![]() |
"Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Printable Version +- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora) +-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/forum-3.html) +--- Thread: "Respect" for the clothing evidence? (/thread-13647.html) |
"Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Drew Phipps - 12-02-2015 I'm not sure that word means what you think it means. "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Bob Prudhomme - 12-02-2015 David Josephs Wrote:Assuming every shot was at 2200fps is quite an assumption... no? Hi David There are a lot of problems with the theory of an "underpowered bullet" or "short shot" that I do not believe anyone takes into consideration. As a comparison to a shallow back wound, I believe we can look at the shallow wound on the inside of Connally's left thigh. Do you recall what was believed to be the velocity of the Magic Bullet, by the time it struck Connally's thigh? "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Albert Doyle - 12-02-2015 Cliff Varnell Wrote:Digging up JFK might satisfy several hundred JFK head wound/s obsessives. I'm not sure that's true Cliff. I think you under-rate modern forensic technology there a little. Plus we could see the true final status of all the head wounds and attempts to alter them. As for the head wounds the true total forensic analysis the original plotters were trying to hide with their conspiracy could finally be done. Cliff Varnell Wrote:How many head shots? One? Two? Three? Just the opposite man. Once modern high tech found any evidence of a second shot, or shot other than the official one, that re-opens the case. Cliff Varnell Wrote:A study of the back/throat wounds is a study of the murder itself. Which an exhumation would only help prove. Cliff Varnell Wrote:It is a common assumption that the people who handled Oswald were the same people who actually murdered JFK -- which over-looks the possibility Oswald's various handlers were themselves groomed for potential patsy-hood. Legally, once they helped cover it up they were. Cliff Varnell Wrote:What happened to the bullets that hit JFK's back and throat? And I'm not one of them. Perhaps a covert pre-autopsy either in the forward cargo compartment or at Bethesda - or both. An issue an exhumation would only help answer. "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Cliff Varnell - 12-02-2015 Albert Doyle Wrote:1Cliff Varnell Wrote:Digging up JFK might satisfy several hundred JFK head wound/s obsessives. "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Gordon Gray - 12-02-2015 I have always felt the bullet hole in the shirt was incontrovertible evidence disproving the SBT. It's easy to demonstrate. Sit some one in a chair with their shirt tail tucked in, place a small piece of tape about 6" below the collar, and have him wave his right arm. The tape will barely move. "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Drew Phipps - 12-02-2015 I have to say, I've always been curious about the bullet hole in the coat and the bullet hole in the shirt matching closely. To have the bullet hole in the same place on both shirt and coat, you need either no bunching at all (when seated with arm at shoulder height) or an exact same bunching of both. Both of those strike me as unlikely. I wear suit coats, from time to time, and they usually do bunch up, if my arm is raised shoulder height or better, or if I sit down. However, that doesn't mean that the underlying shirt (generally secured by a belt) is bunching up as well. It seems to me that the coat material slides over the shirt material independently during any "bunching." "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Cliff Varnell - 13-02-2015 Drew Phipps Wrote:I have to say, I've always been curious about the bullet hole in the coat and the bullet hole in the shirt matching closely. To have the bullet hole in the same place on both shirt and coat, you need either no bunching at all (when seated with arm at shoulder height) or an exact same bunching of both. Both of those strike me as unlikely. JFK had a better tailor. When he raised his arm his jacket indented. ![]() When Drew Phipps casually raises his right arm the shirt fabric along his right shoulder-line indents. Every. Single. Time. "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Gordon Gray - 13-02-2015 Cliff Varnell Wrote:The photo is instructive. The autopsy report located the back wound "14 cm (5.5 in) below the right mastoid process (the bony prominence behind the ear)." The Mastoid process is about level with the top of JFK's collar in this picture, so 5.5 " below would match the bullet hole in the shirt.Drew Phipps Wrote:I have to say, I've always been curious about the bullet hole in the coat and the bullet hole in the shirt matching closely. To have the bullet hole in the same place on both shirt and coat, you need either no bunching at all (when seated with arm at shoulder height) or an exact same bunching of both. Both of those strike me as unlikely. "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Drew Phipps - 13-02-2015 I'm an off-the-rack kinda guy. However, I'm fairly sure that I've got much the same skull as everyone else, including the rich and powerful JFK. The mastoid process is not "level" with the shirt collar, even though he probably has a great tailor. Now, this guy is a different story... "Respect" for the clothing evidence? - Cliff Varnell - 13-02-2015 Drew Phipps Wrote:The mastoid process is not "level" with the shirt collar, even though he probably has a great tailor. The mastoid measurements were not on the level. Count 3 violations of autopsy protocol: 1) The mastoid measuerments were written in pen on the autopsy face sheet. Proper military autopsy protocol requires the use of a pencil. 2) Using a moveable anatomical landmark like the mastoid process is a violation of autopsy protocol. 3) Using a non-thoracic landmark for a thoracic wound is a violation of autopsy protocol. And yet all LNers and many of the so-called "medical experts" like Cyril Wecht and Pat Speer swear by this garbage in order to move JFK's T3 back wound up to T1. The JFK Critical Research Community and its little army of Gerald Fords! |