05-09-2016, 06:49 PM
Hi Drew
I measured the scale on each of these photos and found them to be the same, meaning the photographer must have taken both photos from the same distance.
The nick you pointed out on the front of the tie, on my screen, is 23 mm from where the tie was severed. The nick you pointed out on the back of the tie is 30 mm from where the tie was severed. It does not appear the two were connected.
However, look at the photo below:
![[Image: jfk-dallas-shirttie1.jpg]](https://bamfstyle.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/jfk-dallas-shirttie1.jpg)
We can clearly see the nick on the back of the tie in this photo, plus what appears to be the small bloodstain. The only problem is that it IS on the back of the tie, and on the opposite side of the tie from what we have been led to believe. How did it come to pass that we all believed this nick was on the front surface of the tie? I wonder who planted that gem in our minds?
As you stated earlier, the tail of the tie (narrowest section) is the part the knot of the tie knot is tied around, using the wide end of the tie to make the knot. This means that the narrow end of the tie goes straight through the knot, and is used to adjust slack on the tie.
If the scale beside the laid out tie is in inches, my measurements show that the nick on the back of the tie is about 3.5 inches from where the tie was severed. Would it not make sense that the nick in the tail section was, prior to the assassination, either
1. just below the tie knot or
2. just to JFK's anatomical left of the tie knot
and that the nurses loosened the tie 2-3 inches before cutting the tail of the tie just beside the left side of the knot?
Either scenario is a death sentence for the SBT, as it would mean the projectile was either travelling downward too steeply or too far to JFK's left to be able to impact John Connally's right armpit.
I measured the scale on each of these photos and found them to be the same, meaning the photographer must have taken both photos from the same distance.
The nick you pointed out on the front of the tie, on my screen, is 23 mm from where the tie was severed. The nick you pointed out on the back of the tie is 30 mm from where the tie was severed. It does not appear the two were connected.
However, look at the photo below:
We can clearly see the nick on the back of the tie in this photo, plus what appears to be the small bloodstain. The only problem is that it IS on the back of the tie, and on the opposite side of the tie from what we have been led to believe. How did it come to pass that we all believed this nick was on the front surface of the tie? I wonder who planted that gem in our minds?
As you stated earlier, the tail of the tie (narrowest section) is the part the knot of the tie knot is tied around, using the wide end of the tie to make the knot. This means that the narrow end of the tie goes straight through the knot, and is used to adjust slack on the tie.
If the scale beside the laid out tie is in inches, my measurements show that the nick on the back of the tie is about 3.5 inches from where the tie was severed. Would it not make sense that the nick in the tail section was, prior to the assassination, either
1. just below the tie knot or
2. just to JFK's anatomical left of the tie knot
and that the nurses loosened the tie 2-3 inches before cutting the tail of the tie just beside the left side of the knot?
Either scenario is a death sentence for the SBT, as it would mean the projectile was either travelling downward too steeply or too far to JFK's left to be able to impact John Connally's right armpit.
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964
Warren Commission testimony of Secret Service Agent Clinton J. Hill, 1964