Comment of the week

Photon – March 29

….What are you trying to imply-that Perry’s Nov 22 press conference is the gold standard as to the true nature of JFK’s wounds?



http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/perry_ml.htm
From Perry’s Warren testimony:”I pointed out that both Dr. Clark and Ihad no way of knowing from whence the bullet came.”
Further: ” I expressed it as a matter of SPECULATION that this was conceivable.”
More than once in his Warren interview did Perry refer exactly to the speculation that I mentioned.
What are you trying to imply-that Perry’s Nov 22 press conference is the gold standard as to the true nature of JFK’s wounds?

81 comments

  1. ed connor says:

    It was somewhere outside Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs and alcohol began to take hold.
    I was driving; I was their attorney, even though I had been disbarred years earlier. Dr. Photon sat behind me, with Dr. McAdams by his side. They had been taking tuenols and Grand Mariner all day. McAdams had lost his license long ago, but was able to write a scrip that the pharmacy accepted. We drove on.
    Across the state line we were stopped by the Nevada State Police.
    Photon claimed he could divert them with what he called a “Jedi mind trick”, or “Photon’s Paradox.” He asked them how many witnesses heard shots from the knoll. They were perplexed, and let us go.
    Photon had acquired a smattering of medical knowledge during a part time job as a mortician’s assistant at Gawlers. He used them as a reference, but forgot that they were on Pennsylvania Avenue in ’63, and had not yet moved up to Wisconsin.
    He found a job as a school nurse at Langley Elementary, but was “let go” after some bad craziness at the petting zoo. I had to protect him from the angry parents as his attorney.
    I have retired, but Doc Photon and Doc McAdams continue to tour around the country, now on Vicodin and Grand Mariner, getting by with lectures on Zapruder’s mistresses and Myers’ cartoons.
    I no longer represent these clients. I understand they have hired new counsel in Washington.

    • “Coming soon to a theatre near …?’

      If Stephen King can get his innocuous version on to the screen why can’t ‘ed connor’?

      Is Oliver Stone still making movies?

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        I wish. Can we publicly beg him? His movie JFK changed history by the creation of the ARRB. An updated version based on the findings since then including the ARRB would be devastating to the official record..
        A new younger Oswald actor might resonate with a younger audience.
        If he said I was out front with Shelly (when the shot’s were fired) it might interest a new audience of Fact seekers.

        • Tom S. says:

          I wish. Can we publicly beg him?….

          Ronnie, can I publicly beg you to attempt to understand the scripting below, from JFK, the movie,
          indicates one of two things? Either Garrison conned the writers of the script, Zachary Sklar and Oliver Stone, or the three of them conned and distracted most Americans over the age of nine, in
          the early 1990’s. Your fan like (gushing) praise indicates you don’t get it, or don’t care…
          Jim and Liz Garrsion had to know something was terribly amiss and either they stayed silent, or
          they stayed silent and people they told stayed silent, too.

          https://jfkfacts.org/assassination/comment-of-the-week-17/#comment-858945
          02/21/16 4:44 pm
          http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/JFK.html
          JFK

          By Oliver Stone & Zachary Sklar

          ……LIZ:
          (she explodes)
          I don’t want to see, goddammit! I’m
          tired. I’ve had enough! They say
          you don’t have anything anyway!
          Everybody in town’s talking. You’re
          ruining this man Shaw’s life! You’re
          attacking him because he’s homosexual!
          Going ahead with this stupid “trial”!
          Did you ever once stop and consider
          what he’s going through?

          JIM
          (astounded)
          That’s not why I’m attacking him!
          You don’t believe me – all this time
          you never believed me…

          https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Unredacted_-_Episode_1_-_Transcript.html
          Unredacted Episode 1: Transcript of Interview with Joan Mellen
          Joan Mellen is the author of A Farewell to Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK’s Assassination, and the Case That Should Have Changed History. This interview was conducted on 22 Feb 2006. Tyler Weaver provided the introduction, and the interview was conducted by Rex Bradford.
          …….
          REX: I – I think –

          JOAN: – when Baldwin was present, he was a CIA asset, his brother worked for the International Trade Mart and Clay Shaw, David Baldwin, and these, these are CIA people….


          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Tom, I think the Movie (which is what it is) JFK helped progress the investigation into his Slaughter on Elm Street.
            A newer more accurate and detailed version would be useful. MSO.

    • Photon says:

      Actually Gawler’s moved to Wisconsin Ave. in 1962-it was a couple of miles directly south of Bethesda Naval Hospital.
      Ed, did you ever go to O’Donnell’s? Best restaraunt near the hospital-the sign outside on Wisconsin said ” Tang o’ the Sea”- about 20 blocks north of Gawler’s .
      A few blocks south of Gawler’s used to be Armand’s deep dish pizzeria -although Geppetto’s in G’town was better. Of course, those were the days when Rive Gauche on M Street set the standard for fine dining in the District-although you really couldn’t beat Harvey’s downtown -as I recall the popovers were good. JFK loved Harvey’s . Further down Wisconsin near Tunlaw Old Europe was a destination restaraunt-actually I believe that it was about the only decent restaurant north of Martin’s along that aspect of Wisconsin. In 1960 about a quarter mile north was Dick Nixon’s campaign headquarters-in an old apartment building across from the Washington Cathedral at Mass Ave. called Alban Towers. The Zebra Room was a couple of blocks north of that.
      But no Joshua Trees like you see on the highway near Barstow.

      • Photon says:

        And no Tom S I don’t have any links- most of the places that I named are long gone.

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          Shredded by Fawn??? In the 80’s with Ollie North feeding her. What!!! before personal Computers???

          • Photon says:

            A more handsome lass you will not find. But all business at work. Bud McFarland didn’t have as good a secretary-maybe that contributed to his breakdown.

          • Oh by gosh by golly it’s time for Tow Missiles and Ollie…Adnan Khashoggi Follies, the war dogs get their jollies…

            “He picked a face from the ancient gallery and walked on down to Hall…”
            \\][//

      • “….What are you trying to imply-that Perry’s Nov 22 press conference is the gold standard as to the true nature of JFK’s wounds?”~Photon

        Yes, as pertains to the throat wound, Dr Perry’s comments at the Nov 22 press conference are the gold standard.
        Best witness, freshest memory.
        \\][//

      • ed connor says:

        Unfortunately, Photon, I remember most of those old places.
        You forgot Paul Young’s Restaurant, across from the Mayflower Hotel, where Sinatra threw a “rehearsal dinner” for JFK on 1/19/61 that lasted all night.
        Paul’s brother, David Young, owned a tobacco shop on Farragut Square. He supplied JFK with many boxes of Havana cigars on the night before he announced the Cuban embargo (still in place, btw). David was no dummy; he kept the rest of the pre-embargo cigars locked up. I used to buy them from him, at a premium. Ironically, David died just about the same time as he ran out of 1959 Havanas.
        I also recall taking a heavy date to Rive Gauche in the early 70’s. The menu was in French, which I don’t speak. I took a chance and ordered something I didn’t recognize. It was frogs’ legs. I didn’t care for them, but in the men’s room, they had a framed cartoon of a group of frogs marching around on crutches. Very funny.

        • Hey Ed,

          There is a Rive Gauche in ‘The Valley of the Dolls’ on Ventura Blvd in Sherman Oaks. Marvelous grilled filet mignon with Béarnaise sauce, asparagus sprouts… yum!

          A young starlet named Teri Paul took me there for my birthday (early 80s) — she ended up marrying a famous stunt driver/millionaire and moving to Texas…

          I took many a “hot date” there in “The Day” as they say.

          Hey! Let’s eat!!!
          \\][//

          • Tom S. says:

            Uhhh….this discussion can be an opportunity…. to do what?
            I am always curious about what prompts commenters who ardently manifest no (anti ?) curiousity, to be
            drawn here at all, even to read, let alone to comment.

            Even Mr. Von Pein indicates curiousity of a reasonable person.:

            http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012_03_01_archive.html
            The conference, however, must have been recorded by some radio and/or television outlets (or at least by somebody who had equipment available at Parkland Hospital for recording audio), because the detailed, word-for-word transcript that is copied below could not possibly exist otherwise. (Unless there just happened to be a stenographer on hand at Parkland at the precise moment when the news conference began at 2:16. And how likely is that?)

            http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Feinman/Between_the_signal/Chapter_one.html
            …..Of course, Perry’s observation conflicted with the official theory of the assassination, that President Kennedy was shot only from the rear as his limousine passed the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository Building in which the lone assassin lurked. Perry’s comments therefore immediately led to the question that attorney Mark Lane and others have been asking for nearly thirty years: How could accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald have shot the President in the throat from behind?
            The Warren Commission labored to cast doubt that the reporters at the press conference had quoted Perry accurately, an effort in which Perry himself acquiesced. For years after the assassination independent researchers searched in vain for proof of his original statement. Lane, in particular, was eager to include film footage of the Parkland news conference in his documentary on the Warren Report. In his book of the same title, Rush to Judgment, Lane reported that the three major networks and local Dallas stations no longer had television and radio tapes of the briefing. (Lane, Mark. Rush to Judgment. Dell Publishing Co., New York: 1975, p. 53) Elaborating on that claim in an interview with Playboy Magazine, Lane said that the local Dallas stations were visited after the assassination by FBI and Secret Service agents and asked to surrender all of their tapes. (Playboy, February 1967, p. 50).
            Then, on June 26, 1967, in the second of four nightly CBS News programs on the Warren Report, anchorman Walter Cronkite referred to “the transcript of that news conference” without giving his audience any additional identification or indication of its source. Since that night, there has been no further word from CBS about the document.
            The transcript of the Parkland Hospital news conference to which CBS referred was not of the network’s own making: it was a non-classified government document unseen by the Warren Commission.
            Arlen Specter, the Warren Commission staff lawyer who developed the medical evidence in the assassination, made a feeble and somewhat transparent attempt to obtain for that investigation a recording or transcript of the statements made by Dr. Perry on November 22, 1963. Although Specter told the Commission that, “[W]e have been trying diligently to get the tape records of the television interview, and we were unsuccessful,” (3H 378) there is no evidence that the Commission considered using its subpoena power at any time. Instead of inquiring on its own, the panel asked the Secret Service to undertake a search. The performance of the Secret Service was equally lackluster, for a reason I shall presently discuss. On March 25, 1964, Secret Service Director James J. Rowley wrote the Commission that no videotape recording or transcript could be found at the television networks or the Dallas stations. (CD 678)
            Specter understandably did not press the issue. Perry’s statement about an entrance wound in President Kennedy’s throat was directly at odds with the official report issued by three military pathologists….

            http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=97695&relPageId=11&search=transcript_and%20parkland
            CBS News Inquiry: The Warren Report, Part II
            06/26/1967
            Radio TV Reports, Inc.:

          • “Uhhh….this discussion can be an opportunity…. to do what?”~Tom

            I know what you mean Tom…I almost didn’t but I did when I read the name of that restaurant. Silly of us all, aye?

            So I will get to the point I was trying to pull out of Photon, about what a ‘fixed body landmark’ in human anatomy is.

            The point is this:

            The range of motion from the acromion to the mastoid process when leaning the head sideways and lifting the shoulder can shorten the distance by as much as 70 %. These are not “fixed anatomical landmarks” by any stretch of the term.
            However the vertebrae are fixed anatomical landmarks.
            . . .
            So, WHY would anyone use the measurement from the acromion to the mastoid process to determine the placement of a wound to the back? Even a first year med student would know better, even laymen know better!

            It is preposterous — unless the purpose is to obfuscate. And that is precisely what Humes was up to, playing games with the placement of the wound in JFK’s back.
            That is why he started sweating blood when Gunn asked him about Burkley’s death certificate locating that wound at T-3.

            To read that testimony go to this link, the last part is the dialog I refer to:

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

            \\][//

          • Jean Davison says:

            The press conference at Parkland was organized by White House staff members. This photo (with David Lifton’s caption) shows WH staffer Wayne Hawks with Drs. Kemp Clark and Perry. The man seated on the left is the White House stenographer.

            http://www.orwelltoday.com/jfkdocpressconf.jpg

            Lifton later learned that CBS has gotten the transcript from the White House in 1967 — Lifton got a copy from the LBJ Library. (Chapter 3, Best Evidence)

            According to Gary Mack, there were no recordings of the press conference. I found this quote:

            “The Kilduff announcement was made at 1:30 but it lasted only a few minutes.
            Cameras and microphones were present. Then, as I explained, the broadcast
            media left and were gone by 2:16 when Perry and Clark spoke.”

            http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=11339&page=4

            He also gave a detailed explanation that begins:

            “While the absence of any recordings of the 2:18pm Perry-Clark press
            conference is disappointing, there is information that explains why.
            First, as David [Lifton] recalled, I learned there were NO live cameras in that
            room. Here’s why:”

            https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topicsearchin/alt.assassination.jfk/gary$20AND$20mack$20AND$20parkland$20AND$20press$20AND$20conference$20AND$20camera/alt.assassination.jfk/bRJ690ZcAUg

          • Tom S. says:

            According to Gary Mack, there were no recordings of the press conference. I found this quote:

            “The Kilduff announcement was made at 1:30 but it lasted only a few minutes.
            Cameras and microphones were present. Then, as I explained, the broadcast
            media left and were gone by 2:16 when Perry and Clark spoke.”

            Wow, Jean! (The media left BEFORE… and Rowley didn’t notice his own copy of
            the Perry / Kemp press conference transcript, and “misreported” to Rankin, in writing, that no
            evidence of the press conference could be located, but by some unknown process, Cronkite was able
            to quote from the press conference transcript in 1967, and Gary Mack said….)

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOMX3g7E1dg
            November 22, 1963 – Silent Footage of the Malcolm Perry and Kemp Clark press conference at Parkland

            …And Jean, am I to assume the devices visible in this photo are alien artifacts resembling devices devoted to documenting what is presented…..or is the caption description in error?
            http://www.chron.com/about/slideshow/From-the-archive-The-day-in-Dallas-74425/photo-5481936.php

            Assistant White House Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, Texas, Nov. 22, 1963

            …and- http://www.chron.com/about/slideshow/From-the-archive-The-day-in-Dallas-74425/photo-5481942.php
            Is the link above of an image showing Dr. Perry on the left,
            head bowed, and dare I say it, a microphone displayed in the foreground?

            Is that “rain” running down the back of my neck?

          • Tom S. says:

            http://www.chron.com/about/slideshow/From-the-archive-The-day-in-Dallas-74425/photo-5481941.php
            Image 17 of 44

            Dr. Malcolm Perry, left, and Dr. Kemp Clark, chief neurosurgeon at Parkland Hospital, right, at a news conference at the hospital in Dallas, Texas, Nov. 22, 1963. Perry was the first doctor to attend to President John F. Kennedy upon his arrival at the hospital

            (Assure me I am only observing a p.a. system mircrophone in this photo, so I can return to my
            couch and think nothing further of it. Gary Mack said there was nothing to our suspicions, the
            press removed all recording devices, and the stenographer and his machine visible in the image
            at this link.:
            http://www.chron.com/about/slideshow/From-the-archive-The-day-in-Dallas-74425/photo-5481936.php
            )

            ‘Splain it all away, Jean. I don’t like the way I’m feelin’ about this……

          • “According to Gary Mack…”~Jean Davison

            I read Gary Mack’s entire tale Jean. He wasn’t at the Parkland press conference, he has no valid opinion one way or the other.

            He is not an original source, just another coincidence theorist he. In fact, one with a vengeance, having once been a “conspiracy theorist” himself. A “reformed’ believer is even more of a believer in his reformation.
            Just like holy rollers who have seen the error of their ways.

            You know personally what I mean. Don’t you Jean?
            \\][//

          • By the way Jean, Photon,

            Where did Kilduff point to on his own head to show where the bullet hit Kennedy?

            Of you have forgotten, it was to his right temple:

            https://i1.wp.com/jfkmurdersolved.com/images/kilduff-1.jpg

            \\][//

          • Jean Davison says:

            “Gary Mack said there was nothing to our suspicions, the press removed all recording devices, and the stenographer and his machine visible in the image
            at this link.”

            Take a look at this one:

            https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3753/10999406294_1343dfe606_b.jpg

            Do you see any recording devices? Are the stenographer and his machine still there? I guess Gary was right about that, wasn’t he?

          • “Do you see any recording devices? Are the stenographer and his machine still there? I guess Gary was right about that, wasn’t he?” Jean Davison

            Not necessarily Jean. What are the two men in long sleeve shirts at the end of the table doing?
            The man with his back to us (bald spot) seems to be handling the front end of a large object; perhaps a TV video camera. The man dressed the same way to his front and right seems to be assisting him.
            Plus you do not have a full view of the entire room.

            Where do the exact quotes come from?

            Again Jean, are you denying that Dr Perry uttered the words in the transcript? That he did not say that the wound to the neck was an entry wound?
            \\][//

        • Photon says:

          Perhaps you remember the Duke Zeibert-Mel Krupin wars -frankly I wasn’t impressed with either place-except the pickles.
          Rive Gauche was out of my league. La Colline was more reasonable for French fare, but the real attraction in that area was the Dubliner.
          Au Pied De Cochon/ Aux Fruits de Mer up Wisconsin were also more reasonably priced-and open late. There also was a place called La Nicoise in G’town with waiters on roller skates.Food was not as good as the skaters. The chef eventually started his own restaurant in Fredericksburg.
          By the late 70s Vietnam Georgetown was open a couple of blocks from Rive Gauche.

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      Where do they get this Vicodin, My Dr. won’t prescribe it anymore. It helps me believe maybe I’m wrong, Jack Ruby had no Mob connections and the Warren Omission was thorough and not deceived, Not. Maybe in the old days you mention Dr.s Photon and McAdam’s had access to the medicine cabinet themselves.
      Or were they victims of MKULTRA.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

      Was that acid any good?

      How was that acid Professors?

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        BTW, for any real Doctors or Legislators, the hydrocodone does help the pain in my hip joint. I’ve never taken it on a daily basis and will never unless I’m dying.

        • Photon says:

          Considering how much you post I’m surprised that you don’t have carpal tunnel syndrome , let alone hip pain.If it is so bad that you need narcotics you should get a total hip replacement.

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            How does the possibility of getting carpal tunnel syndrome relate to hip pain? I’m dreading the hip replacement if ever needed and it’s intermittent for now. But my fingers are fine, are you having any problems?
            Yes the changing of Dr. Perry’s statement about an entrance wound is a “Gold Standard” in the assassination. There are others.
            His initial impression, some say the most reliable, of an entrance wound in the throat is unimpeachable. Even by himself.
            He was a Professionally Trained Surgeon with years of emergency room trauma experience with gunshots on an often daily basis, sometimes multiples in the same day. Dallas was and still is one of the most violent cities in the US. Parkland was “the” county hospital where virtually all gunshot victims were taken at the time.
            The point is, Dr. Perry knew what he saw as soon as he saw it. He said so Three times to the press that afternoon.
            He didn’t change his mind until Secret Service Agent Elmer Moore admittedly “leaned on him pretty hard”.
            This last part cements this issue as a Gold Standard.
            Dr. Perry was intimidated. By a representative of Our Government.
            He was not the only witness intimidated.
            This Fact, that his Warren Commission testimony and later statements were influenced away from impartiality and objectivity by the Secret Service is an indictment of them.
            He never said he was mistaken.
            After pressure from the Secret Service he hemmed and he hawed but he never did.

      • Jordan says:

        FWIW, Ruby went to Cuba to bail out a couple of Mob guys…Lucien Rivard for one of many…

        He wasn’t just another ‘lone nut’.

  2. Ronnie Wayne says:

    Perry is evasive and defensive in this interview. He didn’t really think about whether it was a entrance or exit wound? He did on 11/22/63. Enough so he said what 3 times it was an entrance wound at a press conference for all the word to hear (theoretically).
    Of course this interview was after Moore “leaned on him pretty hard”, along with his employer most likely.

    • Gary Aguilar says:

      On 11-22-63, at 3:16 PM CST, barely two hours after JFK was pronounced dead, Perry appeared with Kemp Clark, MD, the professor of neurosurgery who had pronounced JFK dead.

      A newsman asked Perry: “Where was the entrance wound?”

      Perry: “There was an entrance wound in the neck…”

      Question: Which way was the bullet coming on the neck wound? At him?”

      Perry: “It appeared to be coming at him.”…

      Question: “Doctor, describe the entrance wound. You think from the front in the throat?”

      Perry: “The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat; yes, that is correct. The exit wound, I don’t know. It could have been the head or there could have been a second wound of the head. There was not time to determine this at the particular instant.”[66]

      On 11/22/63 UPI reported that Perry had said, “There was an entrance wound below the Adam’s apple.”[67] The New York Times reported, “… Dr. Malcolm Perry … [said] Mr. Kennedy was hit by a bullet in the throat, just below the Adam’s apple … This wound had the appearance of a bullet’s entry … .”[68] On 11/23/63, the Dallas Morning News reported, “The front neck hole was described as an entrance wound,” and it quoted Perry to say, “It did however appear to be the entrance wound at the front of the throat.” These press accounts, and others like them, accurately reflect the fact that at no time during the press conference did Perry allow for any other possibility than that the throat wound was an entrance wound.

      How did the Warren Report describe Perry’s press conference statements? It reported, “Dr. Perry… stated to the press that a variety of possibilities could account for the President’s wounds.”[69] (Emphasis added) Whereas numerous press reports had accurately described Perry’s belief the wound was one of entrance, the Warren Report cited only the New York Herald Tribune’s vague and less accurate version. Ironically, Perry wasn’t easily dislodged from his original position.

      The day after the murder Boston Globe medical reporter, Herbert Black, asked Perry how the throat wound could have been an entrance wound if the gunman was behind the President. Perry answered, “It may have been that the President was looking sideways with his head thrown back when the bullet or bullets struck him.”[70] [It is of interest that, after discussing what was visible in the Zapruder film, Life Magazine offered this same explanation on December 18th for JFK’s throat wound – that JFK had turned toward the sniper’s nest just before being shot.[71] The Zapruder film, however, discloses no such turn. Neither the Warren Commission, nor Life Magazine, nor the government, ever corrected Life’s error. This mischaracterization became but one of many exhibits cited by skeptics in criticizing the media’s handling of JFK murder.[72] [73]]

      Citations available here: http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_1b.htm
      See Part II, next

      • Gary Aguilar says:

        Part II:

        The Warren Commission’s Arlen Specter was concerned about published reports from Perry’s press conference. Presuming Oswald’s guilt, Specter had proposed a theory that would defend that assumption, the so-called “Single Bullet Theory.” This theory explained how it was that both JFK and Connally could be seen in the Zapruder film to have been wounded in too short a time for Oswald to have fired twice. The answer? Lucky Oswald hit both with one shot, the single bullet causing all seven of the nonfatal wounds sustained by both victims.

        In fact, although Specter himself has admitted that his supervisor, Commission counsel Norman Redlich, had banned pretestimony interviews,[74] Specter nevertheless interviewed Perry before he testified to the Warren Commission. He indicated that he would obtain recordings of Perry’s public comments for Perry to review “prior to his appearance, before deposition or before the Commission,” which, Specter acknowledged, he had been unable to do.[75] Under oath, Perry repeatedly answered apologetically, and inaccurately, about how the press had misreported his explanation of JFK’s throat wound. After the Commission suggested Perry be furnished the suspect press reports, so that Perry could correct the errors,[76] Specter asked Perry for the second time during his appearance for clarification.

        “Was it (the throat wound) ragged or pushed out in any manner?” Perry astutely replied, “the edges were neither cleancut, that is punched out, nor were they very ragged … I did not examine it very closely.” [77] (emphasis added) No Commissioner was impolite enough to ask Perry why he would have made an incision on a President’s bleeding throat without taking a careful look at it. Nor did they remind the doctor that only a few minutes earlier, before Specter had made his preferences so plain, Perry had admitted that the throat wound’s “edges were neither ragged nor were they punched out, but rather clean.”[78] The Commission apparently either never examined the verbatim transcript of Perry’s press conference, or it neglected to discuss what Perry actually said, in either case settling instead for Perry’s Specter-abetted finger pointing. The libel against the press thus went unchallenged.

        This is just one of the many ways the Warren Commission forced evidence to fit the preferred outcome. Footnotes available here: http://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_1b.htm

  3. Dr. Perry is simply flat out lying here. Of course he thought about whether it was an entry or exit wound. As Ronnie already points out, Perry described it as an entry wound three times at the press conference on 11/22/1963.

    And yes his body language clearly shows he is stressed out.

    Ed Connor’s comment although humorous is quite perceptive. Lol
    \\][//

  4. In case Photon conveniently misses this on the McClelland thread, I am reposting this here:

    I would appreciate “doctor” Photon explaining to the forum what a ‘fixed body landmark’ in human anatomy is.

    For instance, is the measurement from the tip of the fingers to the wrist a fixed body landmark?

    Is the measurement from the left to right temple a fixed body landmark?

    Is the measurement from the elbow to the wrist a fixed body landmark?
    . . .
    Clue: Two of the measurements inquired of are in fact fixed body landmarks and one is not.
    \\][//

    • Photon,

      This issue I speak to above (March 29, 2016 at 9:50 pm) is elementary.
      Can you not make an answer here?
      \\][//

    • The answer to the question above is obvious:

      The measurement from the tip of the fingers to the wrist is NOT a fixed anatomical landmark.

      Just like the measurement from the acromion to the mastoid process is NOT a fixed anatomical landmark.
      \\][//

  5. Avinash says:

    Perry was likely pressured by the authorities into changing his original statement on the wound.

    • Photon says:

      Wouldn’t it be more likely that Perry’s opinion was altered by finding out that JFK had a wound in the back that nobody in Parkland was aware of?
      What was McClelland’s excuse for changing his wound interpretation from Nov. 22, 1963?

      • “Wouldn’t it be more likely that Perry’s opinion was altered by finding out that JFK had a wound in the back that nobody in Parkland was aware of?”~Photon

        Why would that be more likely Photon? That is what all of you involved in the cover-up would assert, but two entrance wounds do not add up as these wounds necessarily being connected to each other. This began as supposition and has never been proven from that time forward.

        We have gone over all of these points time and again. The “autopsy” was obviously burlesque theater prosecuted by clowns who faked their way through it. They were being manipulated by the actual perpetrators of the crime – the military industrial complex.

        Anyone who buys the so-called “autopsy” or the Warren Report at this late stage is either a dupe or agenteur of propaganda.
        \\][//

      • “This was contradicted by the two FBI agents who attended the autopsy. James Sibert and Francis O’Neill informed the pathologists during the latter stages of the autopsy that a bullet had been retrieved from Parkland Hospital. In their report and in a later memorandum, the **agents maintained that the pathologists were satisfied that this bullet had fallen out of the president’s back during emergency cardiac massage.** The Sibert and O’Neill Report was not made public until after Dr Finck had testified in New Orleans.”
        http://22november1963.org.uk/pierre-finck-jfk-back-throat-wounds

        The Sibert and O’Neill Report:
        ARRB MD 149 – FBI Teletype To: Director and SAC, Dallas From: SAC, Baltimore (dated November 23, 1963) Summarizing Basic Autopsy Conclusions As Relayed by Two BUAGENTS Who Witnessed Autopsy
        http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=680

        \\][//

        • Ronnie Wayne says:

          In neither thread where this subject is discussed, this one or the source of the comment of the week, have Perry’s actual statements on 11/22/63 been seen.

          http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145280#relPageId=9&tab=page

          I found the above courtesy of this link about his obituary.

          http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15105

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            In the second link, post 10, http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15105&p=175791 by Bernice Moore she provides info from a 1999 article by Michael Griffith. In it he relates X Ray Technician Gerold Custer’s statement to the ARRB that he took an x ray of JFK’s throat that showed bullet fragments in it. I’ve never read that. This would support Dr. Perry’s initial impression of a frontal throat shot.
            Any one else have any info?

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            I don’t remember this in “The Eye of History”. Was I mistaken?

          • Thanks for that Education Forum link Ronnie,

            Here is the source material for Custer:

            ARRB deposition of Jerrol Custer, October 28, 1997
            http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Custer_10-28-97.pdf

            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            Dr Wayne, please explain why fragments in JFK’s throat would support a frontal shot. Also, when in the history of forensic medicine has an x-ray tech’s interpretation of a radiograph carried any weight?

          • “when in the history of forensic medicine has an x-ray tech’s interpretation of a radiograph carried any weight?”~Photon

            When in the history of forensic medicine has a general pathologist’s interpretation of gunshot wounds carried any weight?
            \\][//

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            Fragments in the neck would be a big problem for the Magical, Single Pristine bullet would they not. It was supposed to have gone through his back and out his throat without touching bone. If IT did leave fragments in the throat how was it pristine? No I don’t have a source off the top of my head but I’ve read that after traversing Connally’s rib then shattering his wrist more lead was left in his leg than is missing from the bullet. Just as important to me is where the hell is this X-ray if the man is positive he took it?

          • Photon says:

            ” No, I don’t have a source off the top of my head…”
            And yet you claimed that neck fragments would be evidence for a shot from the front. ” I’ve read that … more lead was left in his leg than was missing from the bullet.” Read where? Written by whom?
            If all you read is from a Conspiracy viewpoint you will pick up a lot of “facts” that happen to be untrue-ie. ” factoids”. Many were generated by Conspiracy authors in an attempt to sell books-Tink Thompson’s false claims about the location of the Harper fragment and Bobby Hargis being forcibly hit by JFK ‘s brain matter perhaps the most egregious – “facts” that formed the basis for ” Six Seconds in Dallas” but which I have shown on this blog to have been untrue. Fortunately for him nobody actually challenged those claims during a lucrative career as a JFK assassination commentator. As virtually everybody with interest in the JFK assassination willing to part with money to buy books proposing a Conspiracy viewpoint already have a Conspiracy viewpoint the authors of those books seem immune from actual fact checking. So balony like the Thompson Bobby Hargis claim, the Carlos Hathcock claim, the Beverly Oliver claims( take your pick), the Adele Edisen claim, the Prouty claims,the Cheryl McKinnon story,etc. gets established as Conspiracy truth-despite glaring errors that in many cases are easy to see-but only if you are willing to look. LNers don’t need to refer to false witnesses, false stories or pseudoexperts. Recently this site has been inundated with claims about the unchallenged accuracy of initial Emergency Room observations in regards to medical fact, even to the point of Mr. Whitten claiming that the principal physician’s initial speculation of the neck wound being an entrance wound based on a perhaps 90 second evaluation without any other physical examination was the “gold standard” for wound interpretation and had to be correct, no matter what that physician later said-after he became aware of facts that he did not have during an emergency resusitative effort on the most important patient he ever attended to. That is simply not logical. If it was ER physicians would never need malpractice insurance, instead of having to pay some of the highest premiums among medical specialists.

          • “…even to the point of Mr. Whitten claiming that the principal physician’s initial speculation of the neck wound being an entrance wound based on a perhaps 90 second evaluation without any other physical examination was the “gold standard” for wound interpretation…”
            ~Photon

            Indeed I did, Dr Perry got the best view of the bullet wound before he performed a simple Tracheotomy. As has been discussed here at great length Dr Perry was leaned on by Agent Moore of the Secret Service to change his first account at the Parkland press conference on 11/22/63.

            “DR” Photon’s argumentum verbosium “summation” here, excludes and ignores much of what has been discussed in this thread. His commentary grossly re-bundles information that had been taken apart carefully and displayed with precision.

            As “Dr” Photon has presented this wholesale, I reject it wholesale.
            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            Willy, exactly where is the evidence that Moore “leaned” on Perry aside from a claim by a conspriracy buff with no independent confirmation who essentially disappeared after the HSCA hearings? Moore interviewed Perry -isn’t that what investigators are supposed to do?
            You folks seem totally committed to claiming that Perry was an infallible observer who would always be correct in stating whether a bullet wound was an entrance wound or an exit wound-despite his own admission that he did NOT closely examine the wound. The reason for moving to the trach had nothing to do with the appearance of the wound and everything to do with what was noted to be inadequate ventilation of JFK and blood seen through the laryngoscope during intubation. There was no indication to do a close examination of the throat wound ; instead there was an indication to move rapidly to the trach to establish effective respiration-simple resusitative practice.
            At that time some doctors would carry a small device which looked like a pocket knife but was actually a small surgical blade with a short metal tube . The purpose was to do a cricothyrotomy in the field on a patient who needed an effective airway.That just shows you how frequent docs were willing to go to emergency tracheotomy without doing a close examination.
            Perry barely participated in the second news conference he had with Clark, weeks before Moore ever spoke with him. Who leaned on him then? Or do you find that his belief that he was misquoted in the first conference and misinterpreted made him reluctant to make further comments was nothing but a lie? Clark apparently thought that he was sincere-or did somebody lean on Clark? Why don’t you review Carrico’s interview from 1995 that was broadcast on C-SPAN.He was the first doc to treat JFK and also saw the throat wound.Who leaned on him?
            The fact that Perry went to an incision larger than usual proves that Perry was more interested in securing an airway AND evaluating the potential damage to the trachea and possible sources for the blood seen during intubation. Let me ask you this Dr. Willy-why would he have done that if he was convinced that the throat wound was a simple wound of entrance?

          • Photon,

            Dr Perry’s first impression was clearly that the throat wound was one of entrance. He was fresh from working on that wound. Best witness, freshest testimony. As simple as that.

            A small clean wound is indicative of a wound of entry.

            Further, as has been gone over here ad infinitum, there was never any proof that the back wound and the throat wound were connected or caused by the same bullet.

            The only thing clear is that both were wounds of entrance as per their appearance.

            And “Dr” Photon refuses to admit that the back wound is proven beyond reasonable doubt to be located at T-3 in the back — NOT in the back of the neck as asserted by Specter.

            D”r” Photon’s repeated attempts at relitigation of these points will get him no further that it has before.
            \\][//

          • Michael Baden, Head of the Medical Panel, appeared to contradict the conclusion of an entrance at C-7 when he said the location of the wound corresponded to the location of holes in the clothing:
            “In the jacket and the underlying shirt there is a perforation of the fabric that corresponds directly with the location of the perforation of the skin of the right upper back that, the panel concluded, was an entrance gunshot perforation that entered the back of the President. This is correspondingly seen in the shirt underneath.” [1 HSCA 196]

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

            \\][//

          • One more point Photon,

            A question; Why would a knowledgeable pathologist measure the position of a wound from mobile anatomical landmarks?

            It is senseless when there are fixed anatomical landmarks nearby. As has been pointed out here, Humes chose to measure the position of JFK’s back wound from the Mastoid Process to the Acromion – a distance that can very 70% depending on the relative positions of the head and shoulder; thus it is a rather preposterous choice for such a measurement.

            Measuring from the vertebrae in the back to the wound would be more exacting.
            \\][//

          • Testimony of Michael Baden, Head of the Medical Panel

            Mr. KLEIN: Whose clothing is that and where did it come from?

            Dr. BADEN: This is the clothing worn by President Kennedy at the time of the assassination and does show various perforations in the fabric that were of importance for the medical panel to evaluate. Present on the mannequin is the jacket and shirt and tie. The jacket and the clothing had been torn at Parkland Hospital by the examining physicians in the course of providing emergency care to the President .

            Mr. KLEIN: And with respect to the wounds to the President’s back, what did the panel learn from that clothing?

            Dr. BADEN: In the jacket and the underlying shirt there is a perforation of the fabric that corresponds directly with the location of the perforation of the skin of the right upper back that, the panel concluded, was an entrance gunshot perforation that entered the back of the President.
            This is correspondingly seen in the shirt beneath.
            [1 HSCA 196: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/pdf/HSCA_Vol1_0907_5_Baden.pdf%5D

            The hole in the jacket was 5.5 inches below the upper margin of the jacket collar, and the hole in the shirt, 5 3/4 below the upper margin of the shirt collar [7 HSCA 83] about where witnesses said the back wound was – well below the base of the neck.

            https://i0.wp.com/www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/HWNAU/SRexhibit59.jpg

            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            You didn’t answer the question, Dr. Whitten:
            If Perry was so convinced that the neck wound was a wound of entrance, WHY DID HE MAKE A LARGE INCISION-and explore it?
            It wasn’t a standard tracheostomy incision,was it? Fooling around in the neck is not a simple procedure; there are a lot of structures that can be damaged. Many surgeons don’t even use electro cautery in the neck because of that possibility.
            Actions speak louder than words-except to the medically uninformed.

          • Tom S. says:

            WHY DID HE MAKE A LARGE INCISION-and explore it?
            It wasn’t a standard tracheostomy incision,was it? Fooling around in the neck is not a simple procedure; there are a lot of structures that can be damaged.

            In the interest of balance, Photon offers no opportunity for verification of his credentials; basis for his expertise.

            http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/perry_m1.htm
            ……
            Mr. SPECTER – Why did you elect to make the tracheotomy incision through the wound in the neck, Dr. Perry?
            Dr. PERRY – The area of the wound, as pointed out to you in the lower third of the neck anteriorly is customarily the spot one would electively perform the tracheotomy.
            This is one of the safest and easiest spots to reach the trachea. In addition the presence of the wound indicated to me there was possibly an underlaying wound to the neck muscles in the neck, the carotid artery or the jugular vein. If you are going to control these it is necessary that the incision be as low, that is toward the heart or lungs as the wound if you are going to obtain adequate control.
            Therefore, for expediency’s sake I went directly to that level to obtain control of the airway.

          • Jean Davison says:

            “In the interest of balance, Photon offers no opportunity for verification of his credentials; basis for his expertise.”

            Tom,

            Has the person Photon was responding offered his credentials or the basis for his expertise?

          • Photon says:

            Why would he assume that any of those structures were injuried if it was ” a simple entrance wound”?
            Some time ago on this site I quoted a study on gunshot wounds to the neck published in a reputable medical journal-I’m sure that Tom S. could re-post it if desired. The main point of the article was how few cervical gunshot wounds seen in the ER were actually explored and how well most of those individuals did.
            My expertise on this matter is really immaterial as I refer to the publications of individuals who DO have that expertise, namely the authors of the said article. I do not claim to be a trauma surgeon as some others on this site have, but I do think that I can refer to trauma surgeons’ opinions if they are published in the literature.

          • Tom S. says:

            Photon,
            Will you agree you directly contradicted Dr. Perry’s explanation and justification for
            making his incision for the purpose he described? How do you support your description of
            the degree of enlargement of the President’s presented neck wound puncture?
            Comments submitted under the I.D., Photon, are well written. They create an impression. Here, you are what you write, and only what you write. Jean and Will, for example are individuals with verifiable background details and histories that can be accessed and referenced, compared to what they write today. You say it is immaterial who you are and what your level of expertise is. So you are what you write, and only what you’ve written in comments you’ve submitted to JFKfacts.org. Verifiably, you are no older than this website, yet you write with an air of authority, or expertise. Your writing evokes an impression that Dr. Perry intentionally obliterated the neck puncture wound, wrecklessly, unprofessionally, and then described it to the press as an entrance wound. Coincidentally, you’ve done an impressive job of reducing Dr. Perry in several ways, as an emergency physician, as a credible witness, and most significantly, as a reliable authority on whether the neck puncture was an entrance bullet wound.

            You then, as always, slip away without a trace, no email address left behind, nothing… until if, or when you submit any other comment.

          • Photon says:

            Tom S. , I hardly gave the impression that Perry willfully altered the neck wound, recklessly and unprofessionally.. He moved expeditiously and appropriately addressing the first A-B-C of resusitation-airway. He certainly did not do a complete exam. Had it been any other patient brought pulseless, not breathing without a blood pressure he would have been declared DOA-which the ER staff knew he was-as long before any official announcement or even the comment of the two priests Eddie Barker at the Trade Mart reported on CBS. Perry did what was required emergently and skillfully. That did not include doing a complete physical exam-as too many CTers assume. In those days ther was no recognized Emergency Medicine specialty
            Mac Perry was an outstanding academic vascular surgeon who avoided publicity outside of medical affairs and specifically eschewed mention of his role at Parkland-to the point that many of his colleagues in New York were completely unaware of that role. He regretted that a few months into his first job as an attending physician outside of the military he gave a press conference that he was not prepared for-at least in regard as to how the press operated and interpreted what he meant to say. Who would be?

          • Ronnie Wayne says:

            “In those days there was no Emergency Medicine specialty”. Yes there was. The Emergency Room at Parkland was highly experienced with gunshot wounds on a often daily basis, sometimes with multiples in the same day. They knew what they were seeing.
            Perry’s first impression, on that day, uninfluenced is a Gold Standard.

        • Of course Tom,

          I had read this testimony by Perry before. I understood he did exploratory surgery, and cut the strap muscle on the right side to see the arteries. Thus the larger gaping throat wound. He had also done a simple tracheotomy as an emergency first procedure.

          As per Jean’s question as to my “credentials”; I have never claimed to be credentialed in medicine in any way – I do claim a certain amount of expert understanding of the medical issues in the JFK case however. This is combined with a certain amount of understanding of ballistics and legal matters pertaining to the case.

          Jean herself has admitted to no psychological expertise, although she wrote a book making a psychological profile of Lee Harvey Oswald.
          \\][//

          • “Why would he assume that any of those structures were injuried if it was ” a simple entrance wound”?”~Photon

            Are you asserting that an entry wound to the throat would be incapable of causing injuries to structures within the neck Photon? An entry from any angle would be likely to cause injuries within.

            There is a nick in a vertebrae, right side just behind the collar bone, probably at the C-7/T-1 junction. See X-ray:

            https://i0.wp.com/www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/xray_body.jpg

            \\][//

          • Photon says:

            Ronnie Wayne, you shouldn’t reveal your ignorance of a subject so clearly. The American College of Emergency Physicians wasn’t even established until 1968, the first ER residency programs started around 1970 and official recognition of Emergency Medicine as a distinct medical specialty with board certification didn’t occur until the late 1970s.
            Willy, I have a question-how does a missile that enters the skin at T3 possibly cause a ” nick in the vertebra” at the C-7/T-1 junction? Was the shooter in the trunk of the limo? Or are you claiming that the shooter that hit JFK in the back was so incompetent that he tried to kill him with a round so underpowered it only penetrated the subcutaneous tissues? Or are you claiming that the round that caused this fracture was a separate round from the front ? A round with no exit wound? A round that was not found in the body? A round that could dance around the collar bone-for you yourself stated that the fracture ” was just behind the collar bone”. A round with sufficient energy to crack a process from a vertebral body without injuring at all the bony structure immediately in front of the same vertebral body?
            There are ways to explain the minute fracture noted by the HSCA panel of forensic pathologists. Why can’t you accept their conclusion regarding the etiology of that abnormality? After all, you don’t even have a college degree.

          • “Willy, I have a question-how does a missile that enters the skin at T3 possibly cause a ” nick in the vertebra” at the C-7/T-1 junction?”~Photon

            It doesn’t “doctor”, that nick was from the bullet that entered the throat from the front. There are no bony structures directly in front; it is above the clavicle.

            I am not answering any of your questions Photon. You never answer mine:

            > Why would a knowledgeable pathologist measure the position of a wound from mobile anatomical landmarks?

            It is senseless when there are fixed anatomical landmarks nearby. As has been pointed out here, Humes chose to measure the position of JFK’s back wound from the Mastoid Process to the Acromion – a distance that can very 70% depending on the relative positions of the head and shoulder; thus it is a rather preposterous choice for such a measurement.
            \\][//

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            Willy

            Perry did not sever the strap muscle on the right side of JFK’s trachea to “see the arteries”. Perry severed the strap muscle on the LEFT side of JFK’s trachea, and it had nothing to do with seeing the arteries. If JFK’s right carotid artery had been damaged this wound, plus the head wound, would have caused JFK to bleed out long before he got to Parkland Hospital, making him quite dead before he got anywhere near Trauma Room One.

            As Perry stated, he severed one of the left strap muscles for the simple fact JFK’s trachea was deviated to the left, and the tracheostomy site on the trachea was being covered by this muscle, preventing him from being able to see the trachea.

            Why was the trachea deviated to the left? There is only one medical condition that will present in this way, and that would be a tension pneumothorax in JFK’s right chest cavity as a result of a fragmenting bullet entering the top of JFK’s right lung and disintegrating there. The trachea deviates because trapped air pressure builds in the affected chest cavity, and begins pushing the heart, blood vessels and trachea toward the unaffected lung.

            This is likely the best evidence that the bullet did not pass through JFK’s neck, and that the SBT is a lie.

          • Thank you Bob, after reviewing Perry’s testimony again I see that you are correct:

            “Well, to regress, then, at the time I began the tracheotomy, I made an incision right through the’wound which was present in the neck in order to gain complete control of any injury in the underlying trachea. I made a transverse incision right through this wound and carried it down to the superficial fascia, to expose the strap muscles overlying the thyroid and the trachea. There was ae superficial fascia, to expose the strap muscles overlying the thyroid and the trachea. There was an injury to the right lateral aspect of the trachea at the level of the external wound. The trachea was deviated slightly to the left and it was necessary to divide the strap muscles on the left side in order to gain access to the trachea…”~Dr Perry [P. 4]
            TESTIMONY OF DR. MALCOLM OLIVER PERRY
            The testimony of Dr. Malcolm Oliver Perry was taken at 3% p.m., on March 25, 1964, at Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President’s Commission.

            http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh6/pdf/WH6_Perry.pdf
            \\][//

          • Bob Prudhomme says:

            Hi Willy

            Interesting that Perry would say that he “divided” the left strap muscles. He has also stated, at various times, that he actually severed one of these strap muscles. As these muscles are long narrow things that run vertically and parallel to the trachea, I’m not quite sure what he meant by “divided”.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrahyoid_muscles

  6. Bob Prudhomme says:

    There seems to be no argument that the entrance wound in JFK’s back was 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal mid line, or 14 cm. from the right acromion process, located in JFK’s right shoulder. The only argument is whether the bullet entered JFK’s back at the level of the C7/T1 vertebrae, or lower down at the level of T3 vertebra.

    If we assume the bullet entered at T3, and 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal mid line, we are faced with a bit of a conundrum. This point is between the vertebrae and the scapula (shoulder blade) and, outside of the ribs, there are no large bony structures for a bullet to encounter. In other words, a full metal jacket bullet, at this range and with a muzzle velocity of 2165 fps, should have easily gone straight through JFK’s chest and out the front of his chest, with enough velocity left over to go through Connally’s seat, and possibly Connally.

    I have listened to all of the “short shot” arguments over the years, describing how a defective rifle cartridge propelled a bullet at an anemic velocity of only a couple of hundred feet per second, and how this bullet only penetrated JFK’s back a mere inch, and later fell out in Trauma Room One. While it makes a good story, it is just that; a fantasy.

    Continued……

  7. Bob Prudhomme says:

    …..Continued

    I don’t know how many of you shoot rifles, and out of that, how many of you have ever hand loaded your own rifle cartridges, and, for that reason, I will attempt to keep this as simple as I can.

    The impossibility of the “short shot” can be explained in two words: “under-stabilization” and “over-stabilization”

    As many of you will know, spiral rifling grooves are machined into the interior surface of a rifle’s barrel. They are referred to as either “right hand twist” or “left hand twist”, depending on which direction they travel going down the barrel. The rate of twist is expressed as a ratio. For example, the 6.5mm Carcano had standard right hand twist at a ratio of 1:8.5, meaning the rifling grooves made one complete turn in 8.5 inches. The designers of this rifle had calculated this rather rapid rate of twist necessary to stabilize the relatively heavy 162 grain Carcano bullet. In contrast, the 7.35mm Carcano bullet, weighing only 128 grains, was fired from the M38 short rifle with a slower rate of twist of only 1:10.

    This, of course, raises the obvious question. If a shooter purchases a rifle of, say, a .308 calibre, and possessing a fixed rate of twist, how can he accurately shoot the wide range of cartridges available for it when these cartridges are loaded with bullets varying in weight from 110-180 grains? The answer is that cartridge makers take all of this into consideration, and attempt to put the correct amount of gunpowder into each of these cartridges to keep them within a range of muzzle velocities that will allow bullet stability in flight.

    Continued….

  8. Bob Prudhomme says:

    ….Continued

    Problems arise when handloaders begin selecting their own bullet weights and design, and begin experimenting with varying types and loads of gunpowder. One never knows what a particular combination will do until the cartridges are fired from a rifle at the range.

    When firing an experimental cartridge load, the first thing the spotter looks for, when viewing the target down range through a scope, is a thing called “keyholing”. While bullets normally make a round hole in a paper target, a tumbling bullet will often hit the target side on, leaving an oblong hole referred to by shooters as a “keyhole”. If three successive keyholes are observed, it is pointless to shoot the rest of the cartridges, and the shooter might as well go home, re-calculate and re-load the rest of the cartridges.

    The reason these bullets are tumbling after they leave the muzzle is that the handloader has mistakenly put too much or too little gunpowder into the cartridges, or is attempting to shoot too light or too heavy a bullet that the riflings were not designed for. If the bullet is understabilized, it is spinning too slowly to allow for sufficient gyroscopic stability. If it is overstabilized, it is spinning too quickly for sufficient gyroscopic stability.

    Once a bullet loses gyroscopic stability, it inevitably begins to tumble.

    This is further complicated by the round nosed, flat based design of the Carcano bullet, making it a very un-streamlined bullet creating a great wake of turbulence in its wake, and giving it a low ballistic co-efficient of close to .300.

    Continued….

  9. Bob Prudhomme says:

    ….Continued

    If a handloader can experience this phenomenon at muzzle velocities not far removed from an average muzzle velocity for his rifle, what would happen to a heavy bullet, such as the 162 grain Carcano bullet, if it left the muzzle of a rifle with a muzzle velocity of only, say, 350 fps? It would lose stability, of course, and begin tumbling long before it got to JFK’s back.

    Not only is there the problem of a tumbling bullet being unable to make a small hole in JFK’s back, there is also the problem of merely GETTING this tumbling bullet to JFK’s back. If this bullet is only travelling 400 fps, it has a greater difficulty overcoming wind resistance than the same bullet travelling 2165 fps. However, should this bullet begin tumbling, it loses any advantage its limited streamlining may have offered it, and wind resistance becomes a major factor in slowing this bullet down.

    To sum up, the “short shot” and the crawling bullet making it to JFK’s back are, as I stated, a fantasy.

    • Bill Binnie says:

      This is an extremely interesting point and is largely unexplored by researchers and critics of the SBT- Can you postulate a theory which explains a minor back wound that has no apparent exit, by a bullet that did not remain in the President’s body? You have already struck down the “short shot”. It appears far fetched that this projectile was slowed by first passing through tree branches/ Street Signs / Car Seat/ Et Al and still struck it’s target while leaving a clean, small, neat hole- If this scenario cannot be explained, Proponents of the SBT have a reasonable cause to say that since there are only 2 wounds in the Presidents body, their bizarre theory is left standing by default-

      • Bill Binnie says:

        Is the shot to JFKs back the first shot? If JFK called out “I am Hit” the wound in his throat is from a second, separate bullet. The Connelly’s testimony seems to indicate that they correlate the sound of the first shot with JFKs reaction to the throat wound- Of course, their further testimony establishes a definitive time gap between the Presidents throat wound and a separate bullet that struck the Governor- The Nature and the cause of President back wound could easily establish that 5 or more shots occurred within a 6 second window- 3 well considered shots in less than 6 seconds was always absurd- More than 3 cannot co exist with WC fictional account-

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Hi Bill

        The one thing that has never been established is that the throat wound occurred before the fatal head shot at z313. While JFK’s hands, balled into fists, are raised up to the level of his throat by z225, he is not actually seen to be clutching his throat, as one would expect him to be doing if shot in the throat.

        As for how a bullet travelling at a velocity of +2000 fps could penetrate JFK’s back and enter his right lung, encountering only skin and intercostal muscles prior to entering the lung, and not exit the front of his chest but, rather, completely disintegrate partway through his lung, I highly recommend visiting this web site. The page on product technology is most interesting.

        http://www.drtammo.com

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        Hi Bill

        The main problem with the SBT, if one assumes the shot came from the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD, is that the angles do not work.

        If one was to draw a centre line through the length of the limo, at the moment the SBT occurred (supposedly at z224), and measured the angle from this line to the Sniper’s nest on the 6th floor, one would find this angle to be about 9°. This was calculated by the FBI and the SS during their many investigations.

        Now. as the SBT requires the Magic Bullet to enter JFK’s back/neck to the right of his cervical vertebrae, pass through the muscles of the right side of his neck, pass through the right side of his trachea (windpipe) and exit below his Adam’s apple at about the centre of his throat, close examination of the anatomy of the human neck reveals a certain insurmountable barrier that puts the lie to this theory. In fact, later investigations by pathologists of the HSCA actually confirm this lie with their impossible “findings”.

        The framework of the human neck is, of course, the cervical vertebrae and there are seven of them, C1 to C7, stacked in a column above the thoracic vertebrae, and supporting the head.

        Continued….

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        ….Continued

        Each of these vertebrae has two bony projections, sticking out to the right and left sides of this vertebra, called the “transverse processes”. As the vertebrae are stacked quite tightly in the neck, there is no room for a bullet to pass between two transverse processes, and any bullet passing through the neck that does not encounter bone must pass outside the outer tip of the transverse process.

        The current fable still being pushed by your government is that the Magic Bullet passed just outside the outer tip of the right transverse process of JFK’s C7 cervical vertebrae. It is also claimed this same bullet grazed the upper surface of the slightly longer right transverse process of JFK’s T1 thoracic vertebra, located directly below his C7 cervical vertebra.

        This information, plus the wound in the right side of JFK’s trachea, gives us very precise locations for entrance and exit of the SBT. If one takes a CT scan image of a cross section of the human neck at the level of cervical vertebra C&, showing the longest part of the right transverse process, it is a simple matter of drawing a line from the tip of the transverse process through the right side of the trachea, drawing a centre line through vertebra, trachea and oesophagus, and, using a simple plastic protractor, measuring the angle of this line.

        Unless JFK had severely deformed vertebrae, and those examining the x-rays have never reported this, the angle from tip of right transverse process through right side of trachea is a minimum of 28°. Allowing for JFK’s head being turned to the right by 5°, this still means the shooter had to be laterally removed from the limo centre line by 23°.

        Continued…..

      • Bob Prudhomme says:

        ….Continued

        Posters such as Photon will try to tell you that, when JFK turned his head to the right 5°, as it is shown he did at z224, he also moved his trachea further to the right, thus exposing it. This is medically impossible, and can easily be tested by yourself.

        Place your hand on your upper chest, with your fingers on your windpipe, just below your Adam’s apple. Turn your head right or left. You will notice the windpipe remains stationary, regardless of how far you turn your head.

        If the SBT is true, the shot could not have come from the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD.

        • Bill Binnie says:

          Hard to believe the throat wound occurred AFTER Z313 and similarly that the President’s hands raised, when emerging from behind the freeway sign was not a response to a throat wound- There can be no intellectual affection for the SBT and it is hard to imagine a scenario which allows one to embrace it- EXCEPT, Why are there only two wounds on the President’s body ?(excluding the head) When do you think the back wound occurred in the firing sequence and why did that bullet barely enter the victim, and where did it go? Just like I wonder why LHO brought a package to work that day, even if it was too small to contain a disassembled Carcano rifle- Just like I wonder why Ruby never told the full truth he tethered to Warren in Dallas- Like why did various interrogators question LHO for 3 days but never feel that a recording or transcript might be useful? The conspiracy could have crumbled a dozen times, EXCEPT it didn’t… When do you think the back wound occurred in the firing sequence and why did that bullet barely enter the victim, and where did the bullet go?

  10. “There seems to be no argument that the entrance wound in JFK’s back was 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal mid line, or 14 cm. from the right acromion process, located in JFK’s right shoulder. The only argument is whether the bullet entered JFK’s back at the level of the C7/T1 vertebrae, or lower down at the level of T3 vertebra.”~Bob Prudhomme

    I disagree, there is no valid argument with the physical evidence; a photo of JFK’s back clearly showing a bullet hole at T-3. The shirt and coat with correlating bullet hole positions, Burkley’s death certificate placing the wound at T-3. Boswell’s face sheet showing the wound at T-3, Agents Sibert and O’Neil’s testimony that it was at T-3 or lower.

    That is too much evidence to overwhelm with a theory on powder loads of bullets.
    \\][//

    • Bob Prudhomme says:

      You misunderstand what I am saying, Willy. I am merely stating that, while LN’s and CT’s are locked in argument about the vertical location of the back wound, they seem to be in agreement that the wound was 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal mid line.

      My arguments about the impossible “short shot” have nothing to do with the location of the back wound but, rather, the depth to which the bullet penetrated JFK’s back.

  11. Bob Prudhomme says:

    Photon said:

    “Had it been any other patient brought pulseless, not breathing without a blood pressure he would have been declared DOA-which the ER staff knew he was-as long before any official announcement or even the comment of the two priests Eddie Barker at the Trade Mart reported on CBS.”

    It is not fair, on your part, to make the assumption JFK was pulseless and not breathing when he was brought into Trauma Room One. Several doctors observed agonal respiration, and while there was no palpable pulse, oscultation of JFK’s heart revealed sounds they believed to be heartbeats.

    “Mr. SPECTER – What was the status of his pulse at the time of arrival?
    Dr. CARRICO – He had no palpable pulse.
    Mr. SPECTER – And was he making any movements at the time of arrival?
    Dr. CARRICO – No voluntary movements, only the spasmodic respirations.
    Mr. SPECTER – Was any heartbeat noted at his arrival?
    Dr. CARRICO – After these initial observations we opened his shirt, coat, listened very briefly to his chest, heard a few sounds which we felt to be heartbeats and then proceeded with the remainder of the examination.”

    As JFK would most definitely have been in shock at this point, it is accepted he would not have had radial pulses. With the severing of large blood vessels in his brain, it is also understandable that detecting a carotid pulse would have been difficult, as there would have been nothing to throttle the flow of blood, and make for a detectable pulse. Once again though, it is wrong to assume there was no pulse, it was just beyond their ability to detect.

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.