25-09-2014, 05:09 PM
Tumbling bullets will still travel in a more or less "straight and true" line.
The evidence is Dr. Shaw's measurements of the original entrance wound, elliptical in shape and 1.5 cm at the longest. Shaw measured the angle that the bullet passed thru Connally's body at 25 degrees. Dr. Gregory described the entrance wound as rounded and .75 inches long (this is longer than Shaw's measurement).
The alleged bullet is roughly (don't want to start a new argument here) 3 cm long and 6.7 mm in diameter. To make a elliptical hole 1.5 cm at its widest, you need an angle of incidence of 34 degrees. To make a wound .75 in. at its widest you need an angle of incidence of 49 degrees. Since both these figures exceed Shaw's bullet path angle of 25 degrees, the bullet must have been tumbling, or precessing.
Precession is the small gyrations (wobbles) the rotating bullet makes as it spins on its long axis. The Earth has a fairly stable rotation, it spins once a day but takes 30,000 years to precess around its axle (something on the order of 36,500 spins per degree of precession). Rifled bullets precess more than that, but, unless the precession is very very small, the bullet will not fly straight. You cannot explain the difference between 25 degrees, and 30 or 49 degrees with precession.
BTW the angle of the WC "sniper's nest" is somewhat less than 25 degrees, depending on when the first shot was fired. The FBI exhibits show an angle of 23 degrees, but that was when JFK was behind a tree (looking from the sniper's nest). Had the shooter waited till JFK emerged from behind the tree, the angle would be less than 23 degrees.
The FBI calculated the angle of the "third" shot (without reference to which one caused which wounds) at about 15 degrees down. If Connally wasn't hit in the chest till after the headshot, you have a tough time explaining the 25 degree downward angle, not to mention the greater than 25 degree angle of incidence.
A larger downward angle than the one from the alleged sniper's nest proves to me one of 2 things: The shooter's position is wrong, or the victim was leaning backwards off the vertical line to make up the difference.
Other notes: Shaw in March 1964 was of the opinion that multiple bullets were needed to cause Connally's wounds. When pressed, he looked for a Zapruder frame in which Connally's body was in the correct position for one bullet to produce the wounds; he picked Z frame 236. Gregory testified that the entrance wound in the back contained no metallic fragments or mohair fibers (probably indicating it was the first time this bullet hit anything); however, it would have had to pass thru coat and shirt to reach skin, so this observation is probably incorrect.
There is another problem here for the Dan Rather scenario. Gregory says that the wrist entry wound (dorsal) was 5 cm from the wrist, and the exit wound (palmar) was 1.5 cm from the wrist. The bullet was moving towards the wrist as it transited the arm. Far as I can see, there's only one way for this to be possible for a rear-entering right to left bullet path...the elbow has to be farther to the rear than the wrist. The Dan Rather scenario (with Connally reaching back as he is hit) seems unlikely in that you'd have a hard time placing your hand far enough to the back (with your elbow bent) to intercept the missile before it hits the rear part of the armpit and get a track moving towards the hand.
I think the only way to put your wrist in the path of the missile is to bend your arm completely, tight in to the body, palm facing down, then place the dorsal side of your wrist just under and to the left of the right nipple, so that the bullet enters the wrist after leaving the chest.
The evidence is Dr. Shaw's measurements of the original entrance wound, elliptical in shape and 1.5 cm at the longest. Shaw measured the angle that the bullet passed thru Connally's body at 25 degrees. Dr. Gregory described the entrance wound as rounded and .75 inches long (this is longer than Shaw's measurement).
The alleged bullet is roughly (don't want to start a new argument here) 3 cm long and 6.7 mm in diameter. To make a elliptical hole 1.5 cm at its widest, you need an angle of incidence of 34 degrees. To make a wound .75 in. at its widest you need an angle of incidence of 49 degrees. Since both these figures exceed Shaw's bullet path angle of 25 degrees, the bullet must have been tumbling, or precessing.
Precession is the small gyrations (wobbles) the rotating bullet makes as it spins on its long axis. The Earth has a fairly stable rotation, it spins once a day but takes 30,000 years to precess around its axle (something on the order of 36,500 spins per degree of precession). Rifled bullets precess more than that, but, unless the precession is very very small, the bullet will not fly straight. You cannot explain the difference between 25 degrees, and 30 or 49 degrees with precession.
BTW the angle of the WC "sniper's nest" is somewhat less than 25 degrees, depending on when the first shot was fired. The FBI exhibits show an angle of 23 degrees, but that was when JFK was behind a tree (looking from the sniper's nest). Had the shooter waited till JFK emerged from behind the tree, the angle would be less than 23 degrees.
The FBI calculated the angle of the "third" shot (without reference to which one caused which wounds) at about 15 degrees down. If Connally wasn't hit in the chest till after the headshot, you have a tough time explaining the 25 degree downward angle, not to mention the greater than 25 degree angle of incidence.
A larger downward angle than the one from the alleged sniper's nest proves to me one of 2 things: The shooter's position is wrong, or the victim was leaning backwards off the vertical line to make up the difference.
Other notes: Shaw in March 1964 was of the opinion that multiple bullets were needed to cause Connally's wounds. When pressed, he looked for a Zapruder frame in which Connally's body was in the correct position for one bullet to produce the wounds; he picked Z frame 236. Gregory testified that the entrance wound in the back contained no metallic fragments or mohair fibers (probably indicating it was the first time this bullet hit anything); however, it would have had to pass thru coat and shirt to reach skin, so this observation is probably incorrect.
There is another problem here for the Dan Rather scenario. Gregory says that the wrist entry wound (dorsal) was 5 cm from the wrist, and the exit wound (palmar) was 1.5 cm from the wrist. The bullet was moving towards the wrist as it transited the arm. Far as I can see, there's only one way for this to be possible for a rear-entering right to left bullet path...the elbow has to be farther to the rear than the wrist. The Dan Rather scenario (with Connally reaching back as he is hit) seems unlikely in that you'd have a hard time placing your hand far enough to the back (with your elbow bent) to intercept the missile before it hits the rear part of the armpit and get a track moving towards the hand.
I think the only way to put your wrist in the path of the missile is to bend your arm completely, tight in to the body, palm facing down, then place the dorsal side of your wrist just under and to the left of the right nipple, so that the bullet enters the wrist after leaving the chest.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."