Good afternoon, Mr. Prudhomme
Mr. Cross makes an interesting point about Lipsey, further buttressing Mr. Josephs' lukewarm reception about his credibility. Since you appear busy with drafting a response to Mr. Josephs' initial question and now the one also posed by Mr. Phipps, my question will be brief, and no need for a response until such time allows. My question--given your prior experience in law-enforcement and hopefully with ballistics--is this:
![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=7996&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=7996&stc=1)
<---Unmistakable bullet hole plus(+) another unmistakable bullet hole ![[Image: attachment.php?attachmentid=7997&stc=1]](https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=7997&stc=1)
should equate into more than the presence of a mere nick upon the tie?
Or, just because the president's jacket & shirt have unmistakable bullet holes rather than mere nicks, the bullet hole obviously missing in the tie means:
A) Ford (Gerald) and Specter (Arlen) tilted the evidence
B) There was no "magical" bullet
C) All of the above
D) The tie's fabric was reinforced w/steel within the tie-knot itself thus only a mere nick instead of extensive damage inflicted (but not so steel reinforced that it would bring any disfigurement to the planted, err, pristine bullet traveling through and found much later on the stretcher at Parkland?))
I am having a hard time believing a bullet struck the tie-knot given it's non extensive ragged condition. Short of tying a few of my own ties and shooting at them down by the quarry, in your professional opinion, Could the same bullet that tore through the president's jacket and shirt, leaving unmistakable bullet holes in its wake suddenly leave a tie virtually undamaged as it tore through the fabric?
*images sourced via ratical.org
Mr. Cross makes an interesting point about Lipsey, further buttressing Mr. Josephs' lukewarm reception about his credibility. Since you appear busy with drafting a response to Mr. Josephs' initial question and now the one also posed by Mr. Phipps, my question will be brief, and no need for a response until such time allows. My question--given your prior experience in law-enforcement and hopefully with ballistics--is this:
Or, just because the president's jacket & shirt have unmistakable bullet holes rather than mere nicks, the bullet hole obviously missing in the tie means:
A) Ford (Gerald) and Specter (Arlen) tilted the evidence
B) There was no "magical" bullet
C) All of the above
D) The tie's fabric was reinforced w/steel within the tie-knot itself thus only a mere nick instead of extensive damage inflicted (but not so steel reinforced that it would bring any disfigurement to the planted, err, pristine bullet traveling through and found much later on the stretcher at Parkland?))
I am having a hard time believing a bullet struck the tie-knot given it's non extensive ragged condition. Short of tying a few of my own ties and shooting at them down by the quarry, in your professional opinion, Could the same bullet that tore through the president's jacket and shirt, leaving unmistakable bullet holes in its wake suddenly leave a tie virtually undamaged as it tore through the fabric?
*images sourced via ratical.org