%2021.pdf
    \\][//

  21. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Tim Nickerson is determined to try to show that the Magic Bullet, while passing through the flesh on the right side of JFK’s neck, magically passed through the tiny space between the right transverse process of the C7 cervical vertebra and the right transverse process of thoracic vertebra T1. The reason for this is that I have pointed out that the sniper’s nest on the 6th floor was only 9° removed from a centre line running through the length of the limo and, considering JFK’s sitting position, a bullet fired through his neck, at this angle and from that location, could not pass through his neck AND the right side of his trachea, without passing through the cervical vertebrae and smashing them.

    If JFK was turned 5° to his right, the angle of passage through his neck and trachea, in order to miss the vertebra, would have to be a minimum of 21°, and a bullet causing this could not have originated from the SE corner of the TSBD. Tim is trying to lessen this figure by having the bullet pass between the transverse processes of the C7/T1 vertebrae, not realizing (or simply not caring) that, not only is this almost impossible, but the C7 transverse process simply does not project far enough out to the right for this to gain him any more than one or two degrees; still leaving him at least 10° short of his objective.

    There is no way around it. For a bullet to originate at the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD and pass through JFK’s neck and the right side of his trachea at the moment we are told the SBT occurred, the bullet would have to go through JFK’s cervical vertebrae. As the autopsy report in Appendix IX of the WCR tells us this bullet struck no bony structures on its way through the neck, this proves the SBT is wrong.

    https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-09.pdf

    • Tim Nickerson says:

      Robert Prudhomme wrote:

      If JFK was turned 5° to his right, the angle of passage through his neck and trachea, in order to miss the vertebra, would have to be a minimum of 21°, and a bullet causing this could not have originated from the SE corner of the TSBD. Tim is trying to lessen this figure by having the bullet pass between the transverse processes of the C7/T1 vertebrae, not realizing (or simply not caring) that, not only is this almost impossible, but the C7 transverse process simply does not project far enough out to the right for this to gain him any more than one or two degrees; still leaving him at least 10° short of his objective.
      ================================================

      Bob, I’d like to settle the intervertebral clearance issue before we get into the question of whether or not the bullet could have stayed outside the tip of the transverse process of C7 and still exited at the right side of the trachea. You’re still avoiding providing the specifics that I requested. Please do so and then we’ll see if we should move on to question 2. In the meantime, I’ll just point out that a 5 degree right rotation not only moves the tip of the transverse process to the left, it also moves the trachea to the right.

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Tim

        If you’re suggesting that the Magic Bullet went BETWEEN C7 and T1 veterbrae, the answer is no. There is simply no room between them whatsoever. There is a small gap between these vertebrae at the extreme lateral tips, between the transverse processes but, not only is this gap much smaller than a 6.5mm Carcano bullet, the opening runs downward at a slope to the rear. Any bullet transiting this gap would have to originate lower than JFK. A shooter in the trunk of the limo, perhaps?

        Regardless of the size and alignment on the gap between the transverse processes, these projections are not that large and, even if a bullet could have passed between them, it would only reduce the angle by a degree or two at the most. As it was established early on in the investigation that Oswald was only 9° removed laterally from a centre line lengthwise through the limo, and that, anatomically, we have established a bullet would had to have been travelling a path through JFK’s neck 21° laterally removed from the same centre line in order to avoid hitting any bone and still going through the trachea, the alignment of the bullet path would still be off by a minimum of 9°. Are you sure your shooter wasn’t closer to the SW corner of the TSBD?

        Regarding JFK’s body being turned 5° to his right, thus turning his trachea 5° to his right, we have, if you will recall, already taken this into consideration. The original angle calculated that would miss the vertebrae and still pass through the right side of the trachea was 26° (some strongly believe this to be 28°). The angle of 21° is the result of subtracting this 5° correction from the original figure.

        • Tim Nickerson says:

          Robert Prudhomme wrote:

          If you’re suggesting that the Magic Bullet went BETWEEN C7 and T1 veterbrae, the answer is no. There is simply no room between them whatsoever. There is a small gap between these vertebrae at the extreme lateral tips, between the transverse processes but, not only is this gap much smaller than a 6.5mm Carcano bullet, the opening runs downward at a slope to the rear. Any bullet transiting this gap would have to originate lower than JFK. A shooter in the trunk of the limo, perhaps?
          ================================================

          Bob, that’s simply will not do. All you are doing is giving opinion. I’ve asked you numerous times to provide specifics. That being, actual numbers. You have failed to do so thus far. Until you do, your whole claim is inoperative and there’s no need to address question 2.

          • Fearfaxer says:

            Actually, BP has provided quite a few specifics, i.e., actual numbers. At this point, anyone would be justified in deciding that your line of argument is, to say the least, disingenuous.

  22. Bill says:

    Sorry Tom.
    The central issue that most fail to deal with is the position of Kennedy at the time he was first wounded. The measurements that are used are FLAWED. That is, they depict the angles from a cadaver which is laying down on a flat surface. The angles do not take into account body mechanics. The HSCA handled all this brilliantly well.

    “The Croft photograph also shows Kennedy’s torso facing nearly straight forward. At Zapruder frame 190, however, he is seen to turn his head about 60° to his right (see JFK exhibit F 226), and it is reasonable to expect that he also would have rotated his shoulders a small amount in the same direction. Most probably, this rotation was only 5°or less, as judged by the absence of obvious large shifts in body position in the Zapruder movie. Thus, it was assumed that, except for turning his head by about 60° and his torso perhaps by 5°, Kennedy made no major changes in posture after frame 161. This assumption is supported by a photograph taken by Phillip Willis at about the time of Zapruder frame 202.* (See fig. II-15, JFK exhibit F-155.)
    *Establishing when the Willis photograph was exposed in reference to the Zapruder film was done by the Photographic Evidence Panel by studying the Zapruder film and determining when Willis could actually be seen snapping his picture. In the study of the back/neck wounds trajectory, calibration photographs of the anthropometric dummy were taken but not used (that is, for measurement analysis) because, unlike the head, the torso is quite mobile, and consequently there is no stable relationship between the various body parts. It was decided that to rely on the calibration-photograph technique in this instance would have given a false sense of accuracy to the analysis.
    FIGURE II-15 — JFK exhibit F-155.

  23. What have we here?!?!?!?

    Q.: Were the organs of the neck dissected?

    Boswell: “Yes.”

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/boswella.htm
    \\][//

  24. Fearfaxer says:

    Sometimes you need to step back from all the ballistics analysis, vetting of the Zapruder Film, discussions of the quality of the M-C rifle, refrain from taking part in the arguments about arguments and the empty rhetoric they inspire, and just look at the overall picture, as I alluded to in a comment I made a couple of days ago in this thread:

    The Single Bullet Theory did not arise from careful, calm analysis of what happened in Dealey Plaza on 11-22-63. It arose from the rather desperate necessity of coming up with an explanation of how Oswald could have done this by himself after it became public knowledge that one of the Only-Three-Shots-Fired! had to have missed, hitting that section of curb from which the bits of debris that wounded James Tague came from. Prior to that, the FBI had declared that 2 shots had hit JFK, and the other wounded Governor Connolly, a plausible if not entirely convincing scenario that the WC was apparently going to accept without question. Now all of those wounds and all of those holes in the fabric of their clothing had to have come from only 2 shots, with the bullet said to have hit both men being in near pristine condition. In developing this theory, the WC was fitting the supposed facts to a particular situation — i.e., “there could only have been one shooter and he could only have fired three shots and one of them completely missed the intended target, therefore this must have happened.” I leave it all of you to decide if this approach has produced a plausible explanation. My answer is “No.”

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      And what is truly amazing about the Single Bullet Theory is that is was not calculated by a doctor or ballistics expert but, rather, by a lawyer named Arlen Specter.

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        A notable fact Bob. A lawyer that had an agenda, not of finding truth, but of serving the interests of those who hired him.

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          And remember, first, Future President, Hoover/FBI informant and pardoner of Nixon, Gerald Ford moved the back wound UP to the neck from official reports arbitrarily with never an explanation as Warren Ommissioner.

      • Fearfaxer says:

        Yes. Poor old Arlen. As much as I disliked him (as did most of his Senate colleagues), I have to say now that he’s gone, I can empathize with the plight of a hyper-ambitious young man who has this extraordinarily disagreeable task dumped on him by people who can make or break his future, and told (in the most subtle way of course) that if he didn’t make this ludicrous hypothesis work, he could look forward to a fascinating career in traffic court adjudication, which is all he’d be hired for if he screwed that assignment up. Can I say I’d have done any different?

        That’s the legal profession folks. Cross your bosses, pay the consequences. Make them happy, watch the money roll like a stone through your front door. And maybe you’ll end up a US Senator. A conscience doesn’t pay your bills, after all.

        • Mariano says:

          Yes, but for James T. Tague’s efforts to publicize his wound with the press (six months after the assassination), the Warren Commission may not have called him to testify (despite having been interviewed originally by the FBI, and a Dallas policeman). After testimony, Arlen Spectre produces the SBT to satisfy the predicated outcome of the Warren Commission of fraudsters.

        • Bill says:

          No. But writing non-factual books like Thompson, Lane, J. Hill, will!

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          You are quite correct in your estimation of Specter’s rather delicate “situation”. I’ve often wondered how much he may have been influenced by certain parties telling him that, unless it was shown Oswald was the lone gunman, the assassination could be tied to the Cubans or Russians, and that the fate of the world hung in the balance with the imminent threat of a nuclear exchange. They were, as you will recall, barely removed from the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962.

          Specter may have regarded himself as a patriot and a hero.

      • Bill says:

        Comical. So the HSCA investigation…and 2 Congressional sponsored investigators work, along with private investigations by noted Pathologists….lol….

        They concluded that JFK/Connally hit by same bullet. Pathologists. Real Experts on guns and ammunition. Got it Bob????

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Well, they were wrong then, weren’t they. Intentionally, accidentally, or otherwise. The SBT is mathematically impossible.

          Got it, Bill?

    • Photon says:

      Where is the source for the myth that the Tague wounding drove the genesis of the Single bullet theory? I have seen this posted repeatedly on this site without a shred of documented evidence that the Commission had any interest in Tague whatsoever when the chronological issues noted in the Zapruder film ( which actually generated the theory) became evident in March of 1964. The single bullet theory had coalesced around late April of the same year; Tague wasn’t even interviewed by the Commission until the end of July. The assumption that the SBT was needed to explain his wound is a fallacy in the first place, as fragments from the round responsible for the head wound could just as easily account for his secondary wound as any missed shot.
      The SBT was also prompted by the question of where the round that transited JFK’s neck went-as by the time of the Commission the autopsy final report was available and documented the path of the bullet that struck JFK’s back. The relatively undamaged round had to go somewhere; there was no evidence of it being found in the limo nor damage to the limo that it should have caused. What was directly in front of JFK in the path of this round?
      This is the Achilles Heel of every criticism of the SBT- nowhere has a critic been able to come up with an explanation as to where the neck round went after exiting JFK’s throat. Of course if you can’t believe that it was an exit wound and you are convinced that ER physicians wound interpretations are more accurate than autopsy results ( despite documented studies that ER wound perceptions at best have an accuracy of around 50%) you can ignore that problem. If you believe that a high-velocity rifle round would only penetrate a few centimeters into subcutaneous tissue and then stop when virtually every round available today would penetrate the tissue equivalent of two boneless chicken breasts you can ignore that problem.
      But if you truly understand ballistics, firearms, medical evidence you must conclude that the round must be accounted for-which the SBT does, while no alternative theory has been able to do so.

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Have you read Warren Commission Document (WCD) 298, Photon?

        • Photon says:

          Yes-have you?
          It doesn’t mention Tague.

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            I have read WCD 298 several times, my friend. My favourite part of it is the lovely Visual Aid Brochure, in which we are treated to some photos of some delightful 3-D models of Dealey Plaza, created by the FBI. My favourite photos begin at Page 22, as these are the ones showing the “three shots, three hits” on JFK and Connally the FBI believed occurred.

            https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10699#relPageId=23&tab=page

            What amazes me the most is that the FBI did not seem to believe the fatal head shot occurred at z313, or 265 feet from the Sniper’s Nest. Rather, they place the head shot much further down the street, 307 feet from the Sniper’s Nest, and, coincidentally, almost exactly where James “Ike” Altgens testified the head shot occurred.

            And know what they believed occurred at z313 (265 feet from the Sniper’s Nest)? The FBI believed Connally was shot in the back at a point 262 feet from the Sniper’s Nest, only 3 feet from where the Zapruder film shows the fatal head shot!

            What happened? I’m sure the FBI was not denied the privilege of viewing the Zapruder film, being the main investigative body for the Warren Commission. How could they place a back shot on Connally almost precisely where the fatal head shot was inflicted on JFK??

          • JohnR says:

            For Mr. Prudhomme: Where does Altgens testify that the head shot was 307 feet from the alleged sniper’s nest? I can’t find it. I can’t imagine how he could think that, owing to how close he was to the limo at the moment of the final head shot.

        • “It doesn’t mention Tague.”~Photon

          Lol…that is the whole point Photon. The FBI had three separate shots – each hitting their target.

          When Tague enters the picture, there is a hysterical scramble to change the hits to “one missed” – thus the genesis of the ludicrous Magic Bullet Theory.
          \\][//

          • Photon says:

            The claim was that the Tague story prompted the creation of the SBT. That is not correct.
            WCD 298 makes no mention of Tague. This is a classic conspiracy tactic of changing the story when the conspiracy narrative is not supported by the facts.
            Tague had nothing to do with the fact that the Commission discovered that the round that hit JFK in the back and transited his neck HAD to have hit Connolly. As all of Connolly’s wounds were caused by one bullet( never seriously disputed by any knowledgable authority).
            The FBI report, nor its visual aides make any mention of Tague.

          • “The FBI report, nor its visual aides make any mention of Tague.”~Photon

            I know you aren’t this dense Photon. That IS the whole point. And you are pretending to miss this point: that suddenly the tidy little story of “three shots three hits from a single sniper,” collapsed like a house of card with the advent of Tague.

            That is clearly why the sudden invention of the stupendously ridiculous “Single Bullet Theory”.

            I have to say Photon, your tacky burlesque here is as transparent as a windowpane.
            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            No Willy, it collapsed after the Zapruder film was closely studied in Feb. and March of 1964. Tague had nothing to do with the rushed FBI report conclusions being discarded. The Zapruder film’s greatest value for real researchers is as a chronometer that documents the timing of events. It became evident that JFK and Connolly both reacted to being wounded too closely in time to allow for the bolt action rifle to be reloaded. At that point the 3-shot, 3- hit scenario became untenable. As the FBI report didn’t even mention Connolly’s wounds it should be apparent how woefully incomplete it was.
            If you only report 80% of the correct information you will never learn 100% of the truth.

      • Mariano says:

        Where is the evidence of the limo? What did the Secret Services do with the limo?

      • Fearfaxer says:

        “The claim was that the Tague story prompted the creation of the SBT. That is not correct.”

        Yes it is. “Case Closed”! 😉

  25. Neil says:

    The “Multi-bullet theory”

    Before the SBT, the FBI decided Oswald did it alone and all three shots landed inside the Limo

    The old FBI theory seems to have been resurrected by Det. Mark Fuhrman

    http://simple-act-of-murder.blogspot.com/?m=0

    • Mariano says:

      Yes, the 1st bullet would be seen to have hit Kennedy, the 2nd bullet to have hit Connolly, and the third bullet to have hit Kennedy, in line with their predicated lone assassin agenda.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      I highly recommend reading Warren Commission Document (WCD) 298.

      https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10699#relPageId=23&tab=page

      The photos depicting where the FBI believed the three shots occurred begins at Page 22.

      Spoiler Alert: The FBI did not agree with the SBT, and also placed the fatal head shot much further down Elm St., at 307 feet from the Sniper’s Nest. The WC and the Zapruder film placed the fatal head shot at z313, 265 feet from the Sniper’s Nest.

      Someone was lying.

  26. Bill says:

    Expert Anaysis on the path of CE399:
    The Panel then had to adjust slightly the wound locations that been provided based on the autopsy photographs and X-rays because of their difference in body position from that at the time of the shooting. During the autopsy, Kennedy was in an anatomical position with his face tilted as if looking upward about 35°, a posture and conformation significantly different from those at the time of the assassination.
    Appropriate adjustments were made under the direction of Dr. Clyde Snow, a forensic anthropologist at the Civil Aeromedical Institute of the FAA’s Aeronautical Center. It was determined that returning Kennedy’s head to a normal position relative to his body would, according to laboratory tests on men of similar build, adjust his neck wound down about 1.0 centimeter toward his breastbone. Returning Kennedy’s head to the position it was in at the time he was first wounded–about 60° to the right of straight ahead of his torso-caused only a slight change in the position (approximately 0.1 centimeter to the right of its observed position in the autopsy photographs). (54)
    Because the Zapruder film showed that Kennedy had raised his right shoulder slightly so as to place his elbow on the side of the limousine, the resulting movement of skin at the inshoot location was also assessed. It was found that the wound was approximately 0.1 centimeter higher and 0.2 centimeter closer to his midplane than the post mortem photographic observations by themselves indicated. (55) While only the vertical position of the neck wound was substantially altered by these changes in conformation, all the adjustments were included in the analysis of trajectory.

    • Steve Stirlen says:

      Bill,

      if you can answer my question with a modicum of respect, then I would like to know your thoughts. However, if you have to resort to replying with Stevie or Steven or laddie, or any other term you feel like you need to use to get your point across, then please don’t respond.

      Dr. Snow, he is an anthropologist, correct? Isn’t what we need a forensic pathologist? Someone who has dealt extensively with gunshot wounds and the behavior of the body with these bullets? He also works for the FAA, correct? What exactly does the aviation association have to do where Kennedy’s head may or may not have been at the moment of impact?

      Also, can you explain to me, again with a degree of respect, how holes 5 1/2 down from the collar of a man’s coat winds up exiting his throat, when the bullet has left a sixth floor window? Can you post me a URL that shows this with some clarity? PLEASE don’t give me anything from the WO, or its lackeys. Give me someone who actually might have a clue in what they are doing.

      Thank you for your time.

      • Bill says:

        Steven. I think respect is a two way street don’t you agree? Good. I’m sure you would. First, being Irish, I think you misunderstand my use of the word Lad/laddie. We use these terms everyday and they mean no disrespect. Actually the opposite should be inferred. But it does to surprise me that you take it as such. Interesting.

        About Dr. Snow. First, he is not just an ‘anthropologist’. He is a Forensic Anthropologist. He is/was one of only about 30 or so in the entire United States during the early 80’s.

        We needed a Forensic Anthropologist because the HSCA wanted a team to go over every part of the Assassination and to figure out if, for example, possibly photo’s were altered. Another example of a FORENSIC Anthropologist would be to determine if a shard of bone/fragment would be able to help determine origin, wound location, etc. As for the Aviation part. When a plane goes down and a bomber is suspected to have participated on it…you don’t think that a Forensic Anthropologist would be needed to identify the femur of the 26 year old guy in seat 2-6 or the 12 year old boy in seat 22-5. In cases like this they are used all of the time to reconstruct a body…or a scene…or even a model.

        In the JFK case:

        The highly-popular 35th President of the United States met an untimely and unfortunate end when he was assasinated by Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22, 1963. The circumstances surrounding the incident have since been mired in controversy and conspiracy since the initial government investigation into the assassination occurred (known simply as the Warren Commission after the judge who presided over it).

        “During these sessions, Dr. Clyde Snow was called as a witness for the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSA) to authenticate autopsy X-rays as belonging to JFK, since there was doubt the images released to the public were genuine. Along with Dr. Ellis R. Kerley, Snow determined that the skull and torso radiographs taken at autopsy matched the available antemortem films they had available in a “wealth of intricate morphological detail.”

        Now from this man’s experiences the panel used him to create models, highly detailed models to ascertain the exact position of the models of JFK and Connally at various points located in 3 Assassination Films and in the photographs of Willis, Croft, etc.

        His value to the HSCA was apparent on multiple points. I will speak about the 5.5 inches collar note in my next post.

      • Bill says:

        Regarding the 5.5 inches hole below the collar.

        The issue of the Jacket hole is actually a non-issue if addressed factually. And allow me to explain:

        Please let’s try to go about this in a different path and try to find a grain of common ground. I hope you’re able to do that. I have a visual for you to look at when I’m done so PLEASE bear with me until the end:

        Let’s make JFK sit in the car Coatless, Shirtless, Braceless. Period.

        1. A shot is taken at the car and our occupants begin to look around. Our shirtless JFK resumes his waving and our experienced hunter, Governor Connally begins to twist and turn. He knows a rifle shot when he hears it.

        2. A few seconds later a bullet rips into JFK’s Upper Back/Lower Neck. We do not need to discuss the Governor for a while because we are trying to determine a hole in JFK’s back ( and yes…the coat will come into play in a moment). We’re going one step at a time.

        3. The deceased JFK is brought into Bethesda for an Autopsy. 3 Hacks do the job. It was not ideal but that’s what it was.

        4. They see a whole in JFK’s back and they measure it and they come up with a number of centimeters. They measured this THE COMPLETELY WRONG WAY on multiple fronts. I’ll explain:

        1. First, they pull JFK’s head backward (He was face down on Table ) to show both the rear entry wound AND the Head Wound.

        • Bill says:

          Regarding the 5.5 inches hole below the collar.

          The issue of the Jacket hole is actually a non-issue if addressed factually. And allow me to explain:

          Please let’s try to go about this in a different path and try to find a grain of common ground. I hope you’re able to do that. I have a visual for you to look at when I’m done so PLEASE bear with me until the end:

          Let’s make JFK sit in the car Coatless, Shirtless, Braceless. Period.

          1. A shot is taken at the car and our occupants begin to look around. Our shirtless JFK resumes his waving and our experienced hunter, Governor Connally begins to twist and turn. He knows a rifle shot when he hears it.

          2. A few seconds later a bullet rips into JFK’s Upper Back/Lower Neck. We do not need to discuss the Governor for a while because we are trying to determine a hole in JFK’s back ( and yes…the coat will come into play in a moment). We’re going one step at a time.

          3. The deceased JFK is brought into Bethesda for an Autopsy. 3 Hacks do the job. It was not ideal but that’s what it was.

          4. They see a whole in JFK’s back and they measure it and they come up with a number of centimeters. They measured this THE COMPLETELY WRONG WAY on multiple fronts. I’ll explain:

          1. First, they pull JFK’s head backward (He was face down on Table ) to show both the rear entry wound AND the Head Wound.

      • Bill says:

        Steve: Here is the Jeffries Film I mentioned in my post. I will ask you to review seconds 21-27 to see how high JFK’s Jacket had rode up on his neck. In it is actually riding above the collar at second 26 and, I’M WILLING TO BET THAT, if you take that Jacket with a hold shot through it…and measure it AFTER it is off of the body…

        The hole would be just where it was measured to be. 5 1/2 inches from the top of the collar. Unfortunately….the jacket was not sitting on a man standing and fitting so nicely over his shoulders. It was looped up or puffed up is a better expression I’d say.

        I’ll say this too: Go to the closet and grab a coat and puff it up (loop) so that it is about even with the top of the collar (as JFK’s was). I’m willing to be that the wound in the ‘back’ becomes the wound in the neck that Dr. Boswell probed in the autopsy.
        I’d be willing to wager that it road up what looks like 2+ inches. Now take that 2+ inches and double it ( a pinch of one inch is a pinch of 2 mathematically in relation to normal position.

        The wound was 5.51 inches from the Right Mastoid Process….right where it was measured to be. And WELL up into the lower neck/upper back area.

        The proof of this is right on second 26 of the Jeffries Film.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY384ITlbTw

        And backed up again on the Croft Photo (Elm Street).

        https://www.google.com/search?q=croft+photo+of+jfk&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS503US512&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=875&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAmoVChMI_pjdxYiZyQIViCYmCh2lUwtK#imgrc=D1Frb2XaGsgaLM%3A

  27. Bill says:

    Part 2 of the path of CE399:
    Using the average locations and adjustments, the back wound was located at a point 4.4 centimeters to the right of and 1.1 centimeters above Kennedy’s neck wound at the time of the shot. The bullet was moving from right to left by 18° and downward by 4.0° relative to Kennedy if he were sitting erect (not inclined forward or aft). Since Kennedy was believed to have been turned about 5° to his right relative to the fore-and-aft line of the limousine, it is concluded that the bullet was moving from right to left by. 13° relative to the midline of the limousine. By a similar analysis, since Kennedy was inclined slightly forward by approximately 11° to 18° (from true vertical), the downward slope of the trajectory, taking into account the 3 slope of the street, was established at between 18°and 25° (4° plus 11° plus 3°). The Panel decided to use an angle of 21° for its analysis.
    The analysis by the USGS of the limousine’s motion through Dealey Plaza provided both the location and angular orientation of the limousine at a time corresponding to Zapruder frame 193; (56) adjustments were then made with reference to Zapruder frame 190. (See fig. II-10, JFK exhibit F-133)
    The direction of the trajectory was then determined by drawing a line on a scaled diagram of Dealey Plaza at a 13°(that is, 18° minus 5°) angle relative to the car and extending it to the rear until it intercepted the first building that it encountered. Assuming frame 190 as the moment of impact, the trajectory line intercepts the Texas School Book Depository approximately 14 feet west of its southeast corner. (See fig. II-16). Using an angle of 21°, the slope of the trajectory was then drawn onto a similarly scaled diagram and found to intersect the Texas School Book Depository at a point almost level with the sixth floor windowsill. (See fig. II-17.)”

    Funny how the medical evidence of the HSCA is glossed over isn’t it.

    One bullet. Two Men. 6th Floor.

  28. Bill says:

    Tim:
    Tim. In deriving the slope of the trajectory, the difference in height between the two wounds, the 60-centimeter distance between them, and the inclination of Elm Street, were taken into account. Kennedy’s neck wound was 1.1 centimeters below his first thoracic vertebra; his forward inclination lowered the wound an additional 2.4 centimeters. Connally’s inshoot wound was 18 centimeters below his first thoracic vertebra. Thus, if the men had been sitting so that the tops of their heads were at equal heights, Kennedy’s wound would have been 14.5 centimeters higher than Connally’s.* Then, taking into account that Kennedy was seated approximately 8 centimeters higher than Connally (as observed in the Croft photograph), Kennedy’s wound is found to have been 22.5 centimeters higher (14.5 plus 8 centimeters) than Connally’s relative to the car. This height difference over a distance of 60 centimeters (point-to-point, distance between the wounds) yields a downward slope of about 22° from Kennedy’s wound to Connally’s. Finally, accounting for the 3° slope of the street, the slope of the trajectory is found to be 25°.

    • ed connor says:

      If I stick a stilleto next to your thoracic spine at a downward angle of 25 degrees, the tip ain’t coming out above the knot of your necktie.

    • Tim Nickerson says:

      Bill,

      Thanks for that description of the vertical trajectory. I haven’t had too many CTs try to argue against it. Those that do, usually point out that Connally was taller than Kennsdy. But what they failed to realize is that the extra height was likely in the legs.

      • Fearfaxer says:

        So I take it you’ve measured his corpse?

        Connolly himself insisted to his dying day that the single bullet theory was rubbish. The same appellation should be given to your comment.

        • David Regan says:

          As did two of the closest eye–witnesses – Connally’s wife, who was sitting to his left, and James Chaney, the police motorcyclist who was riding to Kennedy’s right. Both independently claimed that Connally’s back wound was caused by a separate bullet. http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=34&relPageId=155
          http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=39&relPageId=274

        • Photon says:

          Actually, that is not true. Connolly insisted that he was not hit by them first bullet-which initially the Commission thought caused the wound to JFK’s neck and all of Connolly’s wounds. He was correct- but the the first bullet missed everybody; having never seen JFK after the first shot he did not realize that Kennedy also appeared to have heard the shot and reacted to it, as did a little girl who abruptly stopped running along the side of the limo.
          He never said that the second shot could not have gone through JFK before hitting him. His problem was that he could not accept the first shot being the Single Bullet.
          Why make false claims if your theories have merit?

          • Lol Photon, your reinterpretation of the long settled facts here in your comment of, November 15, 2015 at 5:45 am, is daring in the extreme.

            I no longer have the patience to pick apart every one of your scurrilous posts here. You argue on the terms of attrition, as if you go on long enough we will simply tire of this circus you are running, and you will finally get the last word.
            Well I am through with you for now. I have to dismiss everything you say wholesale. I will leave it at that until and if there is room for a summation.
            \\][//

          • Jean Davison says:

            Connally told CBS, “…all I can say with any finality is that…if the single bullet theory is correct, then it had to be the second bullet that hit the President and me.”

            http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=97695&relPageId=22&search=“single_bullet

            He said essentially the same thing to the HSCA.

      • It occurs to me that we may have a dual case of Dunning–Kruger effect concerning Bill & Tim. They both reinforce each other’s wacky analysis; see eye to eye on patent nonsense.
        Odd men out in rational discussion. I don’t think it is an act, like Photon’s game. I think these other two are really sincere in their mediocrity.
        However the three of them combined; that being Photon, Tim N, and Bill (not Brown) do present a three ring circus of distraction and befuddlement. I suppose their plan is to play this show into perpetuity – for the benefit of Mr Kite.
        \\][//

  29. Bill says:

    Tim:
    n figure II-25, a circle of 7 feet radius, representing the estimated minimum reasonable margin of error, has been drawn around the intercept point. It is smaller than those of the other two trajectories simply because the distance between the two wounds (60 centimeters) is more than four times as great as that for the back/neck case (14 centimeters) and five times that for the fatal bullet (11 centimeters). This longer baseline distance admits greater error in wound location and body position, while yielding superior accuracy. The eastern border of the error circle is somewhat better fixed than the western because the right-most position of Connally was better defined than the left-most.
    The consistency of the single-bullet theory trajectory with the back/neck shot trajectory described earlier is illustrated by their similar direction and slope. Note that the intercept point of the single bullet theory trajectory at the Texas School Book Depository lies very close to the margin of error circle established for the back* neck case. Indeed, the two error circles overlap substantially. (See figs. II-17 and II-25.) Clearly, this analysis supports the single-bullet theory. The reliability of this trajectory in indicating the position of the gunman would be less if it could be shown that the bullet had been deflected as it passed through Kennedy’s tissue. Nevertheless, the evidence indicates that the bullet passed near, but did not strike, the right lateral processes of the seventh cervical and first thoracic vertebrae (nor any other bony matter). (59) Consequently, the deflection, was probably negligible.

    You’re right on the money. I find it amazing that some can fault the WC and yet, along comes the HSCA and they STILL can’t come to terms with it.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Bill

      Appendix IX of the WCR contains the autopsy report for JFK. In the paragraph discussing the path of the missile through JFK’s neck, we read the following:

      “As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body.”

      It also states:

      “The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck.”

      As I have been pointing out to Tim, with little success, if JFK was facing forward in the limo at the moment it is believed the SBT occurred, a bullet following the above described path would have to be following a lateral angle of a MINIMUM of 26° through JFK’s neck, as measured from a centre line running the length of the limo.

      As was determined early in the investigation, the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD was only 9° removed laterally from a centre line running the length of the limo, at the moment the SBT supposedly occurred, making it impossible for a shooter in the Sniper’s Nest to have fired the shot described in the SBT.

      How do you account for this discrepancy? Are you sure your “shooter” wasn’t further west on the 6th floor?

      • Bill says:

        Yes. I am sure of that. Everybody and their brother, INCLUDING YOU, have already admitted that NONE OF THE WC Doctors were prepared in training or practice to do this job…and they did a terrible job.

        But the x-rays and photos that exist have been examined and have enough data on them to completely correlate the shooting.

        What is wrong with you? Those Doctors had no way of ascertaining that the wound in JFK’s neck was an exit wound because they thought it was done during the Parkland Hospital E.R. attempts to save Kennedy.

        They ASSUMED INCORRECTLY and that was the start of a botched Autopsy. Do ya think that maybe having Jackie Kennedy sitting upstairs made them hustle up and screw up???? I doj. When the CE399 was found (and Dr. Gregory..who worked on Connally had instituted a search for it…it was just not ‘found’. It was being looked for) it fit a mold that the Autopsy Doc’s messed up.

        Luckily for us, EVERY medical Panel that has investigated the materials associated with JFK’s autopsy have agreed with the fact that one bullet did this.

        I would like to know bob….what is your opinion of JFK’s downward hand swings after he was struck at 223/224…Connally’s flinching face and obvious reaction to being shot at 223/224.

        If ANY LEVEL HEADED person looks at the physical reactions of those 2 men at 223/224 you would have to come to the conclusion that they were struck AT THE SAME TIME.

        If not…well….I have a bridge I’d want to speak to you about.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Please address the issue at hand, Bill, of the Magic Bullet being unable to transit JFK’s neck, as described in the SBT, without smashing through his vertebrae.

          • Bill says:

            Easy. The the doctors established that the missile did not damage anything but soft tissue. Other than that, Bob, the report on the damage speaks for itself.

            Let me ask: If there was no damage then would the Single Bullet be viable? Isn’t that the crux of the discussion?

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Bill, how did the autopsy doctors establish this without probing or dissecting the throat or back wound. They just supposedly assumed the throat wound was one of exit until Humes spoke to the Dallas doctors later.

      • Bill says:

        And I have read that part of the discussion here…between you and Tim. It seems to me that you are not accounting for the spatial relationships of the occupants of the car. By this I mean the forward tilt of JFK’s (slouch) or the fact that JFK was turned, or that Connally was tilted into a different position as well.

        A MAJOR flaw of the Warren Commission Report was the failure of the ‘Medical Experts’ to account for the slope of the street. The movements of the occupants of the vehicle at the moment in question, or even the 3 degree downward slope of the road.

        I see you defending your thesis..but greater experts have already determined it possible and probable.

        I included what the HSCA determined below. They addressed the same issues you come up with and, for them, they were more prepared to study the reality of human movements vs. what the WC slackers did.

        And the bottom line for the HSCA was that, given the new information the angle worked perfectly.

        As for me, about the shooter being further West on the 6th Floor? My view is that Eunis, Jackson, and Rowland are all correct when they viewed a man on the floor. Right down to Jackson, in the motorcade, saying to others he saw the gun.

        Between that and the Hughes film, the fact that the angles all point to the 6th Floor window etc….

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          What on earth does the 3° downward slope of Elm St. have to do with the lateral (side to side) separation of the Sniper’s Nest from the limo? Your post makes no sense at all, and does nothing to address the impossibility of the SBT.

          Much ad about nothing, Bill, pretty much sums up your entire discourse.

          • leslie sharp says:

            Bob, would you offer a brief assessment based on your in-depth knowledge of the ballistics about the configuration of the windowframe and exterior façade related to the position of the box Oswald is alleged to have sat on and the two boxes that were stacked and possibly a third between them and the windowsill? I did an extremely amateur experiment on my portal with a 40”inch stick I found in the garden, boxes of books from my storage and some posts to recreate the window frame. And while the scope aspect was not in the mix, I still could not convince myself that the window frame and façade might not have effected the final shot or shots, let alone that the rifle could have been visible from directly below that window. As a layperson who gets completely befuddled by the ballistics detail being presented here and elsewhere, I’m operating on ‘instinct’ that tells me something is rotten about that sniper’s nest that has yet to be studied thoroughly.

  30. Bill says:

    And one last point about ‘Witnesses’ and what they see.

    How about Jean Hill for an example about mis-statements. She made quite a bit of controversy about seeing the President, seeing the Shot fired. etc…etc…etc. Wrote Book. Appeared on TV.

    Well….FACTUALLY, this Witness to a shooter on the Grassy Knoll, was not ever looking at JFK when the fatal bullet was fired.

    • Bill your straw-man insertion here isn’t going to fly. Jean Hill is not here. Speak to the issues raised by those who are here.
      \\][//

      • Bill says:

        Willy. You do such a disservice to the entire legacy of history. I would wonder more about the issues that are relevant except, with every position you suddenly adopt, it occurs to me how much we know about the JFK Assassination, vs accept as fact because of the writing of you, bobby and chuck.

        How many times do you have to be wrong?

        As far as Jean Hill. Willy…you and Bobby are the NEW Jean Hill of our day. Understand now? I don’t think you do…but I’m hopeful you will someday.

        Peace.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          What on earth does the 3° downward slope of Elm St. have to do with the lateral (side to side) separation of the Sniper’s Nest from the limo? Your post makes no sense at all, and does nothing to address the impossibility of the SBT.

          Much ado about nothing, Bill, pretty much sums up your entire discourse.

        • “How many times do you have to be wrong?”~Bill

          You have never proven me wrong on a single point Bill. Only in your fevered imagination.

          I am really tired of your cheesy burlesque here Bill.
          You go on pretending that you have made valid point.
          It is an endless carousel of nonsense from you and your pals.
          \\][//

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            It is all that they have, Willy. These poor chaps were given the task of defending utter nonsense, and I feel for them.

          • Bill says:

            Willy. Being proven wrong is what CT’ers have been trying to do to the Single Bullet for almost 50 years. With every study performed the Single Bullet Theory becomes more factual.

            I would add that if you feel you do not like the dancing that you accuse me of then simply stop responding to in such a gruff manner. It is, after all, a two-way street.

  31. Mariano says:

    The SBT theory is the result of a Warren Commission desperate to demonstrate a lone assassin from the sixth floor of the TSBD, under the circumstance of some of the evidence leaking to the press (beyond it’s grasp to cover-up).

    In essence, if Tague did not enforce his presence in the investigation, we would not be having this discussion about the validity of the SBT.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      The original FBI report to the Warren Commission also had the fatal head shot occurring much further down Elm St., almost at the concrete steps going up to the pergola. This report became known as Warren Commission Document 298, and it was given to the WC by J. Edgar Hoover (FBI) on Jan. 20, 1964. This report was accompanied by a visual aid brochure, in which a model of Dealey Plaza had been created, showing the location of the limo at the timing of the three shots. The entire brochure is quite fascinating, although the photos demonstrating the three shots don’t begin until Page 22.

      https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10699#relPageId=27&tab=page

      According to this report, JFK and Connally were hit by three separate bullets; something Hoover tenaciously clung to when Arlen Specter brought out the Single Bullet Theory. The first bullet, the FBI claimed, hit JFK in the back while he was behind the Stemmons sign (167 feet from the Sniper’s Nest), the second bullet hit Connally in the back almost exactly at z313 (where we are told JFK was hit in the head) and the third shot struck JFK in the head while he was 307 feet from the Sniper’s Nest in the TSBD, not the 265 feet (z313) later claimed by the Warren Commission. Interestingly, the FBI claimed the second (Connally) shot was 262 feet from the SN; only three feet short of the 265 feet head shot (JFK) seen at z313 of the Zapruder film.

  32. Mariano says:

    That is we would not be having a discussion about a SBT.

  33. Bill says:

    HSCA:
    The Panel then had to adjust slightly the wound locations that been provided based on the autopsy photographs and X-rays because of their difference in body position from that at the time of the shooting. During the autopsy, Kennedy was in an anatomical position with his face tilted as if looking upward about 35°, a posture and conformation significantly different from those at the time of the assassination.
    Appropriate adjustments were made under the direction of Dr. Clyde Snow, a forensic anthropologist at the Civil Aeromedical Institute of the FAA’s Aeronautical Center. It was determined that returning Kennedy’s head to a normal position relative to his body would, according to laboratory tests on men of similar build, adjust his neck wound down about 1.0 centimeter toward his breastbone. Returning Kennedy’s head to the position it was in at the time he was first wounded–about 60° to the right of straight ahead of his torso-caused only a slight change in the position (approximately 0.1 centimeter to the right of its observed position in the autopsy photographs). (54)
    Because the Zapruder film showed that Kennedy had raised his right shoulder slightly so as to place his elbow on the side of the limousine, the resulting movement of skin at the inshoot location was also assessed. It was found that the wound was approximately 0.1 centimeter higher and 0.2 centimeter closer to his midplane than the post mortem photographic observations by themselves indicated. (55) While only the vertical position of the neck wound was substantially altered by these changes in conformation, all the adjustments were included in the analysis of trajectory.

  34. Bill says:

    HSCA:
    Using the average locations and adjustments, the back wound was located at a point 4.4 centimeters to the right of and 1.1 centimeters above Kennedy’s neck wound at the time of the shot. The bullet was moving from right to left by 18° and downward by 4.0° relative to Kennedy if he were sitting erect (not inclined forward or aft). Since Kennedy was believed to have been turned about 5° to his right relative to the fore-and-aft line of the limousine, it is concluded that the bullet was moving from right to left by. 13° relative to the midline of the limousine. By a similar analysis, since Kennedy was inclined slightly forward by approximately 11° to 18° (from true vertical), the downward slope of the trajectory, taking into account the 3 slope of the street, was established at between 18°and 25° (4° plus 11° plus 3°). The Panel decided to use an angle of 21° for its analysis.
    The analysis by the USGS of the limousine’s motion through Dealey Plaza provided both the location and angular orientation of the limousine at a time corresponding to Zapruder frame 193; (56) adjustments were then made with reference to Zapruder frame 190. (See fig. II-10, JFK exhibit F-133)
    The direction of the trajectory was then determined by drawing a line on a scaled diagram of Dealey Plaza at a 13°(that is, 18° minus 5°) angle relative to the car and extending it to the rear until it intercepted the first building that it encountered. Assuming frame 190 as the moment of impact, the trajectory line intercepts the Texas School Book Depository approximately 14 feet west of its southeast corner. (See fig. II-16). Using an angle of 21°, the slope of the trajectory was then drawn onto a similarly scaled diagram and found to intersect the Texas School Book Depository at a point almost level with the sixth floor windowsill. (See fig. II-17.)”

    One bullet. Two Men. 6th Floor.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Bill

      One more time. How does a bullet fired from the Sniper’s Nest, 9° laterally (sideways) removed from a centre line running through the length of the limo at the moment of the SBT, pass through JFK’s neck and the right side of his trachea without going through his vertebrae?

      In order to miss his neck bones, a right to left path through his neck of a MINIMUM of 26°, measured from the same centre line through the length of the limo, is required for the bullet to pass OUTSIDE of JFK’s vertebrae.

      The SBT did NOT happen. It was mathematically impossible.

      • Bill says:

        Bob. YOU are not reading all the available information. You are operating from a conviction that your data is correct. It is simply not correct. New Data that has been refined since 1963 and bears out the precision of exactly how the TSBD 6th Floor was the sniper’s position.

        No hard feeling’s. Seriously. For decades I had felt that JFK was shot from two positions. Would never think otherwise. Then I looked more carefully at the HSCA data, and EXCEPT FOR THE STARTING POINT OF THE SHOOTING ( z-190, which was only because they wanted to use that moment…according to the Acoustic Evidence (which we now know was false of course…what else is new right?) as a starting point.

        The good news is that, DESPITE the starting point being at 160, 190 etc…it does not matter at all. Turns out that the only thing that matters is the position of the INJURY left on the body in relation to each other that matters.

        And at the moment that the Governor gets hit…points directly back to that window sill.

        Peace and best regards.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Bill

          No matter how many times you try to dress that pig up in a silk skirt, you still don’t have a ballerina.

          You speak of new data. Are you saying the investigators who determined, in 1963, that the Sniper’s Nest was 9° removed laterally (sideways) from a centre line running lengthwise through the limo, at the moment of the SBT, were mistaken?

          That is the only piece of data that could save the SBT. However, I’m afraid, with reality being what it is, that this piece of data simply CANNOT be changed. It is also quite simple to recreate the measurement of the 9° angle. Simply select the position of the limo, at the moment of the SBT, place the limo on a map of Dealey Plaza, and measure with a protractor.

          The only other data that could affect this would be an x-ray of JFK’s neck, showing him to have cervical vertebrae 1/3 the size of normal vertebrae.

          Perhaps you would like to share with us the precise details of this “new data” you speak of.

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            I should point out that, even if Oswald was removed far enough laterally (+21°) from the limo, all this would do is get the bullet through JFK’s neck without hitting bone. Unfortunately, it would still be travelling a right to left path through JFK’s neck and, upon exiting his throat, would be on a path toward the front left corner of the limo; WAY to the left of Connally entirely.

          • Tim Nickerson says:

            Robert Prudhomme wrote:

            The only other data that could affect this would be an x-ray of JFK’s neck, showing him to have cervical vertebrae 1/3 the size of normal vertebrae.

            Perhaps you would like to share with us the precise details of this “new data” you speak of.
            ===========================================

            Bob, perhaps you would like to share with us the precise details of the data you are using that allows you to move on to Question 2? What are the dimensions of the normal lower cervical vertebrae that would preclude a 6.5 mm bullet from passing between them or between the very lowest cervical vertebrae and the highest thoracic vertebrae?

          • Bill says:

            Bob,

            I offered the testimony from the HSCA and the testing done by the NASA (maybe you’ve heard of them). They are pretty much experts to a degree greater than many of us gumshoe detectives. Anyway these are the guys who send tiny little objects hurtling around 3 or 4 PLANETS millions and millions of miles away with pinpoint accuracy. Well, they computed the Trajectory of the Shots from occupants of the Limo and guess what? It came back to the window sill of the TSBD…right to the 6th Floor.

  35. Mariano says:

    The SBT is mathematically possible but not through the fable that Arlen Specter formulated. The shot would require to have originated from much lower than the sixth floor of the TSBD, and the evidence would need to demonstrate that there was such a bullet (in a evidence chain that was not dubious).
    However, to invent the SBT in order to marry with a preconceived conclusion of lone assassin, in an effort to convince the doubting public of such, is to have failed to carry out any valid process of investigation of JFK’s assassination.

    • Bill says:

      You know something. You actually have a good point. In his testimony, before the HSCA, Mr. Canning actually discusses the issue of the SBT as a way to make it fit vs. the was to prove it by using the markers on the human body.

      Arlen Specter did not fully appreciate the can of worms he was opening when he simply stated what he thought to address the situation. Yet, in the HSCA Study, the issue was decided in a much more detailed, medical, physical, and mathematical study.

      That is is correct is the rub. The CTer’s had a blast at the ‘Magic Bullet’ and even made it move and dip and dive. The reality is that it was no more magical than….Walt Disney. It just is what it is.

      • jeffc says:

        As researchers such as Pat Speer have carefully demonstrated, the HSCA produced conflicting conclusions. The medical panel established that the “wound in the neck” used by the Warren Commission and appearing in the Rydberg drawings was incorrect, but the trajectory panel, led by Canning, by which the HSCA claimed the SBT was true after all, returned the wound location to the incorrect position.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Well, Mariano, in truth, the cervical vertebrae occupy a much larger space in the neck than most people think. With the Sniper’s Nest in the SE corner of the TSBD, a direct line drawn from there to JFK’s trachea (windpipe) , at the moment of the SBT, would be going through the right segment of JFK’s cervical vertebrae, not around them. The autopsy definitely said this bullet did not strike any bony structures in JFK’s body.

  36. Eddy says:

    So……In summary there is no room for a bullet from the alleged snipers nest to pass through Kennedy’s neck without hitting his spine. Look at some diagrams, make your own mind up.

    This thread has confusing arguments in abundance, but its possible to see whose making sense I think.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Absolutely, Eddy. I would recommend to everyone to obtain a cross sectional diagram of the human neck at cervical vertebra C7. Draw a line through the sternum and spinal midline, 90° to a line drawn through the shoulders and, using a simple student’s protractor, measure the angle of another line, intersecting the first, drawn through the right side of the trachea and outside the extreme right tip of the C7 vertebra.

      Let me know what you find.

  37. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Leslie Sharp

    To answer your question, I have often looked at the configuration of boxes Oswald supposedly used to rest his rifle on and to sit on, during the shooting, and have thought to myself there was something very unreal about the whole thing. For example, look at the photo of Williams and Jarman (Norman?) on the 5th floor, just below the so called Sniper’s nest. I believe they are either kneeling or sitting on the floor. Can you imagine if they were sitting on boxes? The window sills were only 24 inches high on both floors. Wouldn’t it have made more sense for Oswald to sit on the floor, and rest his rifle on the window sill, which, between brick and wood, appears to be 8-10 inches wide? This would have offered Oswald far more concealment, and made it much more difficult for Brennan to estimate his height.

    Sitting higher on a box, and resting a rifle higher up, would have made for a very uncomfortable shot. This is made worse when we look again at the photo of the men on the 5th floor and realize that, while their window is fully open, the window on the 6th floor is only half open.

    If Oswald was resting the rifle on the boxes, and the window sill was 8-10 inches thick, I fail to see how anyone on Elm St. or even the first half block of Houston St. could have seen any more than just a fraction of the rifle.

    • Bill says:

      What nonsense.

      Oswald sitting on a box a distance farther way would allow him to lean forward and get totally comfortable in shooting from that position. What is wrong with you?? If you had Oswald sitting on the floor it would be almost impossible for him to get physically close enough to the window WITHOUT HANGING OUT OF IT. My God Bob. The gun was 40 inches long.You sit 40 inches away from your screen door and try to look down. You will see NOTHING. However…if you sit on a box the height of a toilet bowl (or thereabouts) and lean forward now you can see pretty much exactly what is occurring below you WITHOUT HAVING TO STICK YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE WINDOW.

      It’s a matter of ANGLES Bob. Kennedy below and Oswald above. Wow!

      Speaking of bathroom. Gotta go!

      • Prudhomme is right. Sit on the floor with a tape measure pulled up to 24 inches. That is a very low windowsill. We know the window was only open half way. If Oswald was sitting on a box the height of Bills toilet he would be exposed from the waist up, adding another box to rest a rifle on is just the same as raising the height of the windowsill, but necessitates being further from the open window area. It makes no sense to do it the way the official story claims, and that Bill-not-Brown agrees with.
        \\][//

        • Bill says:

          Wanted to break this up into two parts due to word limits:
          Total nonsense in both description and content. First. The box Oswlad was sitting on was no more than about 1 foot tall. ( and because I know that many are ruler challenged here…. Here is a to what the position of Oswald appears to have been.

          http://www.manuscriptservice.com/SN/snipersnest.pdf

          Please scroll down to page 23 of that link and see for your own two eyes the position that a human being would be in if seated on that box.

          Next….lean slightly forward to take your first shot (and miss) and then, follow the Limo even further down the street while you comfortable rest your gun on the top of those boxes and leisurely kill the 35th President.

          Oh…and Willy…about the waist up part: You mean like Brennan, a witness to this man firing the gun at Kennedy said??

          • Tom S. says:

            Bill,
            Three of your other comments are waiting. I cannot approve them because you opted to add what probably seems to you an amusing but inconsequential adjective before the name of the member you are replying to. I’ve received complaints and I no longer want to waste my time apologizing for what I have approved inadvertently, and sending emails to commenters requesting edits. So, if you don’t mean nuthin’ by it…. why take the trouble to insert the same adjective multiple times? WIth your permission, I will edit out the adjective and approve your three comments, or I will wait for you to resubmit them. My greatest frustration as a commenter here in the past was putting the effort into submitting a comment, usually including several links and some minutes of my time, only to check back and never see my comment appear. I am tempted to approach this work similarly now, but I know how it feels to be ignored here and I want to avoid making that way my SOP. I do not want those who I devote the most time in guiding to a successful approval result of their comments to influence how I process all comments, but I have to keep the time I devote to this to a minimum, if I still want to read and approve comments 16/7.

        • Bill says:

          Willy. Total nonsense in both description and content. First. The box Oswlad was sitting on was no more than about 1 foot tall. ( and because I know that many are ruler challenged here…. Here is a to what the position of Oswald appears to have been.

          http://www.manuscriptservice.com/SN/snipersnest.pdf

          Please scroll down to page 23 of that link and see for your own two eyes the position that a human being would be in if seated on that box.

          Next….lean slightly forward to take your first shot (and miss) and then, follow the Limo even further down the street while you comfortable rest your gun on the top of those boxes and leisurely kill the 35th President.

          Oh…and Willy…about the waist up part: You mean like Brennan, a witness to this man firing the gun at Kennedy said??

          ‘ BELIN. Would you describe just exactly what you saw when you saw him this last time?
          Mr. BRENNAN. Well, as it appeared to me he was standing up and resting against the left window sill, with gun shouldered to his right shoulder, holding the gun with his left hand and taking positive aim and fired his last shot. As I calculate a couple of seconds. He drew the gun back from the window as though he was drawing it back to his side and maybe paused for another second as though to assure hisself that he hit his mark, and then he disappeared.
          And, at the same moment, I was diving off of that firewall and to the right for bullet protection of this stone wall that is a little higher on the Houston side.
          Mr. BELIN. Well, let me ask you. What kind of a gun did you see in that window?
          Mr. BRENNAN. I am not an expert on guns. It was, as I could observe, some type of a high-powered rifle.
          Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had any kind of a scope on it?
          Mr. BRENNAN. I did not observe a scope.
          Mr. BELIN. Could you tell whether or not it had one? Do you know whether it did or not, or could you observe that it definitely did or definitely did not, or don’t you know?
          Mr. BRENNAN. I do not know if it had a scope or not.
          Mr. BELIN. I believe you said you thought the man was standing. What do you believe was the position of the people on the fifth floor that you saw–standing or sitting?
          Mr. BRENNAN. I thought they were standing with their elbows on the window sill leaning out.
          Mr. BELIN. At the time you saw this man on the sixth floor, how much of the man could you see?
          Mr. BRENNAN. Well, I could see at one time he came to the window and he sat sideways on the window sill. That was previous to President Kennedy getting there. And I could see practically his whole body, from his hips up. But at the time that he was firing the gun, a possibility from his belt up. ‘

          You see Willy….Brennan had no way of knowing the windows were so low so he thought they were standing. NOT SITTING like Oswald was…or crouching like the two men on the 5th Floor we seen doing in the Dillard Photo.

          🙂

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        You obviously don’t do a lot of shooting, Bill. By sitting on the floor, I meant sitting with your side against the sill and your left arm hanging over the sill. The stock of the rifle rests on the sill.

        If you were sitting on a box as high as the window sill, with the window only half open, you’d be ducking your head down to see out the window.

        Look at the photo of the men on the 5h floor and imagine one of them with a rifle. They were sitting on the floor.

        • Bill says:

          Bob. If I was a sniper I’d shoot myself for being a stupid man. Do you expect ANYONE to believe that Oswald or ANYONE would go simply sit on that floor and even attempt to shoot that gun out of that window from that angle??

          We already know that Dillard took his photo seconds after the last shot, We know that the boxes were arranged just as we see them WITHIN seconds and the two men on the 5th floor gave testimony as to what they were doing at this precise moment. So the BOXES WERE THERE. OBVIOUSLY, seeing as how the boxes were already in position in the center of the window area precluded ANYONE FROM SITTING AS YOU SUGGEST. Why would you even suggest such a ridiculous position???

          Bob, you are actually correct in your middle paragraph and thank God for that! I’ll explain:

          IF ANYONE were to sit on a box, in the position you want to try to paint Oswald as assuming ( as having his SIDE UP AGAINST THE WINDOW SILL) the position would be impossible to be in. a 1 foot box with a 1 foot sill means there is NO SILL TO LEAN AGAINST. You know this. Right???? So Oswald isn’t sitting with his body up against the glass widow…right??????

          Now, the part you are missing, and if you look carefully at the Warren Commission Exhibit 1312, you would see that a shooter could not assume your hypothetical position up against the sill because the BOXES WERE THERE!

          If you further notice that the logical position is the one noted in the same WC Exhibit 1312. Sit on the 1 foot high box…let the car pass… lean forward…and just stick about 1/2 of the rifle out the window and finish the job.

          With the seat being recessed back from the window, with the boxes screening his position for spectators who would look up after the shots, Oswald gave himself the perfect COMMANDING VIEW of the scene.

          And you’re right about the two men on the 5th floor. Only issue is that they didn’t have a pile off book boxes screening them from shooting downward (cuz they’re right ON THE SILL).

          • leslie sharp says:

            Bill,

            We know that the WC ballistics mean nothing unless they can be tied to the alleged sniper’s nest. The moment the first shot was fired, control over the cover-up was precarious, as the plotters would have anticipated. I wouldn’t stretch the argument to insist Specter was already in the wings, but I would speculate the investigative/ballistics aspect of the conspiracy was very fluid with a number of scenarios poised. Had a clean shot hit Connally or any other person in the motorcade, we wouldn’t be having this debate.

            The one factor that had to remain constant was a sniper’s nest in the TSBD building because that is where the rifle, some shells and a paper bag – all pre-ordained to incriminate a new employee, the patsy Oswald – were positioned.

            Would you link to the Dillard photographs, please? The Alyea footage, beginning at 4:10 does not reveal the position of the boxes you describe, but only the one that is tilted precariously from the windowsill with the tip edge of those it appears to be leaned against barely visible.

            The position a shooter would have to assume, sitting on a 12” high box, resting the rifle on two boxes stacked in front of him continues to appear absurd. Pls refresh our memory, how high were these two boxes when stacked, what was the depth, what was the measurement of Oswald’s foot to knee, knee to hip, waist to shoulder? Could you calculate the additional (and tilted no less) box, along with the depth of the stacked boxes, the required space for his knees while sitting on another box, the depth of the windowsill and the façade and provide the sum total of inches? I assume we agree a rifle would have to have extended that full distance? Further factor in the opening of the window which would add an additional cramp for a shot, and maybe even you would admit it seems an absurd position for a marksman to fire a risky set of shots.

            You have yet to explain why Agent Howlett did not reenact that full scenario; and the question surfaces … were Howlett’s body measurements similar to Oswald’s?

            The ultimate spanner in the works was that the bullet had to take on magical qualities once Kennedy and Connally presented with injuries at Parkland (enter the bullet on the stretcher); with the help of select “experts” who said it ‘could happen’ (did any of these experts swear that it DID happen?), Specter then ‘sold his soul’ in my opinion and managed the lie. Bob and Willy and others are chipping away at the SBT on this site from many angles – pun intended – and the nest is the holy grail of the saga.

            Next: Brennan’s testimony

        • leslie sharp says:

          Bill,

          We know that the WC ballistics mean nothing unless they can be tied to the alleged sniper’s nest. The moment the first shot was fired, control over the cover-up was precarious, as the plotters would have anticipated. I wouldn’t stretch the argument to insist Specter was already in the wings, but I would speculate the investigative/ballistics aspect of the conspiracy was very fluid with a number of scenarios poised. Had a clean shot hit Connally or any other person in the motorcade, we wouldn’t be having this debate.

          The one factor that had to remain constant was a sniper’s nest in the TSBD building because that is where the rifle, some shells and a paper bag – all pre-ordained to incriminate a new employee, the patsy Oswald – were positioned.

          Would you link to the Dillard photographs, please? The Alyea footage, beginning at 4:10 does not reveal the position of the boxes you describe, but only the one that is tilted precariously from the windowsill with the tip edge of those it appears to be leaned against barely visible.

          The position a shooter would have to assume, sitting on a 12” high box, resting the rifle on two boxes stacked in front of him continues to appear absurd. Pls refresh our memory, how high were these two boxes when stacked, what was the depth, what was the measurement of Oswald’s foot to knee, knee to hip, waist to shoulder? Could you calculate the additional (and tilted no less) box, along with the depth of the stacked boxes, the required space for his knees while sitting on another box, the depth of the windowsill and the façade and provide the sum total of inches? I assume we agree a rifle would have to have extended that full distance? Further factor in the opening of the window which would add an additional cramp for a shot, and maybe even you would admit it seems an absurd position for a marksman to fire a risky set of shots.

          You have yet to explain why Agent Howlett did not reenact that full scenario; and the question surfaces … were Howlett’s body measurements similar to Oswald’s?

          The ultimate spanner in the works was that the bullet had to take on magical qualities once Kennedy and Connally presented with injuries at Parkland; with the help of select “experts” who said it ‘could happen’ (did any of these experts swear it DID happen?), Specter then ‘sold his soul’ in my opinion and managed the lie. Bob and Willy and others are chipping away at the SBT on this site from many angles – pun intended – and the nest is the holy grail of the saga.

          Next: Brennan’s testimony

      • leslie sharp says:

        Bill, can you provide a source that testifies to the precise condition of the sniper’s nest … not the SS reenactment video, but photos taken in the immediate aftermath and/or police documentation that describes how many boxes were in the ‘nest’, their precise location, height, width, their proximity to the windowsill and proof that a shooter actually sat on a box.

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          Leslie, you probably know this better than I. I’ve read the boxes were moved (in the ‘search’ for eveidince?), then re stacked for a public press photo shoot on I believe Monday.

          • leslie sharp says:

            Ronnie, the closest I can find of images of the ‘nest’ in the early hours following the assassination is in this Tom Alyea footage; this specific footage must have been taken in the first few minutes he was in the building; he was allowed to film reenactment footage either later that afternoon, or the following day I believe.

            Begin min. 4:10 reveals a box braced on the windowsill but tilted. This does not appear to be the same placement we see in the SS reenactment filmed in 1964; for one, the box is at a sharper angle toward the wall that encases the window frame and from what I see, a shooter’s left shoulder would have been pressed against the inner wall far more than is indicated by Howlett’s position in the SS footage.

            Freeze at 4:16 to see just how thick that wall is. Also notice the width of the exterior wall/facades. This may be an optical illusion, but the exterior appears to be quite thick. I believe Bill has provided the measurements in an earlier comment.

            Also, the angle of Alyea’s film prevents us from seeing the two boxes depicted in the SS recreation, or the box that a shooter might have sat on so I wonder how the SS knew that he sat on a box. Was it conjecture or did they have images of the nest?

        • Bill says:

          As for proof that Oswald sat on the box there is none. Only conjecture and deduction and interpretation of the physical evidence. All circumstantial for sure, but still evidence nonetheless.

          Just as easily, Oswald could have sat on the box and fired from it…OR…fired from his his position by ‘taking a knee’ as he rested his gun on any one of the boxes he put into the nest that bore his prints. His palm print was located on the box the WC reports ‘may’ have served as his seat. Or, just as easily, he could simply have sat there contemplating his next moves.

          Why Sit at all?

          Remember that one of the boys that also worked on the 6th Floor Project actually came back onto the 6th floor and finished his lunch up there, washed up and grabbed his lunch, returned to the 6th Floor, waited for his buddies (Norman and Jarman) and then left when they didn’t show up. Oswald could have just decided to sit and not move while he waited this man out. He would not be able to be seen in this position from any place on the 6th Floor anyway. The palm print was situated in such a position that it would be made if one were to be sitting and facing the incline of Elm Street (Just as the other boxes were also facing).

          As far as sources for the Sniper’s Nest. Two sources. Ayela’s Film and Photos were taken by a reporter and the film was tossed out to be taken and developed. Studebaker’s photos were taken of the position but he admits that, in order to take photos of the shells, he had to move the boxes to photograph the spent cartridges on the floor. Then he claims he put them back in the exact place he moved them from.

          There are no existing photos that I know of that show the undisturbed sniper’s nest on the 6th Floor.

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Exactly. The photos of the snipers nest are unreliable. If I recall right the shells themselves were picked up and inspected then put back down (lined up, not as if randomly ejected) for the photographs.

          • Fearfaxer says:

            By his own estimation, the young man in question, Bonnie Ray Williams, was on the 6th floor eating his lunch from about Noon to perhaps as late as 12:15 before he went down to the 5th floor. At this point, Oswald, if he was there in the alleged sniper’s nest, would have to have been assembling his rifle and positioning the heavy boxes, rather frantically one would assume. It’s very hard to believe Williams would not have heard the sound of this activity.

            His testimony can be found here:

            http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/williams.htm

          • Jean Davison says:

            Fearfaxer,

            The heavy boxes were positioned by the floor-laying crew, as Williams said in your link:

            “… We had to move these books to the east side of this building, over here, and those books–I would say this would be the window Oswald shot the President from. We moved these books kind of like in a row like that, kind of winding them around.”

            Oswald had all morning to assemble his rifle. Plenty of places on the 6th floor where he couldn’t done it without being seen:

            http://s1233.photobucket.com/user/dhjosephs/media/tsbd6thfloorlookingeastce727-enlargedanddarkened.jpg.html

            http://i48.tinypic.com/m9ojeu.jpg

          • leslie sharp says:

            I only hope that Roy Kornbluth and Bob Prudhomme are following this exchange.

            First of all, in this posted by Jean Davison, Williams answers a question that wasn’t asked:

            “We moved these books kind of like in a row like that, kind of winding them around.”

            By chance, several days ago on this site I questioned why that particular row of books appeared to be in a curve. Jean Davison has now weighed in to explain … they were in a curve because Williams said they were in a curve? Study the other stacks of boxes and identify any single row that is ‘in a curve, sort of’.

            Jean, would you clarify this statement? ‘Oswald had all morning to assemble his rifle. Plenty of places on the 6th floor where he couldn’t done it without being seen:’

            Perhaps now that Jean Davison has weighed in on the issue of the sniper’s nest, there will be a more in depth consideration on this site of the crime scene.

          • leslie sharp says:

            Testimony indicates that the floor maintenance was being managed by Roy Truly as the manager of the depository business; Williams was but one of his employees, and knowing the socio-economic dynamics in Dallas in 1963, it is safe to argue that Williams took orders, any and all orders without question.

            In spite of the fact that DH Byrd owned the building, the Cason/Campbell book business took it upon itself to repair areas of the floor on the 6th floor. Numerous questions surface: it was Byrd’s building and Byrd’s floors. Why didn’t he hire a contract company to come in and do the maintenance overnight, meaning in a matter of days. Why was this an ongoing project that was being taken care of by the tenants – meaning their employees – and not the owner of the building? The argument that Truly was making sure his employees didn’t lose any hours is not an argument at all; there would have been liability issues involved, quality of work, etc.

            Why weren’t the repairs made prior to the move-in by the Cason/Campbell depository business when they relocated from 501 Elm Street, the Dal-Tex Building? If the book business was new to 411 Elm, where did all the oil (or water damage) on the floors come from, and did not the new tenants do an inspection and determine that oil or water would damage their product? If the book business was not new to the building in 1963, why were the repairs initiated that specific time period?

            Why did Williams make a point of identifying the ‘curve’ to that particular row of books when no curves are seen in other photographs? Was he prompted to anticipate the question, did he too wonder how they ended up that way, and/or was he even involved in the stacking of those books but when shown the photograph he made note of the curve because it seemed odd to him as well. Roy Kornbluth, let’s write that letter?

  38. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Has anyone gone to this site

    https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/appendix-09.pdf

    and looked at the photos in the Visual Aid Brochure of WCD 298 yet?

  39. Bill says:

    NASA Called before the HSCA to discuss the trajectory. It should be noted that the expert here, Mr. Canning, did NOT use the starting point of the 6th Floor Window. It is where the injuries pointed to AFTER the alignment of Kennedy and Connally were completed. And guess what? It came out as the level of the window sill on the 6th Floor of the TSBD all by measuring the angles between JFK’s body (in life and not laying on an autopsy table) as ascertained in multiple photos/films. I trust NASA a bit more than some of you guys here. ????

    Mr. GOLDSMITH. What is the margin of error indicated by the circle drawn around the end point of the trajectory?
    Mr. CANNING. I believe the radius of the circle is about 13 feet.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. How was that determined?
    Mr. CANNING. This was determined as before on the head wound case simply by making an estimate of the contribution of error at each stage of the analysis, and then combining those in order to obtain an estimate of the overall accuracy.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. Why was your margin of error less in this case than in the case of the head shot?
    Mr. CANNING. In considerable measure because the distance from the limousine to the termination of this line was shorter.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. At this time I would ask that the witness be shown JFK No. F-122.
    Would you indicate on this exhibit, Mr. Canning, where that margin of error circle would be shown?

  40. Bill says:

    Canning Testimony before HSCA:

    NASA Called before the HSCA to discuss the trajectory. It should be noted that the expert here, Mr. Canning, did NOT use the starting point of the 6th Floor Window. It is where the injuries pointed to AFTER the alignment of Kennedy and Connally were completed. And guess what? It came out as the level of the window sill on the 6th Floor of the TSBD all by measuring the angles between JFK’s body (in life and not laying on an autopsy table) as ascertained in multiple photos/films. I trust NASA a bit more than some of you guys here. ????

    Mr. GOLDSMITH. What is the margin of error indicated by the circle drawn around the end point of the trajectory?
    Mr. CANNING. I believe the radius of the circle is about 13 feet.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. How was that determined?
    Mr. CANNING. This was determined as before on the head wound case simply by making an estimate of the contribution of error at each stage of the analysis, and then combining those in order to obtain an estimate of the overall accuracy.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. Why was your margin of error less in this case than in the case of the head shot?
    Mr. CANNING. In considerable measure because the distance from the limousine to the termination of this line was shorter.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. At this time I would ask that the witness be shown JFK No. F-122.
    Would you indicate on this exhibit, Mr. Canning, where that margin of error circle would be shown?

  41. Bill says:

    Mr. CANNING. In considerable measure because the distance from the limousine to the termination of this line was shorter.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. At this time I would ask that the witness be shown JFK No. F-122.
    Would you indicate on this exhibit, Mr. Canning, where that margin of error circle would be shown?
    Mr. CANNING. That margin of error circle is shown again in the handwrought curves produced this morning as this red ellipse in the overlay over the photograph.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. What was the most significant factor in this particular margin of error? In other words, what was your greatest difficulty?
    Mr. CANNING. Essentially in determining, in making an estimate of the rotation of the President’s shoulders relative to looking straight ahead, and in estimating what the inclination of his torso was from that one photograph.
    Mr. GOLDSMITH. Mr. Canning, what impact would it have on your analysis if you were to reconstruct this trajectory based upon Zapruder frame 197? For example, that is when the acoustics panel says that the President may have been shot. If you were to reconstruct the trajectory at that frame, what effect would that have?
    Mr. CANNING. I should have the plan view exhibit marked “JFK F-140” as well.
    The relationships that we established in this exhibit gave us a line indicating the direction of the trajectory relative to the limousine itself. We have no good information that says that this relationship changed importantly with time. Therefore we would simply move the limousine to the new position and allow the trajectory line to travel with it; the result would be that the end point would move a short distance to the left in the figure and slightly upward as well, because the car is moving away from the building. So this point will not only move to the west, but it will rise, but it won’t rise more than just a few feet.

  42. larry webb says:

    Look guys lone nut who’s 201 file we cannot review because sources and methods might be exposed. What if the file was released and marty and doc fire up the flux capasitor and they go back and discover that oswald was in intelligence it would open up the whole bay of pigs thing!

  43. Jean Davison says:

    It’s a myth that the wounding of Tague forced the WC to adopt the SBT.

    “The JFK Assassination Single-Bullet Theory Explained” says:

    “Stage 3: June 1964
    When the wounding of the bystander, James Tague, was unexpectedly made public, the commission became obliged to use the only plausible explanation that would account for all of the wounds having been inflicted by just three bullets:
    •one bullet caused Tague’s wound;
    •one bullet caused President Kennedy’s fatal head wound;
    •and one bullet caused all of Kennedy’s and Connally’s non–fatal wounds…”

    The author links this to WR, p. 117, but that page actually lists TWO possible explanations for Tague’s wound, not just a missed shot:

    “… it [the missile that struck the curb/Tague] might have come from the bullet which hit the President’s head, or it might have been a product of the fragmentation of the missed shot…”

    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=141&tab=page

    Debate the merits of the head-shot fragment alternative all you want, the point is that this second option was listed (and was favored by Josiah Thompson in “Six Seconds in Dallas,” BTW).

    Besides, by June 1964, the SBT already existed. For instance, this photo was taken in May:

    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135&search=garage_AND+photograph#relPageId=110&tab=page

    Specter had been asking hypothetical SBT trajectory questions in testimony even earlier than that.

    • That photo of Specter is from May 24, 1964.
      Tague was called by the Warren Commission to testify on July 28, 1964. But that does not mean that the authorities did not know until July 28 that Tague had been hit. He was interviewed by the police on that very afternoon of November 22nd.

      If we are going to make assumptions here; it is much more reasonable to assume that the Commission was aware of Tague much earlier than may of 1964, and therefore his presence in the events did in fact have to do with “rethinking” how many bullets were involved other than the initial three that were thought to account for 1st shot to Kennedy’s throat, 2nd shot to Connally’s back, 3rd shot to Kennedy’s head.
      \\][//

      • Mariano says:

        It is a mystery why it took a newspaper article for the Warren Commission to call Tague to testify six months after the assassination.
        The Commission had the knowledge and evidence from the FBI and the Dallas Police yet felt no compulsion to call Tague to testify before this time?
        Does it not appear strange that a witness who claims to have been hit by a projectile or fragment at the motorcade is not considered significant enough to call to testify till six months later?
        The Commission clearly ignored the Tague evidence until it was publicly exposed, rendering the cover-up of Tague’s experience, and the Commission fable being devised no longer tenable.
        The SBT coincides with the Tague revelation.
        Do not be put off by the obvious agents here who are trying their level best to discourage people from supporting the release of files to properly investigate JFK’s assassination.

        • Mariano says:

          You know that you have touched on a CIA nerve when the operatives of misinformation and unceasing interference descend on these pages with a cacophony of noise to drown out any sensible debate.
          The desperation to smother any questions or observations about the very questionable origins and evolution of the SBT are plain to see.

        • Photon says:

          ” The SBT coincides with the Tague revelation”.
          No, it doesn’t. The SBT coalesced months before the Tague story was reviewed by the Commission. You have swallowed the Myth.

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          Not much mystery to it. As you state until it was publicly exposed they ignored Tague. When the story came out in the MSM they had to become more creative in their lie. Until then they ran with the FBI’s lie. The mocking bird(s) had to change their tune.

      • You might notice as well that Specter is holding the pointer resting on Kennedy’s stand-in’s shoulder close to the neckline, ie; near the fake T1 position.
        If you look at other photos in this same sequence you will note that there is a chalk mark at T3, the actual wound position. So Specter KNOWS that he is cheating the position of the actual wound on purpose. Why to align with the angle needed to force the Magic Bullet Theory.
        These photos prove that Specter’s whole operation was a fraud.
        \\][//

      • Bill says:

        Willy. Everything you make here is an assumption. So it would be better to write ‘assuming everything we assume is an assumption’.

        • “Willy. Everything you make here is an assumption. So it would be better to write ‘assuming everything we assume is an assumption’.”~Bill

          Not so, especially in regard to the comment you are replying to. It is a FACT that the coat worn by Kennedy’s stand-in has a chalk mark at T3. It is a FACT that Specter is measuring from Kennedy’s neck to establish the angle of the shot. Therefore is a FACT that the pointer is not measuring the established angle from the T3 vertebrae. These facts combine to show that it is a willful misrepresentation of the angle of the shot to Kennedy’s back.
          Facts are established by sound reasoning. It is known as “critical thinking”; you should try it sometime Bill.
          \\][//

    • Fearfaxer says:

      “It’s a myth that the wounding of Tague forced the WC to adopt the SBT.”

      Only to people like you, Jean. And there’s nothing in that material you quote to prove your statement.

      As to this: “… it [the missile that struck the curb/Tague] might have come from the bullet which hit the President’s head, or it might have been a product of the fragmentation of the missed shot…”

      Please. Tague was some 20 feet from where that bullet hit the pavement. You really think a small fragment of a bullet that had already hit something else would still have the force to send a piece of pavement that far and draw blood from someone’s face? Well, I guess you would, what else can you say?

      Not to mention that that quote from the Warren Commission Report demonstrates yet again how uncertain they really were about what had happened.

      Also, Tague wasn’t the only inconvenient witness to be called long after the Commission was made aware of them. Sylvia Odio was another, look at how long they waited to call her.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Hi Jean

      Perhaps you could explain to everyone the precise moment when the Warren Commission chose to reject the FBI’s WCD 298, in which the FBI meticulously demonstrated how one bullet struck Connally and two bullets struck JFK, PLUS the precise locations of these shots, and elected to go with Arlen Specter’s Single Bullet Theory.

      While your at it, perhaps you could show us the research that went into the SBT, prior to its announcement, and what ballistics experts and doctors worked with the WC lawyers in developing the SBT.

  44. These central points need to be reiterated:

    1. The so-called final autopsy report is invalid for clear lawful reasons.
    Humes destroyed by fire the entire record of that autopsy in an illegal act of destruction on the evidence. This is further complicated by the fact that no charges were ever levied against what was clearly a crime of obstruction of justice. How can such impunity to liability be explained?
    I have explained it in my exposition of the MO of Intelligence Agencies in applying coercive pressure. See:Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
    “Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness.”

    2.The position of the wound on Kennedy’s back is clearly at the Third Thoracic Vertebrae, as seen in photographs of both the body, and photos of the jacket and shirt, plus the position of the ‘dot’ on Boswell’s original face-sheet. As well as Burkley’s death certificate for JFK.
    The argument that Boswell later said in an interview with a reporter that the wound was in a different place, is explained by, Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice, ie; Boswell was pressured to conform to the bogus outcome of the WC Report.

    3. Lack of a legal chain of evidence, as the Parkland Bullet cannot be linked to CE399. Two sources being Josiah Thompson, and the FBI reports themselves (as has been discussed ad nauseam herein).
    [265 words]
    \\][//

  45. Jean Davison says:

    Willy,

    Since the WR listed a head shot fragment as a possible cause of Tague’s wound, it still had the other two bullets to account for Connally and JFK’s wounds if it chose to. Tague didn’t force the SBT no matter when the WC may’ve heard about him.

    The FBI’s “3 shots 3 hits” scenario completely omitted the bullet wound in the front of JFK’s throat. Why? Because it was based on the Sibert/O’Neill report which recorded Humes’ comments before he learned about the bullet hole under the tracheotomy. Lifton wrote about this in Best Evidence. As he said there, “Differing sources of autopsy information explained the variation between the FBI reconstruction of the crime and the Warren Commission’s.”

    Any shooting scenario that omits one of the wounds isn’t worth much, is it?

    A page from the FBI version:
    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402&relPageId=25&search=connally

    The Sibert/O’Neill report:

    http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=625&search=sibert_o'neill+report#relPageId=6&tab=page

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Are you saying that when WCD 298, the FBI’s report to the WC regarding the wounds to JFK and Connally (one bullet hit Connally, two bullets hit JFK), was presented by Hoover to the WC on Jan. 20, 1964, the FBI were still unaware of JFK’s throat wound??

    • “Lifton wrote about this in Best Evidence. As he said there, “Differing sources of autopsy information explained the variation between the FBI reconstruction of the crime and the Warren Commission’s.”~Jean Davison

      Now that is a kick Jean, YOU using David Lifton as a source!! That’s funny.

      Who is trying to kid who here Jean, at the press conference in front of Parkland on the very day of the assassination Dr Robert Perry explained that there was a bullet hole in JFK’s throat. He characterized it as a wound of entry and went on to explain the tracheotomy procedures. The doctors at Bethesda supposedly spoke on the phone to Perry the next morning and were told about the bullet hole in JFK’s throat.

      Now you’re going to try to convince us; by an account by David Lifton of all people; that the FBI didn’t know about the throat wound?

      We have the January 24, 1964 ‘off the record’ meeting of the Warren Commissioners complaining that the FBI was feeding the commission, and that the FBI already decided Oswald was guilty, and that they needed their own investigators…And NOW you are trying to say that the Warren Commission had information trumping the FBI about the throat wound???
      Preposterous on all counts.
      \\][//

      • Jean Davison says:

        I mentioned Lifton to show that this issue was discussed years ago by Lifton and other CT writers. But I wasn’t clear in what I wrote, sorry.

        Certainly the FBI knew there was a hole in the front of JFK’s throat because, for one thing, they could see the corresponding hole in his shirt. However, since their representatives at the autopsy, Sibert/O’Neill, didn’t report a bullet wound there, they suggested another explanation. As Lifton, Epstein and others pointed out long ago, the FBI report implied that this wound was caused by a fragment from the head wound bullet. See the paragraph that starts at the bottom here and continues on the next page:

        http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10507&search=overlap_%22collar+button%22#relPageId=8&tab=page

        The S/O’N report said that after failing to probe the back wound, Humes had theorized that the bullet found at Parkland fell out of JFK’s back onto his stretcher. But we know it definitely wasn’t JFK’s stretcher, which was never moved to that location. When Humes learned the next morning that a neck wound had been seen at Parkland, he changed his opinion to what is reflected in the autopsy report.

        Whoever wrote this FBI report may well have known about the Parkland news conference, but usually an autopsy result carries more weight, I think.

        Everything is not a nefarious plot to deceive. People make mistakes.

        • “Whoever wrote this FBI report may well have known about the Parkland news conference, but usually an autopsy result carries more weight, I think.
          Everything is not a nefarious plot to deceive. People make mistakes.”~Jean Davison

          As far as the “usually” in autopsies carrying more weight:

          Destruction Of Original Autopsy Evidence
          In JFK’s autopsy, as with any post mortem, the contemporaneously gathered data from the examination, usually recorded in hand-written, even bloodstained, autopsy notes, carries the greatest scientific and evidentiary weight. These notes detail the measurements of wound sizes and locations, the organ weights and appearances, all the raw data that serve as the basis for conclusions about the cause of death. It is difficult to overstate the importance of such information. Without a reliable base record of fact, conclusions are less certain.

          Certificate in which Dr. Humes admitted destroying “certain preliminary draft notes” related to JFK’s autopsy. In 1996, Humes admitted under oath that the destruction included original autopsy materials.
          (see ARRB MD #9, and also his 1996 ARRB testimony, p. 128 – 139)
          Arlen Specter asked Dr. Humes, “Are there any notes which you made at any time which are not included in this group of [three sets of surviving] notes?”

          Humes: “Yes, sir; there are … In the privacy of my own home, early in the morning of Sunday, November 24th, I made a draft of this [autopsy] report which I later revised, and of which this represents the revision. That draft I personally burned in the fireplace of my recreation room.”

          Specter followed with: “And these represent all the notes except those you have already described which you destroyed?”

          Humes: “That is correct, sir.”[106] (author’s emphasis)

          Humes later admitted, on more than one occasion, that in fact this answer was not correct. The ARRB report was but the first official acknowledgement that Humes had destroyed more than a first draft autopsy report. He had also destroyed original notes taken during the post mortem.

          Humes’ concession contradicted not only his testimony in 1964, it also contradicted two affidavits he had signed within 48 hours of the assassination, a fact the ARRB did not acknowledge, and may not have even realized. By affidavit dated 24 November 1963, Humes “certified” over his signature that he had “destroyed by burning certain preliminary draft notes relating to” JFK’s autopsy,”[107] but that otherwise, “all working papers associated with [JFK’s autopsy] have remained in my personal custody at all times. Autopsy notes and the holograph draft of the final report were handed to Commanding Officer, U.S. Naval Medical School, at 1700, 24 November 1963.”[108]

          Whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.
          ~L. 107–204, title VIII, § 802

          [252 words]
          \\][//

          • I did put it in the wordcount tool! that is where I got the “252” from???…..

            Okay, I just checked…only part of it was entered into the counter box.
            I will be more careful with that next long one I have.
            Sorry for the blunder.
            \\][//

    • Mariano says:

      The FBI Preliminary Report handed down December 9 1963 failed to completely list all the wounds of casualties (that occurred on the day of the assassination), including the experience of James Tague (FBI cover-up).
      Until James Tague’s persistence (along with publicity of his story from a US Attorney and a newspaper) in early June of 1964, the WC had no intention of seriously investigating this evidence.
      Minutes after the assassination both Deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers and patrolman Clyde Haygood (who radioed information to the DPD) witnessed his injury and concluded a bullet had struck the curb near the underpass; on the weekend photographer Thomas Dillard took a pictures of the section of curb which would appear in The Dallas Morning News (the FBI subsequently took some of these pictures); 24 November 1963 Virginia Baker provides testimony to WC re bullet shot to curb; and December 14 1963 FBI interviews Tague, yet the WC had not engaged with this evidence 6 month’s after the assassination, a time when the Commission was giving out many signals that it was ready to conclude a verdict.
      By this time the WC could no longer keep this genie in the bottle, hence Tague was called to testify July 23 1964.
      In August (after an initial false report from Dallas FBI that there was no nick in the curb, the section was indentified, cut out and taken for spectrographic analysis (traces of lead and animony were found).
      The SBT was born out of a frenzied desire to avoid the possibility that there were more than 3 shots (a scenario that would not fit the time frame nor the lone assassin blueprint).

    • Jean, neither you nor any of the other WC apologists are willing to face up to the matter of Humes’ culpability in destroying the original record of the JFK autopsy. It is no “theory” that Humes acts were unlawful, unethical, and massively suspicious.
      These acts utterly undermine the legal validity of the so-called “final autopsy report” of JFK.

      Both Humes and Boswell’s impunity to prosecution in this matter speaks to the much larger issue of the systemic corruption of the National Security State.

      These issues are stark in their bearing, thus any excuses offered are preemptively dismissed as a matter of law and reason.
      \\][//

      • Jean Davison says:

        Willy,

        Can you show me that anyone has ever been arrested for destroying preliminary drafts or notes from an autopsy, or that such papers are usually entered as evidence in a trial? I don’t think I’ve heard of that happening, but if you know of an example, please cite it.

        Several years ago I was an alternate juror in a murder trial and learned some things that surprised me.

        1. When empty bullet cartridges were entered as evidence, nobody identified them by looking for initials or other marks. Instead the evidence envelopes signed by everyone who’d handled them were presented and the witnesses ID-ed their signatures and explained the chain of possession. CE399 has a chain similar to that — a paper trail showing who passed the bullet to whom.

        2. One of the shell casings had a dent in it very similar to the one in CE543. It was entered into evidence without comment.

        3. Another surprise was hearing a state police officer say that he’d destroyed his interview notes after he wrote up his report. This is or was, I think, fairly standard procedure by the FBI and other LE officers. I’m not saying that’s what they *should* do, just that it’s apparently not all that unusual.

        IMO, the FBI’s report on the shooting and the Sibert/O’Neill report were probably ignored by the WC because they were inaccurate — both omitted the throat wound seen at Parkland.

        If Humes’ first draft made the same mistakes reported by S&O’N, could that be a reason he didn’t preserve it? I don’t know, just speculating.

        • “Several years ago I was an alternate juror in a murder trial and learned some things that surprised me.

          1. When empty bullet cartridges were entered as evidence, nobody identified them by looking for initials or other marks. Instead the evidence envelopes signed by everyone who’d handled them were presented and the witnesses ID-ed their signatures and explained the chain of possession. CE399 has a chain similar to that — a paper trail showing who passed the bullet to whom.”~Jean Davison

          Jean, the rules on chains of evidence and marking bullets in 1963 was not the same as contemporary rules. The rules in effect in 1963 were in effect until the 1980s. Ex post facto laws do not apply in any legal cases.

          As per Humes destroying his original notes, and his original draft of the autopsy report. Comparing this to a cop tossing his notes in a traffic stop or even a crime investigation is a far cry from the act of destruction of evidence that Humes committed.

          The JFK autopsy was for the Murder of the Century. Every scintilla of evidence was of critical importance. That there were highly unusual circumstances attending that autopsy, makes Humes actions suspect, and suspect in a legal sense. There is clearly a persistent pattern of destruction of evidence in this case. As such, rule 406, pertaining to ‘habitual activities’ certainly becomes applicable:

          Rule 406. Habit; Routine Practice
          “Evidence of a person’s habit or an organization’s routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness.”
          \\][//

          • Jean Davison says:

            “Jean, the rules on chains of evidence and marking bullets in 1963 was not the same as contemporary rules. The rules in effect in 1963 were in effect until the 1980s. Ex post facto laws do not apply in any legal cases”

            But this isn’t a legal case, Willy. It’s an historical inquiry. Do CTs want to be Oswald’s defense lawyers for another 50 years?

            I believe CE399 would’ve been admitted as evidence but I don’t think it matters now. IMO, the question now is “what’s the most reasonable explanation for CE399 and the other evidence?” Not, “would this have been admitted at a trial?”

            In 1963 the DPD marked bullets, I’m not sure the Secret Service did. None of the 3 SS agents who handled CE399 marked it. One of them, Johnsen, attached a note that stated where he got it, top of this page:

            http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135#relPageId=814&tab=page

            Humes is “suspect” to CTs but then again, who isn’t?

          • “In 1963 the DPD marked bullets, I’m not sure the Secret Service did. None of the 3 SS agents who handled CE399 marked it. One of them, Johnsen, attached a note that stated where he got it, top of this page”~Jean Davison

            The 1963 rules for chains of custody apply to all law enforcement agencies. Show me anything in the protocol of the Secret Service that exempts them from standard law enforcement protocol.

            Your latest remarks to me are based on the idea that this is not a court case. However the rules of evidence are not only applicable to trials by court, they are certainly applicable to honest historical research as well.
            \\][//

          • leslie sharp says:

            “But this isn’t a legal case, Willy. It’s an historical inquiry. Do CTs want to be Oswald’s defense lawyers for another 50 years?” — Jean Davison

            The phrase “An historical inquiry” continues to seep into the dialogue on this site. If you can sleep well without ever having advocated for Oswald’s (posthumous) rights that certainly is your choice, but it’s not your call nor is it anyone elses’ to determine for anyone other than yourselves that this is nothing but an historical inquiry into Oswald’s guilt or innocence. To ignore that the Warren Commission was his kangaroo court is outrageous for our democracy. Oswald was never deemed innocent before proven guilty; that must be corrected, and can be if all assertions rise to the level of admissible evidence. History cannot alter the damage done, but if we don’t successfully challenge the proposition you assert here, history can and most surely will put a nail in the coffin of efforts to expose those who took over our democracy through the coup d’etat on 11.22.63. Proving that Oswald was just a patsy, establishing who was responsible for the assassination and the cover-up could possibly put our democracy back on track.

          • Jean Davison says:

            Willy,

            “The 1963 rules for chains of custody apply to all law enforcement agencies. Show me anything in the protocol of the Secret Service that exempts them from standard law enforcement protocol.”

            I think it’s up to you to show that the 3 agents who didn’t mark the bullet were breaking Secret Service rules. I don’t think I’ve ever seen their protocol. Have you?

            “Your latest remarks to me are based on the idea that this is not a court case. However the rules of evidence are not only applicable to trials by court, they are certainly applicable to honest historical research as well.”

            I doubt it. Do the history books establish a chain of custody for Booth’s derringer?

          • “I think it’s up to you to show that the 3 agents who didn’t mark the bullet were breaking Secret Service rules. I don’t think I’ve ever seen their protocol. Have you?”

            Okay…Lol, where does one begin with such a spurious entry as this?

            First of all the turning the tables, or ‘changing the goal posts’ — NO it is not my responsibility to provide evidence against Jeans assertions, it is up to Jean to prove a positive, not for me to prove a negative in this instance.

            “In 1963 the Secret Service or any federal agent who found evidence marked it so that there was a clean trail.”~Secret Service agent Gerald Blaine

            As far as bringing up the Lincoln assassination, when protocols for ballistics were just being considered and there were no established protocols as such, it is entirely out of order here.
            \\][//

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Lincoln would e more of a attempted distraction or hijacking here Willy.
            The ballistics there were pretty basic there, one shot from a few inches away. No SBT to dispute.

          • Jean Davison says:

            “First of all the turning the tables, or ‘changing the goal posts’ — NO it is not my responsibility to provide evidence against Jeans assertions….”

            I made no assertions about the Secret Service policy on marking evidence, Willy. You did — e.g., “The 1963 rules for chains of custody apply to all law enforcement agencies.” Whatever the official policy was, the Secret Service agents who handled CE399 did not mark it but instead documented who passed the bullet to whom.

            “In 1963 the Secret Service or any federal agent who found evidence marked it so that there was a clean trail.”

            Yes, Gerald Blaine said that in a 2012 e-mail. He also said, “The bullet found on the stretcher was retrieved and marked by SA Richard Johnsen…” When he was told that Johnsen didn’t mark it, Blaine said:

            “Clint Hill talked to Dick [Johnsen] a month or two before he passed away and Clint told me that Dick had marked the evidence. Sounds like he must have put it in an envelope rather that initialing it [the bullet itself], so I apologize if I deceived you and I will recheck with Clint what he remembers…..”

            http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-secret-service-and-ce399.html

            The hazards of hearsay and decades-old memory.

          • “Gerald Blaine said that in a 2012 e-mail. He also said, “The bullet found on the stretcher was retrieved and marked by SA Richard Johnsen…” When he was told that Johnsen didn’t mark it, Blaine said…”~Jean Davison

            This does not alleviate the fact that Johnsen did not mark the bullet, which is clearly a breach of Federal protocol. That envelope was insecure. The contents could have been and apparently were changed. That is the entire reason for marking the evidence itself.
            \\][//

        • I want to follow up on my answer to Jean Davison with a bit more commentary.

          There seems to be a fundamental difference between dissenters and those who are satisfied with the so-called justice system in this nation. I think Jean’s questions and commentary related to her experience as an alternate juror illuminate such fundamental viewpoints of our two camps.

          The question becomes simply; Since things are as they are, does that mean they are as they should be?

          Is “Justice” served in the Amerikan Criminal Justice System today? A heady question on a deep issue. My answer is a resounding NO! The US is caught in the undertow of a riptide of injustice in this National Security State.

          And I am not talking pie-in-the-sky Utopian “best of all worlds” terms here. I am talking to gross injustice on a massive scale. A situation only endured by generational habituation and indoctrination.

          I will end with a practical remark:

          Professor Paul C. Giannelli, in his treatise, CHAIN OF CUSTODY, still advocates for the initialing of bullet hulls, and any other non-unique items, as a fail-safe surety for chain of custody. His work is very contemporary.

          Laxity in law enforcement is a danger to us all.
          \\][//

          • Jean Davison says:

            You’ve misunderstood me, Willy, and I don’t even know where you got the idea that I think everything is “as it should be” in the justice system. It’s well-known that many innocent men have been sent to prison, as DNA tests later revealed.

  46. Bob Prudhomme says:

    The WC apologists have been unable to explain how a bullet fired from the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD, at the moment of the SBT, could penetrate JFK’s trachea without passing through his cervical vertebrae.

    Does this mean the SBT was a fantasy?

    • Photon says:

      No, it means that you do not understand human anatomy.

      • Eddy says:

        “JFK did not have a normal neck.” – Photon.
        “No, it means that you do not understand human anatomy.” -Photon.

        One of the usually reliable defenders of the admittedley fluid official line seems to be having problems. How pray would it help anyone to know anything about about ‘human anatomy’ when Kennedy didn’t have a ‘normal neck’?

        I think your work is done here Mr Prudhomme. Bravo!!

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Perhaps Dr. Photon would share the “abnormalities” peculiar to JFK’s neck, and just how those “abnormalities” might make the SBT possible.

          Odd, though, that during the autopsy and the perusal of x-rays of JFK’s neck, the freakish qualities of JFK’s neck were not noted in the autopsy report.

      • Tim Nickerson says:

        Photon wrote:

        No, it means that you do not understand human anatomy.
        =======================================================

        I think you’re probably right Photon. Bob’s all blather. He’s been making this claim for ages now but refuses to provide any real numbers to back it up. I’ve asked him 4 or 5 times in the last few days to provide specifics but he refuses to even acknowledge the request.

        • Bill says:

          Actually…I think the real issue is an inability to understand that it is ok to make a mistake, apologize, and move forward. 99% of the people who believe that Kennedy was killed as a result of a Conspiracy look at ballistics. They measure angle A, and make some type of deduction. Pretty straight-forward stuff.

          However, in the case of the JFK Assassination, it is simply not an “A”. It is A, B, C, D, and so on. The bone-headed view point does not allow those who conclude more than one sniper to exist. The lose perspective and will, often irrationally, make almost any linkage to fit into a theory of the shooting.

          Kinesiology. The study of the human movement will resolve the situation I feel. Look. If JFK had a hole in his body it would be pretty easy to determine the fact. But he didn’t. He had a hole THROUGH his body. Entry and Exit (2 wounds) . Then to make it more complex, the man sitting in front of him had Entry and Exit AND Entry and Exit And Entry (5 wounds).

          The LAST PLACE to start figuring out how 1 bullet can cause 7 Wounds on 2 different people is to do what the JFK Autopsists did. You can lay out a many on a table and make a single measurement. What can you do? You look at the position that the men were in.

          You look with every last bit of available scientific equipment/data/analysis that you have and you REPLICATE the positions. Most of the time this can’t be done.

          But when you have a 3 Films. Multiple Photos you can create a 3-demensional view of the scene.

          Oh. What do you do after that? You hire a guy from Nasa to come along and figure out how the models were turned at a given point then you see if the data provided works to ALIGN THE WOUNDS on ONLY THOSE TWO MEN…..

          …..then…working backward (because you know the ending..its the beginning you want)…you ALIGN the wounds on those two men to see the FIRST POSITION THEY WERE IN….and follow that missile right back up the line you just created.

          And it falls right onto the level of the TSBD’s 6th Floor window sill.

          Kinesiology. Learn it, love it.

          • Steve Stirlen says:

            Actually…I think the central question of the murder of the century is credibility. And, I think a careful review of all of the “facts” collected by the agencies of deception—FBI, DPD, CIA, and the WO reveals a disturbing pattern. That pattern reveals that the government of these United States in 1963 and 1964 (and up to the present) reveals there is simply NO credibility that can found on any sustained level.

            LHO was a murderous lone nut, ice in his veins, intent on changing the world, driven to madness, a loner and a loser. However, that “lone nut” did more traveling around the world without a bank account in 24 years than I have in 53 years while being employed at the same wonderful job for 25 years. He also managed, as an avowed Communist, to land employment at CIA tied businesses.

            He ordered a rifle that he could have purchased in Dallas for mere pennies without any type of id required. He also traveled across Dallas to shoot Gen. Walker in a “murderous rage,” even though he could not drive. I am sure he took a city bus and told fellow passengers the package was flowers for his elderly aunt.

            The ONLY person who saw Oswald that morning for a significant length of time, testified, under oath, that the package he saw LHO was much too short to be a rifle. From there, things really get murky.

            He was “an excellent marksman” even though he was using a gun that was, by all accounts, a giant piece of scrap metal. His first shot missed everything because it was deflected by a tree branch, stop sign bar, terrible reflection of LBJ’s shining bald head, puff of wind, etc. The WO identified him as the shooter on the strength of one man’s testimony that saw LHO standing up as he fired the shot, even though that was a physical impossibility. This same man was unable to identify LHO in a line-up that night, because he, and ONLY he, was in absolute fear for his life.

            The 19.95 murderous weapon was found, later, to have LHO’s palm print. No finger prints were found on the rifle, at least none that I have read, which leads me to believe that LHO was an even better shot because he fired that gun with his palm. I am not certain, but the twelve times I have fired a gun, I used my finger to pull the trigger. The paraffin test on LHO’s cheek was negative for a gun powder, but now we are told it is a terribly unreliable test.

            However, a truly reliable test, a swab of the inside of the barrel of the rifle was NOT performed by the FBI agent, an “expert” in the use of firearms. I have read that it was a “standard procedure” in crimes committed with a firearm to determine if the weapon was discharged. Ahhhhh, “American “justice.” Learn it, love it, cause it ain’t going anywhere!

          • Bill says:

            Steven. We used an expression to describe working for the Federal Govt. Ineptitude. ‘Good enough for government work’.

            Travel. He was a rolling stone. Moving from place to place getting odd jobs and borrowing money as he went.

            He ordered a rifle in his own handwritting and lied about it.

            He shot at Walker and admitted it.

            BWF was a kid who simply did not pay enough attention BEFORE the fact.

            The entire gun comment is false.

            When you have no idea on window height….and you look up from below you actually do see the upper body more easily.

            And on and on…

      • Come on Photon, this is Jr HS grade biology! As an artist I have studied human anatomy all my life. And I agree with Bob on this point.
        Your pretending to be Doctor Knowitall on this forum has become a real bore. It certainly does not count as a substantive argument.
        \\][//

        • Tim Nickerson says:

          Willy, You believe Bob because he’s giving opinion that lines up with your own. You guys are the pretend Doctor Knowitalls. You are the ones making the medical claims here. I’ve been trying to get real sourced specifics from you “specialists” for days now. To no avail. You guys don’t really know what you’re talking about, do you? Come on, admit it.

          I actually want one of you to give me sourced numbers that rule out a passage of the bullet between the vertebrae. I really do.

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            Are you really trying to make a case for a bullet passing between the vertebrae? Seriously, Tim??

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            Speaking of pretend Doctor Knowitalls, who from the professional medical community did the WC lawyers consult with when they developed the Single Bullet Theory, or do you believe lawyers in the US are qualified for this kind of work?

          • Photon says:

            Tim, as I stated they simply do not get that you cannot extrapolate a true three dimensional anatomic situation from a two dimensional format. Bob does that repeatedly.
            There are literally dozens of patients with cervical gunshot wounds that present to U.S. Emergency Rooms every year that never have contact vertebral bodies or transverse processes. Many if not most don’t even require surgical exploration.Many factors enter into this-the position of the neck when wounded, the age of the patient and the presence of osteophytes, the associated musculature of the neck and its relative development. Other factors such as those seen with JFK alter the normal anatomical situation and may make the assumptions of amateur anatomists like Bob invalid. I do not think that they have a great deal of experience dealing with cervical gunshot wounds in Bob’s province of British Columbia-certainly not outside of Victoria or Vancouver .

          • “You are the ones making the medical claims here.”~Nickerson

            My claims are not “medical claimes” Nickerson,
            I am basing my remarks based on my familiarity with human anatomy – as an artist – not a doctor.

            The manner in which the Thoracic vertebra are stacked atop one another it is impossible for any object larger than 1 or 2 cm to pass through them on any plane whatsoever, until beyond the tip of the transverse process. That would be practically the width/thinckness of the whole neck, less the thickness of the strap muscles of each side. You cannot get that missile to mid throat from there!

            This would mean of course that a missile on any angular trajectory – coming from higher or lower than the mid-plane would have to encounter the bony structure of a transverse process, if traveling from back to front, or visa versa.
            \\][//

          • Tim Nickerson says:

            Robert Prudhomme:

            Are you really trying to make a case for a bullet passing between the vertebrae? Seriously, Tim??
            ===========================================

            Nope. I haven’t said that. You have stated over and over again that is impossible for the bullet to have passed between the vertebrae. All I’ve done, repeatedly, is asked you to prove it. Give me specifics(as in numbers) that rule out the bullet from passing anywhere between the vertebrae.

      • Fearfaxer says:

        Until you start explaining just what you mean by “JFK did not have a normal neck,” you have no business hectoring anybody on what they do or do not know w/r/t human anatomy.

  47. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Well, then, Dr. Photon, by all means, please provide me with some education on human anatomy; specifically the cervical vertebrae of the human neck.

    First off, I would like to know how a bullet fired from the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD, at the moment the SBT occurred, can pass from back to front through JFK’s neck, pass through the right side of his trachea but fail to make contact with the cervical vertebrae in his neck.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Is it perhaps possible, Dr. Photon, that the bullet entered the back and cleared the cervical vertebrae, yet was deviated by the tougher tissue in the neck, causing it to follow a curving path to the left that ultimately exited at JFK’s throat?

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        It went up from T-3 to exit the base of JFK’s throat then down to Connally’s arm pit, out his nipple, smashed his wrist, ended up in his leg, left more metal there and in his wrist than is missing from pristine CE399? Why that’s, Magic Bob! When pigs fly.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          And you know what is really hilarious, Ronnie? This is simply the entrance of the SBT. We haven’t even BEGUN to destroy the rest of the Single Bullet Fantasy yet.

          Trust me, there are LOTS of other things wrong with Specter’s pipe dream.

  48. J. Thornton Boswell, revealed three decades later that the Justice Department was greatly concerned by Finck’s testimony. Carl Eardley, the Deputy Assistant Attorney General, got in touch with Boswell:
    He was really upset. He says, “J, we got to get somebody in New Orleans quick. Pierre is testifying, and he’s really lousing everything up.” … They showed me the transcript of Pierre’s testimony for the past couple of days, and I spent all night reviewing that testimony. And it was this bit about the general. Jim [Humes, the chief pathologist] said, “Who’s in charge here?” And when they asked Pierre in court who supervised and ran the autopsy, he says, “Some Army general.”(Boswell’s testimony to the ARRB, pp.208ff)
    \\][//

  49. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Tim

    If you do not believe it is possible for a bullet to pass between the vertebrae, or that this is what occurred in JFK’s neck, why do you keep asking for me to prove the possibility (or not) of such a thing occurring? What is your point? You’re flogging a dead horse here, and I seriously believe you are trying to distract the readers of this blog from the REAL truth of the SBT, namely that it would have been impossible for a bullet to go from the Sniper’s Nest on the 6th floor, at the moment of the SBT, and pass through the right side of JFK’s trachea without going through his cervical vertebrae.

    You, Photon and Bill are all dodging this one very problematic sticking point. You want to speak of people evading questions? I’ve repeatedly asked the three of you to address this, and not one of you have even made an attempt.

    • Tim Nickerson says:

      Bob, I never said that I don’t believe it is possible for a bullet to pass between the vertebrae. I’m not sure. I don’t really know. You have asserted that it is impossible. I’m asking you to prove it. Give me specifics(as in numbers) that rule out the bullet from passing anywhere between the vertebrae.

  50. Bob Prudhomme says:

    I notice the WC apologists here are also very reluctant to discuss WCD 298, the FBI’s 20/01/64 report to the Warren Commission detailing the “three shots, three hits” to JFK and Connally evidence they so meticulously worked out.

    I notice, too, the WC apologists are reluctant to discuss how the WC lawyers arrived at the conclusion of the Single Bullet Fantasy.

    • Photon says:

      I guess that you cannot accept the opinion of Dr. Milton Halpern , referenced as an authority in this case by Dr. Aguilar 48 hours ago. The same article that was the source of Dr. Aguilar”s quote from Dr. Halpern also mentions Dr.Halpern’s opinion that the FBI report was virtually worthless. But then again he was only a respected forensic pathologist-not a part-time EMT who until recently did not know that JFK had a closed casket wake and funeral.
      Bob, you made the statements about how it was impossible for the Carcano round to pass through JFK’s neck without hitting bone. You have been asked for documentation and have refused ( or have been unable) to give any evidence to support your claim. On other sites you reference two dimensional pictures , sometimes even posting them. This clearly implies that your have no real understanding of the anatomy of the neck, the structures of the neck nor the three dimensional relationships those structures have with each other. The crux of the matter is that you don’t realize that the conclusions that you make based on the illustrations that you use are simply wrong-as anybody actually academically trained in human anatomy can see.

      • “I guess that you cannot accept the opinion of Dr. Milton Halpern”~Photon

        Ad Verecundiam and appeal to authority, is a common form of argument which leads to a logical fallacy.
        \\][//

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Photon

        Let me get this straight. Do you believe the Magic Bullet actually passed THROUGH JFK’s cervical vertebrae, without touching or damaging any of those vertebrae?

      • Fearfaxer says:

        “On other sites you reference two dimensional pictures , sometimes even posting them. This clearly implies that your have no real understanding of the anatomy of the neck, the structures of the neck nor the three dimensional relationships those structures have with each other.”

        Reading this, I am reminded of how a number of people, e.g., UPI reporter Aline Mosby, stated that when Oswald started talking about Marxism, he sounded like he was parroting dialogue he’d memorized rather than someone with a true understanding of the subject matter.

      • Gary Aguilar says:

        Dr. Halpern, let’s not forget, didn’t think much of the abilities of JFK’s pathologists, whose errors the HSCA’s forensic pathologists ennumerated in great detail. Among them, perhaps the most interesting is the forensic panel’s conclusion that the autopsy doctors missed the true location of the entrance wound in JFK’s skull. The Clark Panel, the HSCA and the Rockefeller Commission “experts” all concluded that the entrance wound was 10-cm higher than the autopsy report says it was, and that it was in a different bone than the autopsy report said – in parietal, not occipital bone. A 10-cm error is not negligible, given that, from top to bottom, the rear of a human skull measures about 12-cm or so.

        In 2005, HSCA expert witness, and “JFK Myths” author, Larry Sturdivan concluded the autopsy doctors were right after all: the bullet entered JFK’s skull low, in occipital bone (“JFK Myths,” p. 204-07). And so pro-Warren Sturdivan maintains that all the forensic consultants got it wrong, and that he is right. But Mr. Sturdivan isn’t much impressed with Kennedy’s autopsy. He devotes over 30 pages of his book (ch. 10) to JFK’s “Bungled Autopsy.”

        The question is, which “authorities” should we defer to – the govt. forensic pathologists, Dr. Halpern and Larry Sturdivan who all say JFK’s autopsy was botched? Or, those who argue that you can trust the findings and conclusion of that autopsy?

  51. Bob Prudhomme says:

    And “Dr.” Photon is very good at pointing out how under-qualified everyone on this blog site (except him) is to be offering comments on anything medical or ballistic related, yet what are his qualifications?

    “Other factors such as those seen with JFK alter the normal anatomical situation and may make the assumptions of amateur anatomists like Bob invalid.”

    One more time, “Dr.” Photon, what are the “factors” seen with JFK that would “alter the normal anatomical situation”? What about JFK’s cervical spine was so different, that it would allow the SBT to have occurred? Were his cervical vertebrae missing????

    • Paulf says:

      C’mon Bob, “JFK did not have a normal neck” says it all, it’s succinct and pithy. What more do you want?

      You know what else doesn’t have a normal neck? A giant squid.

      Seriously, what I find incredible about SBT proponents is how certain they are. Even if it was true, and there is far too much evidence against it to make it a serious theory, the odds of a shot behaving that way and coming out pristine would have been a trillion-to-one. At least have the humility to admit that it is extraordinarily unlikely, even if you believe the unlikely occurred.

  52. Eddy says:

    I have limited IT skills, so please can someone who beleives a bullet passed a la SBT theory through Kennedy’s neck: 1. Take a 3D rendering of a normal neck from the internet. 2. Modify it to indicate Kennedy’s neck abnormality. 3. Indicate the location of travel through the neck.

    With my limited CAD skills I could do this, except I can’t because I don’t know what neck abnormality Kennedy had, and I can’t comprehend what type of abnormality miraculously lined up with the bullet path.

    • Eddy,

      If you live in a larger metropolitan area, visit a biology school supply outlet. There are so many anatomically correct models for sale at a variety of prices. You might just study some of the neck vertebrae models in the store, carry a small six inch steel ruler with you, measure the distances and sizes of an adult skeleton.

      We had real human skeletons to work with on some of the special effects shows I worked on. Those are for sale too –but pricey.
      \\][//

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Eddy & Paulf

      Despite the many allusions by WC apologists to JFK having “abnormalities” in his neck that would make the Single Bullet Travesty possible, no one from that camp has produced a single shred of information telling us the exact nature of these “abnormalities”.

      One more time, “Dr.” Photon, please tell us just what was so different about the cervical vertebrae in JFK’s neck that would allow the passage of a bullet without hitting those vertebrae?

      • Tim Nickerson says:

        Bob Prudhomme wrote:

        Despite the many allusions by WC apologists to JFK having “abnormalities” in his neck that would make the Single Bullet Travesty possible, no one from that camp has produced a single shred of information telling us the exact nature of these “abnormalities”.

        One more time, “Dr.” Photon, please tell us just what was so different about the cervical vertebrae in JFK’s neck that would allow the passage of a bullet without hitting those vertebrae?
        =========================================================

        Despite the many allusions by Conspiracy Theorist Bob Prudhomme to the impossibility of the Single Bullet traversing JFK’s neck without striking vertebrae, he has yet to produce a single shred of verifiable information that lays out the exact nature of that “impossible path”.

        One more time “Dr.” Prudhomme, please provide us with specific dimensions of the neck of someone with the physique of JFK that preclude the passage of the single bullet without hitting vertebrae.

        Such dimensions would include: The thickness of the neck, from front to back. The diameter of the trachea. The distance from the most anterior point on the trachea to the most anterior point on the C7 vertebrae. The width of the C7 vertebrae, from the tip of the left transverse process to the tip of the right transverse process. The maximum spacing distance between the right transverse process of C7 and the right transverse process of T1. The degree of axial rotation of C7 with the head rotated at 60 degrees to the right. The amount of lateral movement of the most anterior point on the trachea, just below the laryngeal prominence, by rotating the head 60 degrees to the right. As well as the amount of movement to the posterior of the same point on the trachea.

        • Again Nickerson, explain how it is confirmed that any missile transversed Kennedy’s neck when there is no proof of tracking the path of the bullet to the throat or the back during the autopsy.
          \\][//

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Big mistake, and one we see the WC apologists try time and again, despite the fact this is regularly debunked.

          When the head turns to the left or right, the trachea, at the level of JFK’s throat wound, does NOT rotate with the head, Rather, it remains in a stationary position as the skull turns.

          This is very easy to try at home. Look in a mirror, place your wrist on your sternum (breast bone) with your fingers on your trachea just below the Adam’s apple. Turn your head either to the left or right. You will see the trachea remains in position, regardless of how far the head is turned.

          I hope this demonstrates to everyone how desperate the WC apologists are to make the unworkable and unprovable Single Bullet Fantasy a reality.

          Good luck, Tim!

  53. I think it is shown conclusively that the single bullet theory is not only implausible, but is in fact an impossible lie.

    The key points being:

    > There is no valid chain of custody for said bullet (CE399)

    > There is no proof a bullet passed through Kennedy’s back and exited his throat. In fact the counter evidence is that the throat was an entrance wound. And the wound to the back was too low (the 3rd Thoracic Vertebratae) to match a trajectory as is proposes by the WC apologists.

    > Evidence of a criminal enterprise indicated by an autopsy that was not a scientific prosecution, but in fact a burlesque produced by the perpetrators of the assassination themselves.

    The attempt to produce a Magic Bullet became the death knoll of the fraudulent Warren Commission Report, and revealed the actual perpetrators were the military and intelligence agents of the National Security State.
    The assassination of John F Kennedy in Dallas on November 22, 1963 was a military coup d’etat.
    \\][//

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Willy

      I have to ask, what is the significance of this symbol \\][// that I see at the end of each of your posts?

      • JohnR says:

        I’ll have a go at it. If you look closely, it’s a WW.

        Mr. Prudhomme, Earlier in this thread I asked a where you read that Ike Altgens testified that the headshot occurred 307 feet from the alleged sniper’s nest. I can’t find a reference. Best regards, JohnR.

      • JohnR is correct, \\][// is a stylized WW I used for signing digital paintings, when I was using Photoshop or PaintBrush to do artwork. I began signing such, and correspondence that way quite a few years ago. It is mostly habit. But there is a practical side to it as well, as it is also easy for me to find my own posts when browsing down a thread of commentary.
        \\][//

        • JohnR says:

          It’s too bad your middle name isn’t Willard. I wonder how that symbol would’ve gone over on the back lot?

          • JohnR says:

            Oh my goodness. In the clear light of day the above posting is beyond embarrassing. You wouldn’t know from the post, but I was thinking of the IWW, not WWW, if there is such a thing. Mr. Whitten, please forget the whole thing. The joke failed.

      • Bill Clarke says:

        See Bob, it is kinda like the secret handshake. More or less the pass word to enter the tree house.

      • theNewDanger says:

        He does it on YouTube a lot. It’s his initials.

  54. Bill says:

    I want to make a comment about Sibert’s reporting and disagreement with the conclusion of a single bullet passing through the neck.

    1. The 5 1/2 inch hole story. Sibert was a complete FOOL to not take into account the riding up of Kennedy’s Jacket. It was visible in the Jefferies movie, between frames 21-17 and was CLEARLY looped up to the level where it was actually higher that the COLLAR in question only 60-90 seconds before the car reached the Plaza. But Sibert did NOT KNOW THIS. And that was the start of his flawed reasoning.

    2. The Croft photo shows that Kennedy’s Jacket was still in that position when the car was making it’s way down Elm…at EXACTLY frame z 161.

    So it is kind of ridiculous for Sibert to make that statement about the hole in the Jacket being 5 1/2 inches down without any other qualifier…..and make that statement as to the location of the wound on the body. It’s just IMPOSSIBLE to have the JACKET BE UP and the WOUND BE DOWN!!!!

    What works and is MOST LIKELY then? The obvious really. The anatomical position of the body of JFK on that Autopsy Table was NOT the position he was in when he bullets passed through him.

    There is NO OTHER EXPLANATION. It is that simple.

    Croft Photo: On Elm at z 161

    https://www.google.com/search?q=croft+photo+of+jfk&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS503US512&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=875&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAmoVChMI_pjdxYiZyQIViCYmCh2lUwtK#imgrc=D1Frb2XaGsgaLM%3A

    Jefferies Film of JFK: Seconds 21-27.

    • Two points as per Bill’s latest comments:

      First the Croft Photo: On Elm at z 161, and all the other photo’s of Kennedy’s COAT; “bunched up” is a misnomer in my view. JFK’s coat is bunch outward more than it is upward. Not “higher” but puffing out back further. This would not make the difference that Bill and others propose as far as the holes in JFK’s coat being nonrepresentational of the wound to his back.
      Kennedy wore a back-brace, and surely his tailors custom fit his suit coat to account for that.

      Secondly:
      “The anatomical position of the body of JFK on that Autopsy Table was NOT the position he was in when he bullets passed through him.”

      There is no evidence whatsoever that “bullets passed through him,”
      The standard dissection procedures to track the bullet paths was not performed.

      It is therefore mere assumption that any bullets passed through Kennedy.
      \\][//

      • Bill says:

        Willy. You are simply and disturbingly so factually challenged on this topic. You’re simply wrong and it’s such a glaring error that I’m startled by your lack of understanding.

        First. You’re DEAD WRONG about the ‘puffing’ out back further comment. Even the ‘puffing our back further’ comment you make demonstrates your colossal error.

        That coat, the one you seek to now move AWAY from JFK’s body, EVEN IF IT WAS ONLY PUFFED, STILL REPRESENTS fabric that would need to be accounted for distance-wise in relationship to the skin under it. Do you get that AT ALL???

        Can you NOT UNDERSTAND, no, forget that, HOW can you not understand, the importance to the ‘puff’?????

        Do you realize just how 14cm is just 5 1/2 inches from the Mastoid Process? Did you drop a measurement down 5.5 inches from your own Right Mastoid Process to see where the hole was?? Has it occurred to you that if you did it would go through the ‘puff’?????

        Willy. A GOLF BALL has a circumference of 5.28 inches for crying out loud. HOLD ONE BEHIND YOUR EAR ROLL IT DOWN ONE COMPLETE REVOLUTION. What you will have discovered by doing this BASIC EXPERIMENT is to locate (to within this much
        BBB the wound in JFK’s Neck!!

        Ok. But there is one thing that did make me enjoy your post. I thought of the part you address part 2.

        The Golden Rule: 1. The Boss is NEVER WRONG.

        2. In the case of the Boss being proven wrong…refer to RULE !.

        Thanks.

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      No, their is no explanation for the fact that his suit did not “bunch up” the almost half a foot required by Ford’s moving up of it from the autopsy photo and measurements of it. Do you understand what your asking us to believe here? JFK would have had to have raised his shoulders as high as possible and leaned severely forward to achieve this which he did not per the films and photographs. He did set up and raise his hands to his throat in response to the frontal throat shot but not to the extent you suggest. The autopsy photo, measurements, his coat and shirt prove he was hit at T3.

    • JohnR says:

      Bill, I am amused at your all caps insistence that “there is no other explanation.” It’s so rarely true, regardless of the subject matter.
      I long ago concluded that you think we cannot read. I now suspect that you think us incapable of looking at pictures.
      Just as you cannot provide us with a single sighting of Oswald anywhere other than the first or second floor after noon on the 22nd, you cannot, by sheer force of will, cause JFK’s jacket to bunch up enough to make the SBT work.
      I’ve grown so very weary of your antics.

      • Bill says:

        John. I am amused someone can see a camel and identify it as a horse. Your two conclusions are incorrect of course. I do not think ‘us’ (who would that group be?) incapable of reading or looking at pictures.

        I think that some folks are incapable of reading all the literature OR/AND pictures and interpreting them fairly. That’s all.

        John. I do not have to prove a negative. To the contrary. It was Oswald who failed to provide a single witness to verify his whereabouts during the shooting.

        Thanks for the comments. If you are tired maybe it’s time to stop reading my ‘antics’.

        Thanks!

        • JohnR says:

          I don’t know where you live, and I don’t care. I live in Texas, which, as of this writing is still part of the United States. Perhaps you are not aware of the rules we are supposed to live by, but Oswald did not have to provide a thing. Rather, those who are obligated to provide such things failed to do so. That’s called a fact. Another fact is that we don’t know what all Oswald provided to his interrogators. All we have is a few short summations and scanty notes that fall far short of representing 11 hours of interrogation. I don’t know, but I suspect Fritz and crew only only recorded what they thought implicated Oswald, ignoring the rest.

          • Bill says:

            John. Well…that explains a lot. Good luck down there. What did Kennedy say to his wife? “Real Nut Country”.

      • Bill says:

        John. Something to think about when you get some rest:

        IF there was a hole in JFK’s Suit Jacket (and there was) can you explain how the hole in his back is not 5 1/2 inches down from the collar line? I can.

        The bullet hole in JFK’s neck was 14cm (5 1/2) inches down from the hallow behind JFK’s right ear ( the Right Mastoid Process).

        So, the issue is reduced to the simple explanation: a Suit Jacket with a hole in it 5 1/2 inches down and a wound in the neck (which you want to be the back) 5 1/2 inches down from the RMP. Interesting stuff huh?

        So, unless JFK was wearing his jacket up over his ears we have the obvious looking right at us. The Jacket was bunched up about 2+ inches. Oh, and guess what?

        This is the approximate distance from the Mastoid Process to the top of the collar line of the Suit Jacket. The effect is pretty simple. The wound was where the Autopsists said it was (not drew it) and it lines up perfectly with the hole in the body of JFK.

        Thanks.

        • JohnR says:

          Ah, awake and refreshed. Odd that the bullet holes in the shirt and jacket line up. What a magical day that was. Would you care to offer the rest of us your one and only true explanation of that inconvenient fact?

          • Bill says:

            Sure John I look forward to enlightening the group. I’ll be more than happy to state my opinion. I don’t understand why you say it’s ‘Odd’ that the bullet holes in the shirt and jacket line up. Maybe you are unaware that they actually do not align. But they are very close. Ok? Why would they not be? I don’t know why you would expect them to be greatly different. Of course they have to be close. They actually have to be close for BOTH arguments don’t they?

            The very straight forward answer is that both the shirt and the jacket rode up. We have proof, for example in the photos and Jefferies film as well as the Croft photo that the Jacket was very much bunched up. Too many photos to not agree with this fact.

            JFK was not wearing a T-shirt (but he did have a brace that day. There is no reason why his shirt would not move pretty much the same as his jacket. Men who do not wear a T-Shirt know fully well that the shirt will slide along the skin and become ‘untucked’ or very loose. Most men know that, when wearing a dress shirt we often stand and the first thing we do is reach around and ‘tuck’ in our shirts. (Except if we wear suspenders)

            JFK was shot in the posterior of his neck/back. That is easy enough to understand. What is difficult to understand, when using both the shirt and the Jacket holes, is how anyone can assume they would not move in concert. Kennedy’s brace would have little or not impact on his shirt. It was more like a corset and I’ve link a page for you to visit to help you see it.

            https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwitsPOzk57JAhXH2D4KHb_fDjwQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Ferikdalton.com%2Ftravell-kennedy-scoliosis%2F&psig=AFQjCNFim11puR-ZnDAisH7nyW–QBorEA&ust=1448079702459573

            Actually, in fact, for the SBT to exist at all they would HAVE to have moved together wouldn’t they? On the other side we have the direct opposite. Conspiracists need the shirts to line up as well….but they also need for the jacket to not have bunched up as it did.

            And that sums it up. Which is more likely?

            On JFK’s the numbers that are measured are 6 1/2 inches below the collar +,- for each garment. Very close as I said. So the argument boils down to the an argument.

          • Bill says:

            John:
            Part 2. The argument is relatively straight forward thankfully.
            I would argue that, seeing that JFK’s Suit ( and shirt) are proven to have been riding high all morning in every Limo photo it would stand to reason that it was that high on Elm Street. Luckily for us we have Croft, Willis, Zapruder, Towner, Betzner, to demonstrate the shirt as the car moved down Elm Street.
            I would argue both moved together because, after all, the man was shot in the back and, since the holes are very, very close, in the fabric of both the Jacket and the Shirt, and there is only one hole in JFK’s posterior neck/back the fact of establishing that they moved together is easy to prove.
            Others argue, as you may be doing here, that the Jacket and the Shirt are also very close (and by that I mean within an inch) BUT, for some reason, you feel that Jacket and the Shirt…or the Jacket…or the Shirt…or JFK’s body…all acted independently of each other on Elm Street?
            Because, quite honestly, the plain truth is that the garments must have moved together for my view or for your view to be factual. The only difference appears to be how the hole in each of the garments, Shirt and Jacket, got there.
            I mean, it stands to reason that the Jacket has a hole at x position. The Shirt essentially the same location. Yet the body doesn’t. 5 3/4 inches give or take on the Jacket and the Shirt (down from the collar). Yet, the mystery is that the body does not have a wound anywhere near that point.
            What the body does have is a wound 14cm (5 1/2 inches) below the Right Mastoid Process.
            I’m still waiting for someone to explain to me how we can start at the Right Mastoid Process…drop our line down the prescribed 14cm ( 5 1/2 inches) and have it fall anywhere near 5 3/4 BELOW the Collar.
            To suggest anything other than the Shirt and Jacket moved together is simply not true. The back brace was not a factor in this:
            https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwitsPOzk57JAhXH2D4KHb_fDjwQjRwIBw&url=http%3A%2F%2Ferikdalton.com%2Ftravell-kennedy-scoliosis%2F&psig=AFQjCNFim11puR-ZnDAisH7nyW–QBorEA&ust=1448079702459573

  55. Bob Prudhomme says:

    From the FBI statement of Charles Brehm, JFK assassination witness standing on the south side of Elm St., just east of James Altgens’ position:

    “BREHM expressed his opinion that between the first and third shots, the President’s car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet. It seemed to him that the automobile almost came to a halt after the first shot, but of this he is not certain. After the third shot, the car in which the President was riding increased its speed and went under the freeway overpass and out of his sight. ”

    Beginning to smell something rotten yet?

  56. Bob Prudhomme says:

    I originally replied to JohnR with this post but, upon re-reading it, discovered it to be over the 500 word limit. Here it is in two posts.

    ——————————————————————-

    JohnR

    My apologies for not elaborating on that point, as James Altgens did not specifically state, in his testimony, that the fatal head shot occurred 307 feet from the Sniper’s Nest. He would not, of course, have any way of measuring that distance.

    What he does testify to the Warren Commission is reproduced below:

    “Mr. LIEBELER – Now, the thing that is troubling me, though, Mr. Altgens, is that you say the car was 30 feet away at the time you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and that is the time at which the first shot was fired?
    Mr. ALTGENS – Yes, sir.
    Mr. LIEBELER – And that it was 15 feet away at the time the third shot was fired.
    Mr. ALTGENS – Yes, sir.
    Mr. LIEBELER – But during that period of time the car moved much more than 15 feet down Elm Street going down toward the triple underpass?
    Mr. ALTGENS – Yes, sir.
    Mr. LIEBELER – I don’t know how many feet it moved, but it moved quite a ways from the time the first shot was fired until the time the third shot was fired. I’m having trouble on this Exhibit No. 203 understanding how you could have been within 30 feet of the President’s car when you took Commission Exhibit No. 203 and within 15 feet of the car when he was hit with the last shot in the head without having moved yourself. Now, you have previously indicated that you were right beside the President’s car when he was hit in the head.
    Mr. ALTGENS – Well, I was about 15 feet from it.
    Mr. LIEBELER – But it was almost directly in front of you as it went down the street; isn’t that right?
    Mr. ALTGENS – Yes.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Part 2

      Mr. LIEBELER – Am I wrong, or isn’t it correct that under that testimony the car couldn’t have moved very far down Elm Street between the time you took Exhibit No. 203, which you took when the first shot was fired, and the time that you saw his head being hit, which was the time the last shot was fired?
      Mr. ALTGENS – Well, I have to take into consideration the law governing photographic materials and the use of optics in cameras–lenses–and while my camera may have been set on a distance of 30 feet, there is a plus or minus, area in which the focus still is maintained. I figure that this is approximately 30 feet because that’s what I have measured on my camera.
      Mr. LIEBELER – And you say Exhibit No. 203 was taken about 30 feet away?
      Mr. ALTGENS – But it might be 40 feet, but I couldn’t say that that’s exactly the distance because while it may be in focus at 40 feet, my camera has it in focus 30 feet. It’s the same thing–if I focus at 15 feet, my focus might extend 20 feet and it might also be reduced to 10 feet, but my focusing was in that general area of 30 feet. I believe, if you will let me say something further here about this picture—-”

      For those who do not know, Exhibit No. 203 is the famous Altgens 6 photo that coincided with frame z255 of the Zapruder film.

      As can be seen in the Zapruder Film, Altgens is nowhere near JFK at frame z313, and is not 15 feet from JFK until about frame z340.

      http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z350.jpg

      It would be easy to discount Mr. Altgens’ testimony, if it were not for the fact he was a professional photographer, and his careful explanation of how he had pre-focused his camera to a distance of 15 feet in order to take a photograph of JFK when the limo was directly in front of Altgens.

      “Mr. LIEBELER – Because you didn’t see who fired it?
      Mr. ALTGENS – Because I didn’t see who fired it. After the Presidential car moved a little past me, I took another picture–now, just let me back up here–I was prepared to make a picture at the very instant the President was shot. I had refocused to 15 feet because I wanted a good closeup of the President and Mrs. Kennedy, and that’s why I know that it would be right at 15 feet, because I had prefocused in that area, and I had my camera almost to my eye when it happened and that’s as far as I got with my camera.”

      • JohnR says:

        Thank you Mr.Prudhomme. I’m sure Mr. Altgens laid awake many a night wishing he’d taken that picture. I suppose that would apply to Mr. Bothun as well. Best regards, JohnR.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Yes, I believe if he had taken that photo, and it was not made to “disappear” as so much other evidence did, it is very likely we would not be having this exchange.

          It is fascinating to read Altgens’ testimony, and to see him wrestle the demons tearing him between what he knows as an experienced professional photographer, and his seeming conviction to believe what he has been told about the assassination by the authorities, simply because that is what people did in 1963.

  57. Bob Prudhomme says:

    I believe we shall all grow old, with great long grey beards, awaiting “Dr.” Photon’s explanation of just what precisely was so different about JFK’s neck and cervical vertebrae, and how these “abnormalities” could actually overcome the plethora of problems in making the Single Bullet Fantasy work.

  58. Bill says:

    Bob P:Bob. The answer to the question you pose over and over and over, as if you feel it is THE secret question to successfully solving the question of 1 bullet 1 men is: Your data is incorrect and, therefore, your summary is incorrect as well AND, because of this, the QUESTION IS INCORRECT to boot.

    The WCR assumed JFK was facing forward. He was not facing forward. And BECAUSE he was not facing forward, it changes the pathway through his neck. He was turned more to the right than your theory is accounting for. And that small turning motion which the FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST, the FORENSIC PATHOLOGISTS, and KINESIOLOGISTS and lastly, The NASA TRAJECTORY EXPERT, all agree to with establish with 100% certainty, that JFK was turned much further to the right than was thought in the investigation and this turning motion, along with the arm being extended right arm of JFK sufficiently alter his torso and neck organs enough to allow for the passage of CE399 to do exactly what they TESTIFY they did do.

    You would like to think, possibly, that they were looking to develop a response to awkward and bizarre assassination theories. While it is true they went almost to the maximum limit to dispute absurd claims body-tampering, etc, etc, all they really did was do with Science, Forensic Pathology, Forensic Anthropology, Physics, Geometry, etc….is to validate what Arlen Specter came up with based on a solid deductive point:

    Where did the bullet through Kennedy’s neck go? Right??? THE MYSTERY.

    It’s not THE mystery that can not be resolved. Agents Bennett saw JFK get hit in the BACK and wrote his report long before ANYONE looked at back (none did in Dallas). Nobody Dallas saw any wound in JFK’s back because they felt no need to turn him over. Oh I know. Bennett is lying. He must be lying. That is always the outcome for any study or proposal that sheds light on the crux of the Assassination, which is, 2 men struck by 1 bullet.

    So, Where did the bullet that passed through JFK’s neck go??

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Serious analysts of the Zapruder film have determined that JFK’s upper torso was turned no more than 5° to his right, as measured from a position where he would be facing straight forward. Even amateurs can plainly see this for themselves, although I am sure you will be quick to discredit this.

      JFK’s head was turned much further to the right than his torso was. However, this does NOT alter the position of the trachea below the level of the Adam’s apple whatsoever. Nor does it alter the position of the lower cervical vertebrae.

      Unless you are discounting the validity of the Zapruder film (are you a closet alterationist, Bill?) there is no denying the position JFK was sitting at the moment the Single Bullet Fantasy allegedly occurred, regardless of how many “experts” were hired by the Government in an attempt to put a lid on this mess.

      P.S.

      SA Glen A. Bennett also wrote in his report of 22/11/63 that he saw JFK hit in the back by a bullet about four inches down from the right shoulder. If you are upholding Bennett as a reliable witness for the back shot, do you uphold his location of the back shot?

  59. Bill says:

    The answer to the question you pose over and over and over, as if you feel it is THE secret question to successfully solving the question of 1 bullet 1 men is: Your data is incorrect and, therefore, your summary is incorrect as well AND, because of this, the QUESTION IS INCORRECT to boot.

    The WCR assumed JFK was facing forward. He was not facing forward. And BECAUSE he was not facing forward, it changes the pathway through his neck. He was turned more to the right than your theory is accounting for. And that small turning motion which the FORENSIC ANTHROPOLOGIST, the FORENSIC PATHOLOGISTS, and KINESIOLOGISTS and lastly, The NASA TRAJECTORY EXPERT, all agree to with establish with 100% certainty, that JFK was turned much further to the right than was thought in the investigation and this turning motion, along with the arm being extended right arm of JFK sufficiently alter his torso and neck organs enough to allow for the passage of CE399 to do exactly what they TESTIFY they did do.

    You would like to think, possibly, that they were looking to develop a response to awkward and bizarre assassination theories. While it is true they went almost to the maximum limit to dispute absurd claims body-tampering, etc, etc, all they really did was do with Science, Forensic Pathology, Forensic Anthropology, Physics, Geometry, etc….is to validate what Arlen Specter came up with based on a solid deductive point:

    Where did the bullet through Kennedy’s neck go? Right??? THE MYSTERY.

    It’s not THE mystery that can not be resolved. Agents Bennett saw JFK get hit in the BACK and wrote his report long before ANYONE looked at back (none did in Dallas). Nobody Dallas saw any wound in JFK’s back because they felt no need to turn him over. Oh I know. Bennett is lying. He must be lying. That is always the outcome for any study or proposal that sheds light on the crux of the Assassination, which is, 2 men struck by 1 bullet.

    So, Where did the bullet that passed through JFK’s neck go??

    • Bill says:

      Where did the bullet through Kennedy’s neck go? Right??? THE MYSTERY.

      It’s not THE mystery that can not be resolved. Agents Bennett saw JFK get hit in the BACK and wrote his report long before ANYONE looked at back (none did in Dallas). Nobody Dallas saw any wound in JFK’s back because they felt no need to turn him over. Oh I know. Bennett is lying. He must be lying. That is always the outcome for any study or proposal that sheds light on the crux of the Assassination, which is, 2 men struck by 1 bullet.

      So, Where did the bullet that passed through JFK’s neck go??

      Right into the right armpit area of John Connally, who then started to scream…which drew his wife’s attention, which drew Jackies attention, which prevented a slightly different outcome to the event (+ or -) that we can never know because Jackie herself she was distracted by the screaming of Connally and this action prevented her from pulling JFK down to save him.

      On another note: Physics and Forensic Pathology has also demonstrated the muzzle velocity and penetration power of CE399, using the closest ammunition to the Western Cartridge to simulate it’s flight and penetration characteristics through ribs, bones, etc, to determine that the missile that was SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN to be projectile would, at the end of it’s journey, have bleed off enough energy to in all likelihood cause the superficial wound in the thigh of Governor Connally because the study showed it did not have the inertia/power to fully penetrate his skin and associated muscles and then SIMPLY FELL OUT in the movements afterward and/or/ the clothing cut-down process.

      Connally was left with an a superficial wound in his leg which fit the size of the base end of CE399. Not the business end. Why do we know this?

      It was a conclusion of the HSCA Forensic Team that a small shard of lead, part of the base of CE399 was, in fact extruding from the bullet and could have left a visible artifact of the lead core in the thigh of Connally.

      But…anyway. You are wrong in your repeated question about the medical probability. The fact is that the way you pose the question is NOT THE WAY the bullet moved at all.

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      I believe you are beginning to repeat yourself, Bill; a clear sign of stress.

      • Bill says:

        No. Not really repeating. I speak a different language and I have to convert it. I then see that I went over my word limit and then I just break it up. Stop being so conspiratorial about that too. Sheeeesh.

        It’s not stress. It’s fun to help you find the truth. It will set you free I’m told!

        Bob, about Bennett’s observation. You are misstating what he said. He said he saw it hit ABOUT 4 inches. And that is just the beginning of his problem that day Bob.

        Bennett has a real problem. He was sitting in the right rear seat of the follow up SS Car. He is seen, in Altgens 6 looking backwards toward the TSBD. The problem for him is that Altgens 6 correlates to Z255. This translates to him looking backward still and LEAST 1.6 seconds AFTER the first shot was fired.

        Agent Bennett’s Statement that day is total nonsense.

        http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2112.htm Here is his full, hand written statement.

        It is so full of holes it is like cheese. He states things like hearing a firecracker and starts Immediately looking and Immediately he sees it hit Kennedy. Then he says he heard another shot and it hit the right rear of JFK’s head.

        See a problem with it? I hope so. He leaves out the 3RD SHOT!

        So….he, like Agent Hill….keep inserting themselves into heroic positions. Fact is…Bennett is seen in Algen’s number 6 doing anything IMMEDIATELY at all. He is looking backwards 1.6 seconds before JFK is killed.

  60. Bob Prudhomme says:

    “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

    ~~Joseph Goebbels~~ Reich Minister of Propaganda, Nazi Germany, 1933-1945

  61. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Photon said:

    “Even if you assume that perceptions stated four months after an incident ( refreshed several times during the interview by referring to the operative report) trump a written record dictated immediately after the procedure, you are ignoring what else Shaw said. While during his March,1964 interview he used the the term elliptical to describe the wound, 1.5 cm in diameter. As that distance is over twice the diameter of the Carcano round it was obviously tumbling when it hit Connolly-even based on the March interview.”

    There is a clear misunderstanding on Photon’s part of precisely where Connally was struck by a bullet, and that other things beside a tumbling bullet may contribute to an elliptical wound.

    Dr. Robert R. Shaw clearly stated he observed a wound on Connally’s back at the “midaxillary line”. To state this as the location of the wound, it would be more appropriate for Shaw to say Connally was wounded in the side, not the back.

    Contrary to popular belief, Connally did not suffer a through and through wound of his right lung. Rather, he suffered a tangential wound of his side in which the bullet was barely under the surface of his skin the entire 10 cm. (4 inches) of this wound. It ploughed downward through the outer surface of his 5th rib for this 10 cm., but never went deeper than this.

    From the perspective of the shooter, the back does not present a flat surface at the midaxillary line. Instead, the contour of the chest has curved on its way to the front of the chest until, at the midaxillary line, the shooter would be looking at a surface almost parallel to the path of the bullet. This is why there was an elliptical entry wound, as the bullet struck the side a tangential blow that would have, if Connally was a mere 2 cm. more to his left, likely have missed his chest altogether.

    Further evidence of a non-tumbling bullet is Dr. Shaw’s testimony that, while the narrow 5th rib was essentially destroyed for 10 cm., the intercostal muscles above and below it were miraculously undamaged. A tumbling bullet would have inflicted far more damage as it cartwheeled through the wound.

    SA Robert Frazier, FBI, examined Connally’s suit coat, and testified to seeing a 3/8″ round hole on the front of the coat; presumably made by an exiting bullet. This is slightly less than 1/8″ greater in diameter than a 6.5mm Carcano bullet. Considering that the wound in JFK’s throat was observed to be round, as well, just when exactly was this bullet supposed to have been tumbling?

    • Bill says:

      Bob. Maybe SA Frazier should have testified to the shape of the hole ON THE BACK of the coat.

      Lastly, you continue to misquote the medical evidence in trying to make your point. I would suggest, again, that you actually read what Shaw said. Here is the relevant page from the WC.

      http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/html/WC_Vol6_0053a.htm

      Why do you continue to misquote the ballistic evidence. I know that you try to have every possible answer, and you actually have trapped yourself into doing this because to make an admission means the game is up. But really….Bob…Shaw HIMSELF…states: “It didn’t have the appearance of a wound caused by high velocity bullet that had not stuck anything else; in other words, a puncture wound”.

      Now that may be difficult to translate with the use of the negative: So what it really said was:

      The bullet did NOT have the appearance of a wound caused by a high velocity bullet that DID NOT strike anything else….namely….a puncture wound.(sic)

      So far tonight/today you’ve blown the angle of JFK’s body/torso/head. The distance from the Right Mastiod Process, the JFK Coat ‘puff’, and SA Frazier’s comment along with Dr. Shaws.

      As I mentioned to others earlier. Keep up the lying and keep demeaning the life of a true Cold Warrior’s memory. You do no service to the memory of JFK by changing numbers.

      Good Day.

      • Bill,
        You harangue Bob accusing him of misquoting the medical evidence. Yet in your attempted “correction”, you do not finish the entire answer Shaw gives in that instance.
        Allow me to offer that complete exchange from where you leave off:

        Dr Shaw: “The wound of entrance was an elliptical wound. In other words it had a long diameter and an short diameter. It didn’t have the appearance of a wound caused by a high velocity bullet that had not struck anything else: in other words a puncture wound. Now, you also take into consideration, however, whether the bullet enters at a right angle or at a tangent. If it enters at a tangent there will be some length to the wound.”

        Mr Specter: So, would you say in net that there would have been some tumbling occasioned by it passing through another body or perhaps the oblique character of entry might be occasioned by the angle of entry.

        Dr Shaw: “Yes; wither would explain a wound of entry.”

        \\][//

      • Now, you do realize Bill, that Doctor Shaw testified on two occasions fro the Warren Commission [?].

        This Testimony at the other occasion may interest you and the forum:

        Mr. SPECTER – When you started to comment about it not being possible, was that in reference to the existing mass and shape of bullet 399?

        Dr. SHAW – “I thought you were referring directly to the bullet shown as Exhibit 399.”

        Mr. SPECTER – What is your opinion as to whether bullet 399 could have inflicted all of the wounds on the Governor, then, without respect at this point to the wound of the President’s neck?

        Dr. SHAW – “I feel that there would be some difficulty in explaining all of the wounds as being inflicted by bullet Exhibit 399 without causing more in the way of loss of substance to the bullet or deformation of the bullet.”

        (Discussion off the record.)
        Mr. SPECTER – Dr. Shaw, have you had an opportunity today here in the Cornmission building to view the movies which we referred to as the Zapruder movies and the slides taken from these movies?

        Dr. SHAW – “Yes.”

        Mr. SPECTER – And what, if any, light did those movies shed on your evaluation and opinions on this matter with respect to the wounds of the Governor?

        Dr. SHAW – “Well, my main interest was to try to place the time that the Governor was struck by the bullet which inflicted the wound on his chest in reference to the sequence of the three shots, as has been described to us.”
        […]
        Mr. SPECTER – I have heretofore asked you questions about what possibly could have happened in terms of the various combinations of possibilities on missiles striking the Governor in relationship to striking the President as well. Do you have any opinion as to what, in fact, did happen?

        Dr. SHAW – “Yes. From the pictures, from the conversation with Governor Connally and Mrs. Connally, it seems that the first bullet hit the President in the shoulder and perforated the neck, but this was not the bullet that Governor Connally feels hit him; and in the sequence of films I think it is hard to say that the first bullet hit both of these men almost simultaneously.”
        Mr. SPECTER – Is that view based on the information which Governor Connally provided to you?

        Dr. SHAW – “Largely.”

        Mr. SPECTER – As opposed to any objectively determinable facts from the bullets, the situs of the wounds or your viewing of the pictures?

        Dr. SHAW – “Yes. I was influenced a great deal by what Governor Connally knew about his movements in the car at this particular time.”
        http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/shaw1.htm
        \\][//

        • Bill says:

          Willy. You must be kidding me. Dr. Shaw based his opinion on the recollections of John Connally and his wife…and that is the ‘evidence’? You’re telling me that a Dr. based his clinical situation on what a man who had his back to the President, and never saw him until AFTER he himself was struck, is indicative of an expert opinion by a Dr.
          Perhaps you should watch this interview by John Connally: I’m pretty sure it will shed some light on this matter. Governor Connally…right? Here he is in his own words. It may make you cry a tear for your rapidly dying attempt to debunk the SB.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t6rUgfjgUiU
          Now on to Nellie Connally. I have some real concerns about her description of the assassination because she clearly has made statements about doing things…that she simply did not do.
          Nellie Connally WC:
          Mrs. CONNALLY…..
          Then I don’t know how soon, it seems to me it was very soon, that I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right.
          I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck.
          Mr. SPECTER. And you are indicating with your own hands, two hands crossing over gripping your own neck?
          Mrs. CONNALLY. Yes; and it seemed to me there was–he made no utterance, no cry. I saw no blood, no anything. It was just sort of nothing, the expression on his face, and he just sort of slumped down.
          Then very soon there was the second shot that hit John. As the first shot was hit, and I turned to look at the same time, I recall John saying, “Oh, no, no, no.” Then there was a second shot, and it hit John, and as he recoiled to the right, just crumpled like a wounded animal to the right, he said, “My God, they are going to kill us all.”
          I never again—-
          Mr. DULLES. To the right was into your arms more or less?
          Mrs. CONNALLY. No, he turned away from me. I was pretending that I was him. I never again looked in the back seat of the car after my husband was shot.
          My Goodness. Where do I even begin to discuss her testimony?

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Quite simple, Bill. It was a tangential wound that struck Connally at the “midaxillary line” or the extreme right side of his chest. A quick check of Dr. Shaw’s testimony will confirm this.

        http://o.quizlet.com/i/yjJ57A5pYgJ-azjv8XNQWA_m.jpg

        At this point, from the perspective of a shooter behind Connally, the back no longer presents a flat surface. Rather, with the curvature of the rib cage, the outer surface of the side of the chest would be almost parallel with the shooter’s line of sight.

        In other words, it was not a direct hit but, instead, almost a glancing blow. It is no mystery that it would make an elliptical entrance wound, and Dr. Shaw even points to this possibility.

        • Bill says:

          I understand that. However…that is not what I’m referring to at all. And that is not a valid representation of the impact as it relates to the shape of the wound at all. Not at all.

  62. Bill says:

    I see two major problems with Altgen’s interview.

    Here is a schematic, scaled, drawing of the photographers and where they stood in DP, on Nov 22.

    First. JFK’s Limo was 21 feet long.

    Second. Altgens and Mr. Super Brain, Wes Liebler, both confuse 1st shot. Altgens continues to
    say that his 203 exhibit was the ‘First shot’. Leibler gets confused.

    Third. The position of Altgens was approximately 15 feet up Elm Street from the stairs in his
    relative position to said stairs.

    Forth. Altgen’s position to the limo at time of z 255 was, about 30/33 feet.

    Fifth. At the time Altgen’s thought he took the ‘First Shot Photo’ (CE 203) the car was
    actually at z224, or about 50 feet from his location.

    Perfect case of the Blind leading the ignorant. Leibler who should have known that the explanation was simply not factually true.

    Good enough for government work.

    Peace.

    • Steve Stirlen says:

      Bill,

      “Perfect case of the Blind leading the ignorant. Leibler who should have known that the explanation was simply not factually true.”

      A careful reading of what you wrote leads m most people to the crux of the problem with the WO, and the buffoons that investigated and wrote the “official version” to solve the crime of the century.

      You chided Bob about JFK’s memory because he does not believe what a liar—in this particular case—Leibler (although you could insert any name into that slot—Ford, Specter, Hoover, Dulles, McCloy and on and on), but I have yet to hear your anger and disgust with bozos like Liebler, who purposefully LIED to the country AND the memory of JFK. Whatever your disagreement with Bob is between you and Bob. However, at least Bob is TRYING to discover the truth, even though it may not be YOUR truth, or how you think the truth should be seen. I commend Bob for his efforts.

      Maybe one day your comments and venom about the people on this site that disagree with the “official version” will be matched with some comments and venom about the people who were given the charge to tell the truth and DID NOT. Again, insert any name here you would like—Johnson, McCone, Hoover, Humes, Fritz, etc.

      Let me give you one final piece of help, courtesy of Robert Blakey:

      “Significantly, the Warren Commission’s conclusion that the agencies of the government co-operated with it is, in retrospect, not the truth.

      We also now know that the Agency set up a process that could only have been designed to frustrate the ability of the committee in 1976-79 to obtain any information that might adversely affect the Agency.

      Many have told me that the culture of the Agency is one of prevarication and dissimulation and that you cannot trust it or its people. Period. End of story.

      I am now in that camp.”

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      Bill wrote:

      “Forth. Altgen’s position to the limo at time of z 255 was, about 30/33 feet.”

      Not even close, if we are to believe the limo maintained a steady 12 mph to the last shot.

      If the limo was travelling at 12 mph, it can also be stated the limo was moving forward at 17.6 feet per second. We also know that Zapruder’s camera exposed 18.3 frames per second, and we can use this as a constant.

      313-255 = 58 frames between Altgens photo at z255 and the moment of the fatal head shot at z313.

      If we divide 58 by 18.3, we find that 3.17 seconds elapsed between z255 and z313.

      3.17 seconds x 17.6 fps = 55.79 feet

      In other words, Mr. Bill, my calculations show there were 55.79 feet between the position of the limo in the Altgens photo ande the position of the limo at the moment of the fatal head shot, and Altgens was still WAY further down Elm St.!

    • Bill – November 19, 2015 at 4:18 am,

      So which of these hundred or so pictures on this page are you referring to? Don’t you know how to single out a particular URL for an image yet?

      A comment to your tack here on the Altgens’ photo’s there more than one. You do not seem to appreciate that Altgens explained that there were a range of distances that a focal setting would capture and still be in focus.
      So it is YOU that do not realize that you cannot determine the exact distances from the testimony on focal settings as you just attempted to do in your commentary of, November 19, 2015 at 4:18 am.
      \\][//

      • Bill says:

        Willy. You lovable guy. Of course I recognize that. But I should point out. There is really no ‘tack’. I simply wanted to just help bob locate where he thinks Altgens was. I think when he (or you apparently) reads my note just sent he can find it. He seems like he can handle the pressure pretty well. As for you. I’m not so sure!

        Focus Willy. Focus on the bigger picture and let some stress out. Ok? I didn’t care about focal setting Willy. LOL…I was trying to figure out where he was standing as to landmarks on the street vs. using a camera/speed. And I’m happy to say I mucked it up because I couldn’t read the wee little numbers.

        See. No conspiracy. No Right Wing attempt to become the nefarious Mr. Brown.

        Anyway. Mr. Bob, if you should read this I truly am interested in your theory of Altgens being further away. I promise!

        🙂

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Bill

          If you read my response to you a couple of posts back, you will see it is quite simple to establish that the limo moved about 56 feet between the moment of the Altgens 6 photo (z255) and the moment of the fatal head shot (z313). This is, of course, accepting the premise that the limo was moving at 12 mph (17.6 feet/second) and did not slow down or stop.

          James “Ike” Altgens testified to the WC that JFK was directly in front of him, and about 15 feet away from him, at the moment of the fatal head shot. Using this testiony, frame z350 would correspond to what he states, as this frame places JFK directly in front of him.

          350-313 = 37 frames of the Zapruder film between the fatal head shot, and JFK being directly in front of Altgens.

          37 frames divided by 18.3 frames per second (speed of Zapruder’s camera) = 2.02 seconds

          2.02 seconds x 17.6 fps = 35.5 feet

          In other words, the distance between the position of the fatal head shot and James Altgens’ position was about 35 feet.

          If we add 35 + 56, we find there was actually about 91 feet between the location of the Altgens 6 photo (z255) and the position Altgens claimed to be standing in.

          How could Altgens believe he had pre-focused his camera to 30 feet for the photo he took at z255?

  63. Bill says:

    On the Suit Coat hole: Attached with this post is a photograph of the men, JFK, Connally, Kellerman.

    I’d be thinking that JFK’s Jacket was much higher on his back than some of the ‘experts’ on this website may think.

    A quick, and I do mean quick, look at the photo and you will easily see that JFK’s Jacket was riding OVER THE TOP of his collar. As proof of this here is a photo that shows exactly what the issue is.

    Why are CT’ers unwilling to accept that the hole in the Jacket was EXACTLY where it was measured to be (approx 5 1/2 inches from the collar BUT are willing to accept that JFK’s coat was bunching up in a VERY significant way?

    Can it be that they are trapped in a paradoxical, can’t win situation? Yep. It sure is.

    The Paradox:

    Original dissenters wanted the bullet to be at the level of the hole in Jacket. Why? Well, it made the hole in the Jacket proof that there was a hole in JFK’s back that was much lower than the WC said it was. Early on and in using simplistic logic, CT’ers felt that the crux of the case could be made for the not enough time to wound JFK and Connally with two shots scenario. This ‘lynchpin’ logic lead them to fight tooth-and-nail for the 6 Seconds in Dallas mentality to give rise to the murderous conspiracy that killed JFK.

    They used the simple sketch that was provided on the Autopsy Face Sheet (anatomical figure) to begin to cook the books. The idea was: The Hole is way down here on the diagram. The Suit Jacket has a hole in approximately the same place. Therefore…zippo. The investigation is lying about the wounds on JFK and his own autopsy proves it.

    • “They used the simple sketch that was provided on the Autopsy Face Sheet (anatomical figure) to begin to cook the books. The idea was: The Hole is way down here on the diagram. The Suit Jacket has a hole in approximately the same place. Therefore…zippo. The investigation is lying about the wounds on JFK and his own autopsy proves it.”~Bill

      “Zippo”, isn’t that a lighter? I doubt if it’s the one Humes used to light his fireplace, if that’s why you bring it up.

      Talking about “cooked books”? Yes let’s do that. You have a problem with the fact that the spot on the face sheet “just happens to be” at T3, that the bullet holes in the coat and shirt “just happen to be” at T3. That the death certificate signed by Burkley “just happens to be at T3”. That SSA Sibert was standing no farther that 2 feet from Kennedy when that back wound was measured and saw the notation at T3, and claims that they lied when they moved it up.

      But you have a bigger problem Bill, there is ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF that a bullet ever transited from JFK’s back and through his neck. Because the standard method for tracking such bullet paths was not done in the so-called “autopsy” of JFK. Every point you make from that proximate reality is moot. All is conjecture because you have no proof of a missile transiting Kennedy’s body.
      \\][//

      • Photon says:

        Willy, what was the standard method for tracking bullet paths in 1963? You do realize that I discussed this myth about dissecting out bullet paths previously-and that when it was rarely done it was to recover a missile, not to establish a tract that was determined by other methods.
        Which doctor besides Burkley stated unequivocally that the back wound was at T3?
        As Burkley never mentioned a throat wound on the same certificate how does that square with all of the Parkland doctors statements that he had an entry wound to the throat?
        Was Burkley correct that all wounds came from behind?

        • “Willy, what was the standard method for tracking bullet paths in 1963? You do realize that I discussed this myth about dissecting out bullet paths previously-and that when it was rarely done it was to recover a missile, not to establish a tract that was determined by other methods.”~Photon

          Of course Photon, I remember all the jabberwacky you present as “argumentation” here.

          I don’t buy your argument that dissection is not a standard practice to discover the paths of missiles in a post mortem, and in fact the problem the doctors had at the Kennedy “autopsy” did involve the question of where were the bullets.

          The point is however that the procedure was NOT done, and therefore there is no proof that a missile went completely through JFK.
          \\][//

        • JohnR says:

          Photon, I have yet to locate these standards from the National Association of Medical Examiners pertaining to 1963, but I’m working on it. I’ll be sure to provide it to you when or if I find it. For now, even though I doubt you’ll be satisfied, here are the standards as of 2006. Please scroll down to page 13, where you will find this quote: “The forensic pathologist shall describe and document the track of wound.”

          http://www.mtf.org/pdf/name_standards_2006.pdf

          • Photon says:

            Describing and documenting the track of the wound does not require dissection of the wound- not in 2015, nor did it in 1963.

          • 7. (vi) With all injuries, record the size and shape, pattern, location (related to obvious anatomic landmarks), color, course odirection, depth and structure involved. Attempt to distinguish injuries from thereputic measures from those unrelated to medical treatment. In the descriptiion of projectile wounds, note the absence of soot, gunpoweder, of singing. If gunshot reidue in present. document it photographically and save for analysis. Attempt to determine whether the gunshot woundis and entry of exit. If an entry wound is present and no exit wound is seen , the projectile must be saved and accounted for. Excise wound track samples to be saved for microscopic examination. Tape together knife wounds to assess the blade size and characteristics.
            http://www.forensicpathologyonline.com/e-book/autopsy
            \\][//

          • ARRB Testimony of James W. Sibert
            Sebert: When I talked with Killion that night,
            “Chuck,” I said, “is there any kind of a bullet that would completely fragmentize? Maybe hit a bone and go down in the lower extremities of the body?” And I said, ‘They – the doctors, can’t find a bullet”. And “they’re at a loss to account for the bullet causing the back wound.
            http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Sibert_9-11-97.pdf
            \\][//

          • JohnR says:

            I didn’t use the word dissection. Did I? In my opinion, however, in the past whenever an opponent of the Warren Commission used that word, THIS procedure was the one to which they referred, albeit unknowingly. As I’ve said before, for all intents and purposes, they amount to the same thing. One is to document the damage done as a missile transits a body, the other is to locate and recover a missile that does not. In both procedures, the damage is documented, and an opinion is rendered as to whether or not that damage contributed to the cause of death. In the end, Mr. Whitten is right. The important thing is that the procedure was not done.

        • It is preposterous for Photon to keep arguing the point of whether it was mandated forensic protocol to dissect gunshot wounds to track the path of a bullet.

          In the first instance, it was not done with the throat and back wounds on JFK. That is the simple fact of the matter. It is therefore empty presumption to propose that the back wound, having all the hallmarks of an entry wound exited through the throat.

          It is especially preposterous due to the fact that the throat wound – regardless of any knowledge of the original nature of it as a bullet wound of entry, has all the hallmarks of a knife wound. For any pathologist, even as incompetent as Humes and Boswell, to conclude that that wound in the throat could possibly be an exit wound caused by a bullet is simply ludicrous. Even once informed of the original bullet wound, the concept is unsound.

          Which brings us full circle to the first instance stated above; the dissection was not done, the bullet tracks are unknown, Thus it is empty speculation to claim that any bullets passed through Kennedy. Period.
          \\][//

      • Bill says:

        Willy. No. I don’t share your view of any problem whatsoever. Actually…I’ll stick with the Boswell testimony that the wound was in the neck from start to finish. Therefore, your honor, you’re out of order!

    • ed connor says:

      T-3 is not located in the neck, as Dr. Paul Photon will admit under cross examination.
      It is located in the thoracic spine, referencing the thorax, or chest.
      An entrance wound at T-3, on a 30 degree downward angle, will not result in an exit wound above the knot of JFK’s necktie.
      Q.E.D.

      • Photon says:

        Except that the back wound as illustrated in the autopsy photos cannot be proven to be at T3-again, the two dimensional issues that I have brought up make it difficult if not impossible to verify the wound’s location in regard to the vertebral column-ergo, my request to Willy to confirm that any MD other than Burkley unequivocally made the claim. To my knowledge none did.
        But here is another issue. We know that JFK’s coat was riding up during the shooting as noted on photos. As JFK was sitting upright in the limo with his back braced and his arm on the side of the limo his shoulder ( at least the right) was hunched up. The post-mortem autopsy picture with relaxation of the tissues is not totally reflective of the actual position of the wound at the time it occurred. JFK’s abnormal neck and back potentiated this problem.As such the position of the wound on JFK’s back appears to be lower than it actually was at the time of impact.

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Please, please, please, Photon, TELL US WHAT WAS SO ABNORMAL ABOUT JFK’S NECK!!!

        • “Except that the back wound as illustrated in the autopsy photos cannot be proven to be at T3-again, the two dimensional issues that I have brought up make it difficult if not impossible to verify the wound’s location in regard to the vertebral column…”
          ~Photon

          Yes indeed it can be discerned by this photo. Anyone familiar with perspective can see that the angle of the plane of Kennedy’s back is forward of the head and neck by a considerable degree. The foreshortening in this shot means that the distance between the wound and the neck are further than if one just considers this as all one flat plane.
          As a visual artist my whole life I have a keen eye for perspective. The back wound is definitely at T3.

          I will stand on my visual acuity as a trained artist who learned to see what is actually in front of me, rather than an “impression” – one cannot become a successful draftsman without such training or innate abilities as I have had since I was a youngster.

          Burkley was present at the autopsy and witnessed the placement of the wound personally. Boswell’s “dot” on the face-sheet in not “coincidentally” in the same place – that is where the wound was. It is not coincidental that the holes in the coat and shirt are in the same place. And dismissing Sibert’s placement of the wound at the same place cannot be hand-waved as pure coincidence.
          The photos of the bunching of the jacket cannot trump the points I just outlined. I have given my view of the bunching out – not up, and that is the only way the issues of discrepancies with the other points can be resolved.

          Wherever your idea that Kennedy had an abnormal neck comes from is not apparent. There is absolutely nothing unusual to Kennedy’s neck in those photos of him on the beach.

          I don’t know how many times you intend to go around and around with this Photon. But I stand by my present analysis. I will let the candid world decide for themselves.
          \\][//

  64. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Bill

    Did you know that Connally’s back wound was not actually a back wound but, rather, a wound that entered the side of his chest?

    Did you know that the bullet did not actually enter Connally’s right chest cavity but, rather, went along the outside of his chest, following the course of the 5th rib downward?

    Did you know the path of the bullet went across Connally’s chest, at a right to left angle, and exited just medial to his right nipple? In other words, between his right nipple and the centre of his chest?

    • Bill says:

      Yes Bob. The wound in Connally was near the armpit. Yes. I read the report. And yes..I saw that it tunneled through the meat on his ribs. And Yes Bob. But I want to also point out that upon the exit toward his leg….the bullet still had plenty of space to exit between the ribs and not smash out his breast bone.

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        So let me ask you a question, Bill.

        If the Magic Bullet left a perfectly round exit wound in JFK’s throat, as described by Parkland physicians, made a 1.5 cm. entrance wound in Connally’s side that can be explained (and was by Dr. Shaw) as a tangential wound, “burrowed”, as you say, through 10 cm. of Connally’s 5th rib and then exited medial to Connally’s 5th rib and made a perfectly round 3/8″ hole in the front of Connally’s suit coat, WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE THE MAGIC BULLET WAS SUPPOSEDLY TUMBLING?

        The best evidence of the Magic Bullet NOT tumbling is the statement by Dr. Robert Shaw that the intercostal muscles above and below Connally’s 5th rib were miraculously untouched, and the damage was limited to the narrow width of the 5th rib. My experience meat hunting with tumbling bullets has shown that a tumbling bullet will destroy a great amount of tissue in an animal, and the damage done would never be described as “burrowing”

        Wouldn’t you agree, Bill?

  65. “If the government can manufacture, suppress and lie when a President is cut down — and get away with it — what cannot follow?”–WHITEWASH

    “In its approach, operations and Report, the Commission considered one possibility alone — that Lee Harvey Oswald, without assistance, assassinated the President and killed Officer Tippit. Never has such a tremendous array of power been turned against a single man, and he was dead. Yet even without opposition the Commission failed. . . .
    A crime such as the assassination of the President of the United States cannot be left as the Report . . . has left it, without even the probability of a solution, with assassins and murderers free, and free to repeat their crimes and enjoy what benefits they may have expected to enjoy therefrom. No President is ever safe if Presidential assassins are exculpated. Yet that is what the Commission has done. In finding Oswald “guilty,” it has found those who assassinated him “innocent.” If the President is not safe, then neither is the country.
    […]
    Much more does it relate to each individual American, to the integrity of the institutions of our society, when anything happens to any president — especially when he is assassinated.
    The consignment of President John F. Kennedy to history with the dubious epitaph of the whitewashed investigation is a grievous event.[30]
    Above all, the Report leaves in jeopardy the rights of all Americans and the honor of the nation. When what happened to Oswald once he was in the hands of the public authority can occur in this country with neither reprimand nor question, no one is safe. When the Federal government puts its stamp of approval on such unabashed and open denial of the most basic legal rights of any American, no matter how insignificant he may be, then no American can depend on having those rights, no matter what his power or connections. The rights of all Americans, as the Commission’s chairman said when wearing his Chief Justice’s hat, depend upon each American’s enjoyment of these same rights.”~Harold Weisberg, Whitewash
    \\][//

  66. Steve Stirlen says:

    Bill,

    (Part 1)

    “So, Where did the bullet that passed through JFK’s neck go??”

    Bill, the is the SINGLE best question you have asked since you moved to this site. Why, let us ask J.Edgar “yes, Mrs. kennedy, I have a picture of JFK with Marilyn Monroe” Hoover about the evidence that he collected from the limousine. Better yet, how about some ACTUAL PICTURES of the limousine. Wait, what? There are NO pictures that show the damage to the car? Wait, what? We should take the “word” of the distinguished FBI? The same FBI that destroyed LHO’s famous “threatening the world” note? The same FBI that lost a chunk of concrete pulled from a street in DP? Wait, what?

    “The wound on Kennedy’s neck truly was in his neck, not as CT’ers hoped it could be (lower). 5 1/2 inches is the distance a golf ball will travel in a single revolution. It means the Jacket was riding up so high that day. The video and Photographic information disproves the CT’ers claims.”

    Bill, if the evidence is SO STRONG as you say, why did Gerald “yes, I will kiss your butt so I can be a career politician” Ford feel the need “to move the wound up for clarity.” Wait, what? The wound in the back is not clear enough that a member of the WO that was a back channel for the FBI felt the need to “help us?” The same Gerald Ford who said it was terrible to profit off of a book about JFK, then wrote a book about the “deranged loner” that traveled the world, and his desire to kill? Wait, what?

    “It was a conclusion of the HSCA Forensic Team that a small shard of lead, part of the base of CE399 was, in fact extruding from the bullet and could have left a visible artifact of the lead core in the thigh of Connally.”

    Bill, is this the same HSCA headed by Blakey that said JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy? The HSCA that said this:

    “The Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and the Warren Commission were all criticized for not revealing to the Warren Commission information available in 1964, and the Secret Service was deemed deficient in their protection of the President.”

    “1. The 5 1/2 inch hole story. Sibert was a complete FOOL to not take into account the riding up of Kennedy’s Jacket.”

    Bill, unless I am mistaken, when Agent Sibert was standing 2 FEET (his words) during the autopsy, JFK was probably NAKED. I would imagine the coat was somewhere else, which allowed the FBI to manipulate…oops, I mean investigate the coat. Anyway, Sibert was looking at a HOLE in JFK’s back. The coat was not in Sibert’s mind at all. He was looking at the body. And, even though Photon would have us believe that Sibert did not know anatomy, I can safely assume that Sibert can recognize a HOLE in someone’s back.

  67. DIRE CONSEQUENCES

    “CE399 may seem like a “magic bullet” to the lay person, but these experts have no problem with it. Something to think about, isn’t it?”~Jean Davison — March 23, 2015 at 9:39 pm

    Yes, indeed, it is something to think about. How is it that so many so-called experts would go along with that which is provably patently false, not merely to the lay person, but to anyone who actually uncovers and discovers the actual facts of this “magic bullet”. And as it is, that this preposterous tale of CE399 has been torn asunder on the pages of this blog; the question Jean Davison poses above must be seriously considered. How is it that so many simply fold under pressure and go along to get along.

    This question of “Obedience to Authority” was address by Stanley Milgram in an important study published in 1974:
    The Milgram experiment on obedience to authority figures was a series of social psychology experiments conducted by Yale University psychologist Stanley Milgram. They measured the willingness of study participants, mostly young male students from Yale, to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts conflicting with their personal conscience. Milgram first described his research in 1963 in an article published in the Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology and later discussed his findings in greater depth in his 1974 book, Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.

    The experiments began in July 1961, in the basement of Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University, three months after the start of the trial of German Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Jerusalem. Milgram devised his psychological study to answer the popular question at that particular time: “Could it be that Eichmann and his million accomplices in the Holocaust were just following orders? Could we call them all accomplices?” The experiments have been repeated many times in the following years with consistent results within differing societies, although not with the same percentages around the globe. [See Wiki]

    It is in considering studies such as these that give us the proximate clues to the situation faced in 1963 when a coup d’etat took place in broad daylight on the streets of Dallas, Texas. There are obviously systemic forces underlying the organized denial of truth and fact surrounding this and subsequent events. It is therefore incumbent on each and every sincere individual to come to grips with this hybrid paradigm of a blatantly obvious military police state that is the direct consequence of the 1963 Amerikan coup d’etat.
    \\][//

  68. Bob Prudhomme says:

    What kind of bullet can break up completely into metal powder without hitting bone, and after travelling only a couple of inches through soft tissue?

    Answer: A hollow point frangible bullet.

    http://www.drtammo.com

    • That is exactly what I was thinking Bob. Every hear of a hollow point frangible Carcano bullet? Neither have I.
      \\][// {That stands for WW – grin)

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Actually, there was a 6.5mm Carcano frangible bullet, although it was not exactly a hollow point bullet. It and the cartridge it was loaded into were designated by the Italian military as the M37 “Magistri” round. The M37 round was made as early as the 1920’s and was known mainly as a “range” cartridge.

        It is essential that any student of the assassination understand the difference between a “frangible” bullet and bullets designed to expand rapidly in a wound and possibly fragment into many pieces. Frangible bullets were invariably made mostly of a powdered metal, most often lead although modern frangible bullets are getting away from lead in an effort to promote environmental consciousness.In contrast, other bullets, designed to expand and fragment, were made from solid metal, usually lead. The powdered metal was utilized in a frangible bullet in two ways; either the loose metal powder was loaded into a bullet jacket and sealed in, or the metal powder was compressed, glued or “sintered” into the shape of a bullet. In the latter case, the bonded bullet was usually inserted into a bullet jacket but there is a sizeable amount of frangible ammo, mostly handgun ammo, that is unjacketed.

        However they are constructed, frangible bullets all share one thing in common. When they contact a hard surface, such as stone, concrete or steel, they will disintegrate back into powder and not ricochet, making them a somewhat “safe” bullet in an urban environment.

        Two views of an M37 Magistri cartridge:

        http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k100/corleyas/65mm1.jpg
        http://i86.photobucket.com/albums/k100/corleyas/65mm2.jpg

        Note that the Magistri copper alloy jacket is in two sections, and that it has an unusually deep cannelure, where the crimp of the jacket neck has been made.

        End of Part I

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Part II

          The joining of the two sections of the Magistri copper alloy bullet jacket, up near the nose of the bullet, and the abnormally deep cannelure are notable, as, coincidentally, evidence points to the bullet jacket coming apart into three pieces.

          The construction of the M37 was quite unusual. As seen in the photos, in my last post, a roughly 1 mm opening in the very tip of the nose of the jacket was left open, exposing the core of the bullet. Inside the bullet jacket, there was a tiny lead or “maillechort) pellet in the very nose of the bullet jacket, and it is this pellet that can be seen through the 1 mm nose opening. Below this pellet, the majority of the jacket was filled with what I believe was powdered lead, although it is difficult to ascertain if this powder was loose or ad been compressed or glued into a solid. The base of the bullet was filled with sand. While this bullet was equal in size ans shape to the standard 162 grain Carcano ball round, the use of sand in this bullet, plus the granular lead, made this bullet quite a bit lighter than the standard Carcano bullet. To have this bullet match the muzzle velocity of the standard bullet, the amount of gunpowder in the M37 cartridge was reduced accordingly.

          The M37 Magistri was designed for one purpose. Beginning in the 1920’s, many indoor shooting ranges were built in Italy; some in excess of 200 metres in length. As there is always a danger of ricochets when shooting high powered rifles, the M37 frangible bullet was considered an ideal match to the indoor range and even made the construction of backstops behind the targets simpler. Instead of installing dense yet soft materials behind the backstops to “catch” the spent bullets, a simple vertical concrete wall was made behind the target area, where the frangible bullets would impact and disintegrate. The 1 mm opening in the nose of the M37 jacket likely aided in the disintegration process.

          While the M37 was a “safe” range bullet, it has long been appreciated that if you could get that frangible bullet, intact, inside of a skull or passing through a thoracic or abdominal organ and THEN had it disintegrate, the resulting 3-4 inch cloud of powdered metal coming to an abrupt halt, inside of the skull, chest or abdomen, would have an enormously devastating effect, and make this one of the most lethal bullets ever created.

          End of Part II

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            Part III

            The interesting thing about the M37 Magistri is that I believe it capable of penetrating the bone of a human skull, or the tissue overlying the chest or abdomen, and still remaining intact. Once inside any of these cavities, all it needs is a mechanism to make it disintegrate.

            The modern and lethal frangible bullets, mostly designed for hunting, have borrowed a feature from another type of bullet in order to make the frangible bullet break up while passing through soft tissue. That feature is the hollow point nose found on hollow point bullets where it is utilized to make the bullet rapidly open up into a “mushroom” shape in soft tissue.

            By making a hollow point nose on a frangible bullet, a cavity is created in the nose of the bullet that will fill with semi-liquid tissue as the bullet passes through brain, lung or abd. organ. As the velocity of the bullet results in this semi-liquid matter in the hollow point being under enormous hydraulic pressure, the pressure is then transmitted to the bullet section behind the hollow nose. This pressure is more than the loose construction of this bullet can take, and the bullet disintegrates into powder and jacket fragments, wreaking enormous damage to everything within a 3-4 inch circle around the bullet.

            Going back to the 1 mm opening in the nose of the M37 bullet, I believe it would have been quite simple to drill a hollow point hole 2-3 mm deep in the lead or maillechort nose pellet, just beneath this opening. This would transform the M37 into a crude but potentially lethal imitation of a modern frangible bullet.

          • Photon says:

            Can you prove that this round could penetrate a human skull?

          • JohnR says:

            Photon, once again, I cannot provide you with the results of a test that has not been conducted. Had I the means to do so, I would gladly satisfy your request. Mr. Prudhomme has every right to continue his SPECULATION.

      • “Can you prove that this round could penetrate a human skull?”
        ~Photon

        You have this particular knack for irrelevant questions and observations Photon. We were speaking to the throat wound, not the head wound.
        \\][//

        • Bob Prudhomme says:

          Actually, I believe all of JFK’s wounds were inflicted by frangible bullets, Willy, including the head wound.

          Remember the trail of hundreds of dust-like particles seen in the skull x-ray? Clear evidence of a frangible bullet, as solid lead bullets do not disintegrate into powder. Lead is malleable, not brittle.

          • “Actually, I believe all of JFK’s wounds were inflicted by frangible bullets, Willy, including the head wound.”~Bob Prudhomme

            I agree Bob, but I don’t they were high-powered rifle shots, not that Carcano type bullet you were describing. Probably a 30 cal.
            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            Do you have any evidence that the frangible Carcano round described could inflict any of the wounds on JFK? That is, do you have any evidence that the round could even penetrate human skin?
            Any examples of this round being fired into humans?

          • It was late and I was tired when I posted my last comment to Bob last night.

            I meant to say:
            I agree Bob, but I think they were high-powered rifle shots, not that Carcano type bullet you were describing. Probably a 30 cal.
            \\][//

  69. Eddy says:

    I have read the bulk of this long thread, and realise several simple things.

    1. Belief that the theory matches reality is essential to the lone gunman conclusion. Noone has ever plausibly suggested otherwise. No SBT no ‘Oswald acted alone’.

    2. Unusually in the case, it may be possible to conclusively debunk it (Most issues are too murky to convince everyone). This is because locations can be accurately mapped and the bullet trajectory can be estimated accurately enough to see where it hit Kennedy.
    A 3D model could then conclusively determine (at least for those without froth on their lips) whether the bullet could have missed Kennedy’s spine.

    3. This thread shows the enormous efforts that the defenders of the theory put into its defence. This is a very long thread made up of more supporters than detractors. Most people who dispute the theory have given up arguing against it, not because they believe it, but because it is a given to most interested parties that the theory doesn’t work.

    • Eddy,

      I understand your take and 3 points as far as they go.

      But I want to point out that the supporters of the Magic Bullet theory had absolutely ZERO proof or facts on their side:

      1. They have no legitimate chain of custody for said bullet, which leads to the certainty that CE 399 is a plant.

      2. There is no proof that a missile passed through Kennedy’s back and exited his throat. NONE whatsoever, just empty speculation.

      3. The trajectory proposed for the magic missile is impossible.

      4. The Zapruder film clearly shows that Kennedy was struck some 3 or more seconds before Connally was hit.
      ===================================================================
      No matter how many times these points are proven, the cacophony of spurious disharmony arises like the screech of harpies from the WC loyalists. As we can be almost assured that my present comment will again invoke.
      \\][//

  70. Now, throughout all of this commentary there has been no acknowledgement of CSI Sherry Fiester’s analysis of the trajectory of the bullet that struck Kennedy in the right temple.

    Her analysis begins with the ‘blood spatter’, the mist of blood that hangs in the air just forward of Kennedy’s face for less than 3 full frames.
    This is indicative of a bullet shot from the front as such blood spatter is ejected toward the bullet.

    Next she analysis the trajectory by establishing which direction Kennedy’s face was actually facing at the time of the hit. This involves the triangulation of Zapruder on the pedestal; taking account of his height above Kennedy, and the angle he was shooting the camera at.

    She is then able to produce a cone of trajectory for the bullets path.
    This is a three dimensional cone – not a flat triangulation. This gives the position of the shooter both as to his angle facing Kennedy, but also the elevation that the shot was fired from.

    A two dimensional representation of this trajectory cone is presented here:
    https://enemyofthetruth.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/dealey3a.jpg?w=700

    The sniper who shot Kennedy in the head was forward of the limousine, on a knoll near the south-west corner of Dealey Plaza on the other side of Commerce Street. He was using a high-powered rifle, firing frangible bullets. The same sniper hit Kennedy in the throat earlier as well.
    \\][//

    • Photon says:

      Totally contradicted by the forensic pathology evidence.
      Where is Fiester’s documentation that she is the expert she claims to be?

      • Where is Photon’s documentation that he is the expert he claims to be?
        He has no evidence for a word he writes here.
        \\][//

        • Photon says:

          I don’t recall ever claiming to be an expert. I DO question those who claim to be, particularly those with no expertise in fields that they expound on.
          I try to refer to documented experts to support my positions, not colloquial hobbyists with no real evidence that they know what they are talking about.
          Take Mr. Prudhomme and his frangible bullet nonsense. Why would anybody use a round designed to BREAK UP upon hitting a hard surface to try to kill anybody, particularly a high speed round at a distance? There are hundreds of thousands of examples from WW I and WW II that prove that the common FMJ could easily cause a fatal head wound exactly as seen in JFK, yet Mr. Prudhomme assumes that a round that he can’t even prove could penetrate something as thin as skin could be responsible for all of JFK’s wounds. Why not assume that JFK was hit with a BB? Mr. Prudhomme has yet to answer my query as to whether he has even been in the same room with a Carcano, let alone held or fired one.
          Or Dr. Thompson. Despite having a reputation as being an expert on this subject, I have demonstrated that he has made fundamental errors and unsubstantiated claims that he used to bolster his argument while clearly ignoring the physical and medical facts that he does not understand.

          • “Take Mr. Prudhomme and his frangible bullet nonsense. Why would anybody use a round designed to BREAK UP upon hitting a hard surface to try to kill anybody”~Photon

            You obviously don’t know a single thing about bullets and weapons. A frangible bullet does not “BREAK UP upon hitting a hard surface”, a hollow-point/frangible bullet penetrates through kinetic force just as any bullet would. The fragmentation INSIDE of the body is what is so damaging.

            Virtually every law enforcement agency use hollow point bullets. Why? Because they are lethal.
            \\][//

          • Charles says:

            I take no position on its use in this instance but to answer Photon’s question as to why use a frangible bullet, here are are two reasons.

            1. a bullet that breaks up is practically impossible to forensically match to a rifle barrel. Useful to obscure multiple shooters.

            2. less chance to ricochet or over- penetrate causing injury or death to bystanders like Mrs. Kennedy, Secret Service detail or motorcycle escorts. Professional assassins tend to take injury to innocents very seriously; a real nut job would have just machinegunned the whole car.

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            There is a formula someone devised (I can’t recall who it was or where I saw it) that demonstrates, mathematically, the relationship between how close to the truth one’s theory is by the level of negative response from the Warren Commission apologist camp. I believe, in the case of my theory regarding JFK being struck by frangible bullets, I have come very close to the truth, as my proposal of this theory has driven Photon almost to the point of distraction, ever since I first proposed it.

            Frangible bullets are quite common, and have been used both in hunting and by law enforcement agencies. Contrary to what Photon says, they are more than capable of penetrating a human skull, and leaving only a small entrance wound in doing so.

            http://www.drtammo.com

            I referenced the 6.5mm Carcano frangible range bullets (M37 Magistri) only to demonstrate that frangible bullets have been around for over 75 years. Whether or not the M37 was actually used is another matter. The scarcity of these antique bullets precludes the possibility of testing with them.

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            How do we know JFK was hit by a frangible bullet? Before answering that question, let me first remind everyone what a frangible bullet is. It is a bullet made from a powdered metal. That powder is either compressed, glued or sintered into the shape of a bullet, which is then either inserted into a bullet jacket or given a light coating of a compound such as gilders metal.

            Frangible bullets will pass through skull bone. Once inside the cranial cavity, their hollow point nose allows a build up of semi-liquid matter that exerts enough hydraulic pressure on the bullet to cause it to disintegrate and return to the powder it was made from. This disintegration causes extreme tissue damage, and the wound is inevitably fatal.

            JFK suffered three very unusual wounds, if we are to believe they were inflicted by full metal jacket bullets, and it is the evidence of these wounds that has lead me to my conclusions.
            1. X-rays of JFK’s skull showed trails of hundreds of dust-like particles that could only have come from the bullet(s) that inflicted his head wound. Disintegration to dust is clear evidence a frangible bullet entered JFK’s skull. As lead is a very malleable metal, and not at all brittle, one must wonder how a FMJ bullet could possibly have disintegrated into such small particles. In my experience hunting, I have seen soft point and hollow point bullets break up, but they always broke up into sizeable pieces. Of course, I have never hunted with FMJ bullets as they are universally banned from hunting. Why? Simple, they are designed not to expand or break up, and don’t do enough damage to be able to cleanly kill a game animal.
            2. The back wound. According to witnesses at the autopsy, Humes spent a few hours trying to determine where the wound that entered JFK’s back went. In all that time, why did Humes not look closely at the throat wound and see the obvious bullet damage to JFK’s trachea, and make the simple connection to the back wound? The answer is simple, and explains his frantic dissection of chest and abdominal organs in a search for a bullet.

            Continued……

          • John says:

            Paul, where is your proof that LHO was on the 6th floor of the TSBD at 12:30 pm on 11-22-63 and fired at JFK and Connally? Not heresy or innuendo, but legally admissible, incontrovertible proof?

          • John says:

            Paul, just so you know, spellcheck changed “hearsay” on me. I wouldn’t want to cause you to have to waste any time pointing that out to me. Thanks!

          • Photon says:

            “Frangible bullets will pass through skull bone”. Do you have any proof that the M37 round could do that- it is the only Carcano round that you have discussed. Why you bring up DRT ammo is beyond me-aside from claims of ballistic performance that seem to be exaggerated , the company and technology were not around in the 1960s. Why not claim a depleted uranium round could have been used-those were available earlier than DRT ammunition -although still years after the assassination. The frangible bullet certainly has not taken off with law enforcement.
            Do you have ANY documented evidence that ANY frangible bullet would penetrate a human skull? Not some colloquial report of hunting feral pigs on a shooter’s blog-but clear, concise evidence.
            Despite your claims even modern frangible ammunition is notorious for its unpredictability outside of a shooting range. It has been documented to rarely break up hitting clothing -while sometimes penetrating wallboard that it supposedly is stopped by.
            Who even now with the modern ammo would use it in an attempt to assassinate somebody?

  71. Zandalf says:

    Pheeewww! 52 years later……

    What strikes me most about anything to do with any of the bullets, was the display by Tom Wilson in episode five from the nine-part documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy. Wilson, using digital surface-photography equipment and techniques (Photonics) shows how the final shot that hit Kennedy came from just in front of him from the direction of the storm drain. Makes sense. JFK’s head was titled forward, and that final shot came from below him…. That, and the photo of the limo at Parkland with a bullet hole in the lower righthand corner of the windshield are slam dunks for me – besides the thousands of other details supporting the obvious conspiracy.

    Single Bullet Theory? Great name for a rock band….

  72. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Willy wrote:

    “You obviously don’t know a single thing about bullets and weapons. A frangible bullet does not “BREAK UP upon hitting a hard surface”, a hollow-point/frangible bullet penetrates through kinetic force just as any bullet would. The fragmentation INSIDE of the body is what is so damaging.”

    Well, Photon is partly correct here. Frangible bullets will disintegrate back into powder if they impact VERY hard surfaces, such as steel, stone or concrete. This feature, aside from their EXTREME letality, is the main reason they are being adopted by urban law enforcement agencies, as they will not ricochet off of extremely hard surfaces.

    The human skull, however, is just thin enough and soft enough for a frangible bullet to penetrate and only leave a small entrance wound. The same is true of hollow point and soft point bullets. Once inside the skull, the disintegration of the frangible bullet back into powder, and its subsequent immediate halt, delivers the full energy of the bullet to surrounding tissue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more