"Respect" for the clothing evidence?

[Drew Phipps]

I'm not sure that word means what you think it means.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Assuming every shot was at 2200fps is quite an assumption... no?

You are aware of the type of weapon and caliber? You are sure no Sabots were used? An underpowered round?

We can't know any of this so you stating a certain velocity is pure speculation... The locations on the other hand can be corroborated.
The mess at Bethesda can be corroborated. The wholesale alteration of evidence can be corroborated.

Evidence was added and removed. Kinda hard to bleive Dino's 6-8 shots and only think we could find 1 bullet (provided by Rowley to Johnson) and some fragments

Stick with facts and evidence Cliff... these are real people claiming to have seen real bullets and saying so at their own risk. They were outside the conspiracy, not part of it.
Belmont to Tolson after speaking with the SS - why mention an extra bullet if there wasn't one?

Are you truly of the opinion that we actually have authenticated assassination related evidence from which to come to our conclusions?
Everything that happens once the casket closes and Kellerman takes the body to AF-1 requires corroboration and authentication.
And in every case this process proves fruitless. What they SAID happened and what the Evidence shows are mutually exclusive.

In the REAL world, many more than 3 shots were fired
In the REAL world, those bullets were made to disappear, like the actual photographs and xrays, like the brain, like so much of this case.....


"Never believe anything the government says until it has been officially denied"

Look at the evidence in this light... (in the strangest of places if you look at it right)

DJ

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?

[Albert Doyle]

Digging up JFK might satisfy several hundred JFK head wound/s obsessives.

But the FBI reference to "apparent" pre-autopsy surgery to the top of the head means we can't know for sure how many times JFK was struck in the head even if he were exhumed.

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.

How many head shots? One? Two? Three?

What a colossal rabbit hole!

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.

A study of the back/throat wounds is a study of the murder itself.

Which an exhumation would only help prove.

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.

What happened to the bullets that hit JFK's back and throat?

There seems to be an entire generation of JFK Critical Researchers awfully reluctant to address that crucial question...

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.

[Cliff Varnell]

Digging up JFK might satisfy several hundred JFK head wound/s obsessives.

But the FBI reference to "apparent" pre-autopsy surgery to the top of the head means we can't know for sure how many times JFK was struck in the head even if he were exhumed.

I'm not sure that's true Cliff. I think you under-rate modern forensic technology there a little.

Maybe. You *do* realize that such a thing can never happen, right?

No one is going to dig up JFK, man.


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.

Good luck with that...

How many head shots? One? Two? Three?

What a colossal rabbit hole!

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.


There has always been prima facie low tech proof of a second shooter.

The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to be associated with the throat wound.

Even when Gaeton Fonzi destroyed the SBT to Arlen Specter's face it sure as hell didn't reopen the case.

A study of the back/throat wounds is a study of the murder itself.

Which an exhumation would only help prove.


Quixotic, that one.

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.


They were accessories.

What did Oswald's handlers need to know about the who and how of JFK's murder?

What they needed to know was all they knew, and I'd submit they didn't need to know much.

What happened to the bullets that hit JFK's back and throat?

There seems to be an entire generation of JFK Critical Researchers awfully reluctant to address that crucial question...

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.

Why pine for evidence you'll never see when there's plenty of evidence you're not even considering?

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church...nseney.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church..._Colby.pdf

The doctors the night of the autopsy seriously considered the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon, which points to the US Army Special Operations Division, Ft. Detrick, Maryland, specifically the "Staff Support Group," which was a CIA operation staffed with military officers who used high tech weaponry which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

You'll never get leads like that out of the head wound/s evidence.

1

[Gordon Gray]

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.

[Drew Phipps]

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."

[Cliff Varnell]

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."

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.

[Gordon Gray]

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."

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.

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]

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...

[Cliff Varnell]

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!