[size=12]Multiple problems with the descriptions of the injuries suffered by Governor Connally and the mislabeling of the presented X-rays strongly suggest that the Parkland physicians doctored their reports to hide an uncomplimentary posture of the victim when shot.
Two Descriptions of the Back Wound
The clinical report by Dr. Shaw on the preoperative treatment of Governor Connally described a sucking chest wound partially relieved by a pressure dressing. A tube was inserted into the chest cavity and the free ended connected to a waterseal bottle. These emergency measures relaxed the respiratory distress. Once in the operating room anesthesia was induced and the wounds were more carefully examined. Shaw found a wound of entrance just to the left of the right scapula. He reported that this wound was "approximately three cm in its longest diameter." The surrounding area was cleansed with Phisohex and Iodine then draped for the initial operation upon the far more serious frontal chest wound.
Perhaps someone from the ballistics community informed Shaw that a wound with a longer dimension equal to the length of the three-centimeter MC bullet indicates a strike by a missile traveling sideways. Under this condition the bullet had insufficient kinetic energy to exit the chest.
Dr. Shaw revised his description of the back wound for his Warren Commission testimonies. On March 23, 1964, Shaw testified in Dallas. He told the commission that Connally had a 1.5-cm roughly elliptical wound of the right posterior shoulder to the left of the right armpit. During his testimony in Washington, D.C. on April 21, 1964, he repeated the earlier description of the wound and added that the bullet did not penetrate the shoulder blade.
Doctor Gregory reported details of the back wounded which corroborated the description of an elliptical wound by Shaw. In particular, Gregory noted a linear wound with a rounded central portion. This rounding of the central portion of the back wound was not noted on the linear wound of the wrist. By contrast the shape of a simple wound made by a bullet with a considerable yaw angle resembles a rectangle with rounded corners.
　
Wrist Wounds and the Fractured Radius
Connally suffered two wounds of his right wrist. The larger wound of entry was on the back or the dorsal side of the wrist with the smaller wound of exit on the palm or the volar side of the wrist. Doctor Gregory noted that a larger wound of entry was not at all characteristic.
During his testimony in Dallas on March 23, 1964, Gregory reported the dimensions of the wounds on the opposing sides of the wrist. He gave the longer dimension of the dorsal wound as 2 cm and the longer dimension of the volar wound as 1.5 cm. On April 21, 1964, Gregory more fully described both wounds of the wrist. He reported that the transverse exit wound on the volar side of the wrist resembled a small laceration with dimensions of 1.5 cm by 0.5 cm. The wound of entry on the dorsal side of the wrist was rather linear with dimensions of 2.5 cm by 0.5 cm. He did not mention any rounding of the central portion of the dorsal wound as he did when describing the linear back wound. The disagreement of the longer dimensions of the dorsal wound suggests that Gregory related the wound sizes from memory rather than notes.
Gregory described the wrist fracture as comminuted. He explained that comminuted means shattered into more than two pieces and counted seven or eight bone fragments on the presented X-rays. During his Warren Commission testimony of March 23, 1964, Shaw corroborated Gregory by describing a compound comminuted fracture of the radius. The description of the comminuted fracture as compound meant that the sharp edge of a recently fractured bone broke the skin and created a wound. On April 21, 1964, Shaw cited the motion of the wrist as evidence of the compound fracture. Initially Gregory observed metallic fragments on the preoperative X-rays of the wrist. During debridement, he removed a few small fragments of lead found throughout the wrist and the fractured the radius. Gregory volunteered no opinion on whether the bullet deposited or irrigation carried the metal fragments to various positions within the wrist.
Superficial Wound of the Thigh
Dr. Shires in his operative report of November 22, 1963 described a 1-cm punctate wound and debriding the wound track into the muscle. He interpreted an X-ray as showing a small fragment imbedded in the femur. Shires repeated these descriptions during his testimony in Dallas and added his speculations on whether a tangential entry by a whole bullet or a fragment caused the observed peculiarities of this wound. The description of the wound as punctate means that the abrasion surrounding the bullet hole was spotted. This punctate appearance implied entry by a spent missile with insufficient kinetic energy to produce the solid area of discoloration surrounding a typical bullet hole.
Shaw explicitly attributed the wound in the thigh being considerably longer than the size of the missile to a tangential entry by the bullet.
Prior to surgery, Dr. Gregory carefully observed the bullet hole in the thigh. He noted that the hole was almost round and could see penetration from the skin to the underlying fascia. During his testimony in Washington, D.C., Gregory described a puncture wound on the inner aspect of the thigh and a little toward the front. The wound appeared rounded with a diameter of about 6 mm. This size excluded the surrounding abrasion reported by Shires.
The preoperative X-rays produced by Gregory revealed a shallow fragment inline with the femur and just beneath the skin. These observations contradicted Shires who asserted that the fragment deeply penetrated the thigh and was imbedded in the bone. The Forensic Pathology Panel dismissed the presumed fragments on the X-rays as artifacts.
Cynics have suggested that the Parkland doctors concocted the story of a fragment in the thigh to reduce the embarrassment of Doctor Shaw who during the Friday afternoon press conference told the World that the bullet is in the leg and will be removed during surgery. This statement is made just beyond five minutes from the start of the linked recording.
Clothing Evidence
Connally's coat had regular defects that conveyed to the analyst valuable information not obtainable from the irregular defects of the shirt. This fortuitous situation made the defects of the coat the preferred garment for comparison with the wounds of the torso. On the back side of the coat, SA Robert A. Frazier of the FBI Laboratory described a defect that measured approximately five-eights of an inch horizontally by one-quarter of an inch. The one-quarter inch dimension coincided with the diameter of a 6.5-mm bullet and the five-eights inch measurement agreed with the 15-mm dimension of the back wound described by Dr. Shaw in his testimonies. The failure of Frazier to describe the shape of the defect on the rear of the coat as either rectangular or oval allows entry by a bullet with a 30-degree yaw angle or a bullet with negligible yaw angle and an approximate 66-degree incidence angle.
Frazier described a defect on the front of the coat as approximately round with a diameter of three-eights of an inch. The smallness of this hole shown on Figure 2 ensures that only a bullet with negligible yaw could have made this defect.
Frazier measured the angles made by a straight line joining the defect on the rear of Connally's coat with the defect on the front. He found a line sloping leftward from the rear to the front. This line made a 20-degree angle with the sagittal plane of the coat. The FBI also used these defect on the rear and the front of the coat to calculate the angle made by a straight line joining the entry and the exit wounds with the transverse body plane. A disagreement between the transverse angle for the coat with the transverse angle though the torso shows that the posture of Connally was not relaxed when shot. The straight line joining the defect on the rear of the coat sloped downward toward the defect on the front of the coat. This line made a 35-degree angle with the transverse plane of the coat. The line joining the corresponding defects of the shirt made a lesser 30-degree angle with the same plane. These measurements show that Connally had a strained posture when or immediately before being shot.
Frazier examined the trousers worn by Connally. He found a small circular defect with a diameter of about one quarter inch. This quarter inch defect of the trousers stands with the small 6-mm bullet hole described by Gregory and disputes the suggestion by Shires that a tangential entry caused the 10-mm punctate abrasion which surrounded the bullet hole in the thigh.
Composite Wounding
The Parkland doctors in the operating room collectively developed the idea that one missile inflicted all the wounds suffered by Connally. Dr. Shires discussed this idea with his assistants, Drs. Baxter, McClelland and Patman. Shires had direct knowledge of similar discussions among Drs. Shaw, Boland and Duke. He surmised that Dr. Gregory, Osbourne and Parker also discussed the wounding. These groups concluded that one bullet inflicted the five wounds suffered by Connally.
Gregory cited progressively less damage from the chest, through the wrist and into the thigh as evidence of wounding by a single bullet. The bullet inflicted considerable damage upon the torso in shattering ten centimeters of the fifth rib and punching a 5-centimeter roughly circular hole in the chest. These injuries consumed a considerable portion of the kinetic energy of the transiting bullet. This less energetic bullet inflicted lesser injury upon the wrist. The wounds of entry and exit were elongated slits and cleaved a few pieces of bone from the radius. These lesser injuries consumed more kinetic energy. The bullet upon striking the thigh had insufficient kinetic energy to produce a solid abrasion and perforate the leg. Instead this spent missile produced a punctate abrasion surrounding the wound track which extended to but not through the muscle.
The report of an initially small tunneling wound by Shaw is evidence of entry and initial transit of the torso by a bullet with negligible angles of yaw and pitch. Coupling these observations of the back wound with the report by Frazier of a round 3/8-inch hole in the front of the coat shows exit by a bullet with negligible angles of yaw and pitch. These observations argue for overall transit of the torso by a properly aligned bullet and explain the absence of metallic fragments in the chest.
Problems arose when the doctors provided further details of the injuries.
The elliptical wound twice described by Shaw and corroborated by Gregory required that the bullet entered the back with an approximate 60° incidence angle as shown on Figure 3. The locations of the back and the chest wounds required that this tangentially entering bullet deflected by an incredible angle of between forty and sixty degrees during transit of the torso. So both the original and the revised descriptions of the back wound are entangled in insoluble problems.
Following the testimony of Shaw on March 23, 1964, Specter and Shaw had a conversation off the record then went back on the record and discussed whether a tumbling bullet struck Governor Connally in the back. Shaw mistakenly associated an elliptical wound with a bullet which had struck something else. This testimony strongly suggests that Doctor Shaw and the authorities reached a compromise. In particular the authorities would forgive doctoring his medical reports in exchange for capitulation to tolerate the SBT.
The locations and dimensions of both wrist wounds and especially the linear shape of the volar wound imply transit by a bullet with a considerable though decreasing angle of yaw. For the dorsal wound the given dimensions imply striking by a bullet with a yaw angle between arcsin ( 2 / 3 ) or forty two degrees and arcsin ( 2.5 / 3 ) or fifty six degrees. Upon exit from the volar side of the dimensions of the wound yield a lesser yaw angle of arcsin ( 1.5 / 3 ) or thirty degrees. The modifications of these calculations to account for the elongation of the wounds by a few tenths of a centimeter due to tangential entry and exit by the yawed bullet would be inconsequential.
However, the ante posterior X-rays of the wrist, CE 691 and CE 692 show no evidence of a yawed bullet having punched a slot with dimensions ranging from 1/4 inch by 1 inch nearer the dorsal side of the wrist to 1/4 inch by 4/5 inch nearer the volar side. Given the locations of these wounds, a slot punched by a yawed bullet would have been seen on the ante posterior X-rays as a through and through gap in the radius. So the failure to see this large void of bone stands in contradiction with the description of the surface wounds.
By contrast, a properly aligned bullet with negligible yaw angle could have tangentially perforated the wrist and tunneled a track with a 1/4 inch diameter through the bone. This bullet track would appear as a narrow strip of lesser opacity on the X-rays..
Apparently Gregory learned by experience that a yawed bullet could produce linear surface wounds and another bullet could tunnel a small cylindrical track through a bone. However, his role as a medical doctor did not require him to analyze whether one wound could embody the special characteristics of two other unrelated wounds. Probably these gaps in his knowledge account for the contradictions in the presented descriptions of wrist wounds.
The X-rays presented by Gregory showing the tiny fragment inline with the femur on some views and just beneath the skin on orthogonal views effectively disproves Shires' claim of a fragment imbedded in the bone. Further the report by Gregory of a 6-millimeter "almost round" thigh wound discredits the speculation by Shires of a tangential entry by the bullet. The implications of these two reports by Gregory consistently point to an unexpected posture for the leg when wounded.
If Connally's left leg were crossed with its calf resting near his right knee then a bullet on an earlier course from below the right nipple and straight through the waist would strike the inner surface of the left thigh at a small angle of incidence. This trajectory would carry the bullet and any shed fragment closer to the knee while not penetrating toward the bone by a comparable distance.
Perhaps the authorities interpreted this implied posture of Connally as feminine and moved the left leg to a normal masculine position when shot. The problems with Shires' testimony in Dallas and his latter absence from testifying in Washington, D.C. are consistent with this possibility.
When Doctors Shaw, Gregory and Shires testified in Dallas during March 1964 they referenced and did not present easily accessible X-rays to document the injuries suffered by Governor Connally. The following month when Shaw and Gregory packed their evidence and traveled to Washington, D.C. to testify they brought nine X-rays with them.
Source: Warren Commission testimony of Dr. Robert Roeder Shaw on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 106
Mr. SPECTER. Would it be useful - As to that X-ray, Dr. Shaw, will you tell us what identifying data, if any, it has in the records of Parkland Hospital, for the record? Dr. SHAW. On this X-ray it has in pencil John G. Connally. Mr. SPECTER. Is that G or C? Dr. SHAW. They have a "G" November 22, 1963, and it has a number 218-922.
Despite the confirmation of a "G" by Dr. Shaw, Specter persists to place into the record his reaffirmation of "C" as the middle initial on the X-rays.
Source: WC testimony of Doctor Charles Francis Gregory on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 124
Mr. SPECTER. Have you brought the X-ray with you? Dr. GREGORY. Yes; I have. Mr. SPECTER. On what date was that X-ray taken? Dr. GREGORY. This X-ray is marked as having been taken on November 22, 1963. It indicates that it was made of the left thigh, and it belongs to John Connally, John G. Connally. Mr. SPECTER. That says "G" instead of "C"? Dr. GREGORY. Yes. It appears to me to be a "G." The number again is 219-922.
At this point, Specter had manipulated the record to allow him to plead confusion if the credibility of the X-rays were to be challenged.
Skipping ahead a witness to Mrs. Connally shows that Arlen was intent upon expanding his protection.
Source: WC Testimony of Mrs. John Bowden Connally, Jr. on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 146
Mr. SPECTER. Are you the wife of Governor John C. Connally? Mrs. CONNALLY. No, I am the wife of Governor John B. Connally.
The answer to the first question of the previous witness discredits ignorance as an excuse for Arlen Specter not knowing the middle initial of Governor Connally.
Source: WC Testimony of Gov. John Bowden Connally, Jr. on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 129
Mr. SPECTER. Will you state your full name for the record, please? Governor CONNALLY. John Bowden Connally.
Four pages earlier in the testimony of Dr. Shaw, Arlen Specter disclosed knowledge of the middle initial of John Connally.
Source: Warren Commission Testimony of Dr. Robert Roeder Shaw on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 102
Mr. SPECTER. Were you called upon to render medical aid to Gov. John B. Connally on that day? Dr. SHAW. Yes.
I wonder when Arlen Specter stop knowing the middle initial of John Connally?
Forcing Governor Connally's wounds to fit a sitting posture had an embarrassing consequence for Dr. Gregory. He was asked by Specter whether a bullet with a declination angle of forty five degrees could have inflicted Connally's wounds. Gregory had no choice and answered the question affirmatively.
Source: Warren Commission Testimony of Doctor Charles Francis Gregory on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 127
Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Gregory, could all of the wounds which were inflicted on the Governor, that is those described by Dr. Shaw and those which you have described during your testimony, have been inflicted from one missile if that missile were a 6.5 millimeter bullet fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second at a distance of approximately 160 to 250 feet, if you assumed a trajectory with an angle of decline approximately 45 degrees? Dr. GREGORY - I believe that the three wounds could have occurred from a single missile under these specifications.
Dr. Gregory was no dummy. Without doubt, he could have solved the eleventh-grade problem of the isosceles right triangle and mentally calculated the height of the muzzle above Connally as between 160 sin ( 45 ) or 112 foot and 250 sin ( 45 ) or 175 foot. By contrast the sniper's nest on the sixth floor of the TSBD was less than 70 foot above their victim.
[/SIZE]
Excellent article, Herbert. I would like to add to the information you presented about the wrist wound, as I believe it alone presents enough impossibilities by itself to completely discredit the Single Bullet Theory.
As you pointed out, the FBI's Robert Frazier measured the entry and exit wounds on Connally's coat, finding the entrance wound to be 5/8"x1/4" and the exit wound to be a round wound 3/8" in diameter. Clearly, as is characteristic of a very long bullet of this calibre, this bullet was not deflected by striking Connally's thorax and was continuing straight and true with minimal yaw. It most definitely was not tumbling at this point. Yet, within the space of a few inches, it had tumbled sufficiently that it hit the dorsal aspect of Connally's right wrist side on, leaving a 2.5x.5 cm. entrance wound on Connally's wrist. How did this 6.5mm bullet, dubbed by some as a "flying drill", exit Connally's coat straight and true and immediately begin to tumble?
Unless a person was severely double jointed in the elbows, and there is no evidence Connally was, it is impossible to rotate the wrist back far enough that the dorsal (back) aspect of the wrist is facing the thorax. This can be proven at home by anyone reading this. Hold your right wrist at a point level with an area on your chest, just below the right nipple, and try turning your wrist so that the back of the wrist faces the chest. As you will quickly learn, it not only cannot be done, even getting close to this position is extremely uncomfortable and not a natural position.
As presented to us by the WC, the intact, unscathed bullet known as CE399, or more fondly as the "Magic Bullet", passed through a narrow gap between the radius and ulna bones of Connally's right distal forearm. While I have pointed out, in the last paragraph, the impossibility of this, due to the unavoidable fact Connally could not have rotated his forearm far enough to line up this gap between the two bones with the path of the bullet, the matter is further complicated by studying the x-rays of Connally's forearm.
In the top x-ray, we are looking at the underside or "palm" side of Connally's right wrist, with the right thumb clearly distinguishable on the right side of the x-ray. The long bone on the right is the "radius", clearly broken by the bullet, and the bone on the left is the "ulna". The small white specks are flakes of lead, likely shed from the open base of a full metal jacket bullet. This "shedding" of flakes would have occurred as the FMJ bullet struck bone and began to deform and compress, making the space inside the FMJ smaller and squeezing flakes of malleable lead out the base like toothpaste from a tube. Special note should be made that the flakes and the majority of impact damage to the radius bone appear to be quite some distance from the gap between the radius and ulna bones.
The bottom x-rays show, on the left, a side view of Connally's right forearm with the radius bone closest to the viewer. The last x-ray, on the bottom right, presents a dorsal view of the back side of Connally's right forearm, with the right thumb visible on the right side of the x-ray. This is the best view of the bone damage and one can actually see the impact crater left by the bullet. As you recall, the entrance wound made by this bullet was 2.5 cm. x .5 cm., meaning the bullet was travelling through the air sideways when it struck the radius bone. Looking at this x-ray, we can see the base of the bullet would have hit at the lower right end of the fracture, depositing lead there, and the nose would have struck further up the crack made by the bullet. A closer inspection shows us that the cratering of the radius bone stops well before the gap between the radius and the ulna bones.
The question that should be on everyone's mind at this point is, if the bullet did not pass through the radius bone, and Connally's surgeon stated it did not, why was the bullet not stopped at the radius bone? It clearly hit the radius bone square on, without penetrating it. As there is next to no meat over the radius bone at this point, an intact bullet striking the radius bone here and stopping should have fallen to the ground a few seconds later.
If CE 399 passed between radius and ulna, as the WC would have us believe, how did it negotiate itself away from the smashed radius bone, slide laterally an inch to the gap, and re-launch itself to pass through the gap between radius and ulna?
The only logical conclusion a thinking person can draw, from the available evidence, is that Connally's right forearm and thorax were struck by separate bullets. However, this conclusion leads us into another conundrum that also involves the back wound and the throat wound, and is a puzzle that has bothered me for years.
One of the things noted by Connally's surgeon was the relatively small amount of damage inflicted by CE 399 on the radius bone of Connally's forearm, considering the bullet was supposedly propelled by a rifle at close range. He noted that rifle bullet wounds of this nature usually inflict so much damage to a bone, amputation of the limb is often the only recourse. The WC lawyers immediately seized upon this observation and interpreted it to mean CE 399 had slowed considerably as it passed through JFK and Connally's ribs. However, if we couple this observation with the fact that the bullet struck side on and was likely a de-stabilized bullet that had begun to tumble, an entirely new yet very puzzling possibility presents itself. This is, of course, assuming the bullet that struck Connally's right forearm did not contact anything else on its way from the muzzle.
Also, if we assume JFK's back wound and throat wound to have been caused by separate bullets, we now have three bullets with very similar and very puzzling records.
First, a FMJ bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2200 fps carries a great amount of energy and penetrating power. If this bullet travelled less than 100 yards and struck JFK in the back 5.75" below the collar line, it would not be unreasonable to assume this bullet would have passed completely through JFK's thorax. Considering the angle this bullet was travelling at, it would not be unreasonable to further assume this bullet would have passed through the base of the limo driver's seat.
Second, the throat wound, if inflicted by another FMJ rifle bullet, should have passed completely through JFK's neck vertebrae, shattering these vertebrae on the way through and completely severing JFK's spinal cord.
There seem to be three bullets that were not performing anywhere near to what would be expected of a rifle bullet. Were they from defective cartridges? Were they purposely underloaded with gunpowder, to minimize collateral damage?
I don't have the answers to these questions but I would be interested to hear everyone's opinion on this matter.
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
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
28-09-2014, 06:49 AM (This post was last modified: 28-09-2014, 07:07 AM by Drew Phipps.)
sorry double posted after server error
"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."
Bob: Put the base joint of your right thumb (where it joins the hand) just under your breatbone. Make a fist. Rotate your hand till the thumb is pointing as nearly straight down as you can get it. Pull your elbow in tight to your chest so that the arm passes just under the nipple.
Dont you think that posture might account for the bullet entering the arm from the dorsal side and exiting from the palmar side and travelling somewhat closer to the writ joint as it passes thru?
I do not suggest the Z film is an accurate recording of the assasination; just for illustrative purposes of describing the posture:
It appears to me that the posture I described above roughly matches the position of Connally's hand during this time frame. At the beginning of this time, and also at the end, the hand might be too high, but if you look at the two frames just when Connally appears from behind the sign, the hand is not quite so clearly visible, which suggests to me that it was a bit lower with respect to the frame of the car while he was obscured.
If Connally was indeed holding his hat below his hand, his fingers and thumb must have been pointing generally downward.
Hmm. What is that reddish splotch under Connally's mouth? Never mind, its the red flowers in the back seat.
"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."
Maybe I'm just not limber but, when I try this pose, no matter how hard I try to rotate my forearm, the back side of my wrist is still perpendicular to my chest, or rotated 90° away from the breastbone. The side of my wrist is facing the chest. Dr. Shaw, in his second testimony to the WC, discusses this same problem:
"Mr. Specter.He has described that as what he concluded to be the wound of entry on the dorsal aspect of the right wrist, but your thought was that perhaps that was the wound of exit?
Dr. SHAW. Yes; in trying to reconstruct the position of Governor Connally's body, sitting in the jump seat of the limousine, and the attitude that he would assume in turning to the right--this motion would naturally bring the polar surface of the right wrist in contact with the anterior portion of the right chest.
Mr. SPECTER. Well, is your principal reason for thinking that the wound on the dorsal aspect is a wound of exit rather than a wound of entry because of what you consider to be the awkward position in having the dorsal aspect of the wrist either pointing upward or toward the chest?
Dr. SHAW. Yes, I think I am influenced a great deal by the fact that in trying to assume this position, I can't comfortably turn my arm into a position that would explain the wound of the dorsal surface of the wrist as a wound of entrance, knowing where the missile came out of the chest and assuming that one missile caused both the chest wound and the arm wound.
Mr. SPECTER. Might not then that conclusion be affected if you discard the assumption that one missile caused all the wounds?
Dr. SHAW. Yes, if two missiles struck the Governor, then it would not be necessary to assume that the larger wound is the wound of entrance.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, would not another explanation for the presence of a wound on the dorsal aspect of the wrist be if the Governor were sitting in an upright position on the jump seat with his arm resting either on an arm rest inside the ear or on a window of the ear with the elbow protruding outward, and as he turned around, turning in a rotary motion, his wrist somewhat toward his body so that it was present in an angle of approximately 45 degrees to his body, being slightly moving toward his body.
Dr. SHAW. Well, I myself, am not able to get my arm into that position. If the wound, as I assume to be in the midportion of the forearm here and the wound of exit would be here (illustrating) I can't get my arm into that position as to correspond to what we know about the trajectory of the bullet into the chest."
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
In my opinion, the SBT has been discredited since the '60s for people who live in the "reality based community." But for the governmental/corporate elites, who have always believed they have the power to define reality however they choose* - and we're supposed to just accept it - the SBT will never be discredited no matter what we do.
These are the people who insist that home-made bombs or aluminum airliners can do the kind of damage that only military explosives can inflict, or that numerous witnesses were mistaken when they saw an object streak up toward TWA 800, or Sirhan could really shoot RFK at point blank range when he was standing several feet away, or that Watergate was really just a third rate burglary, that Iran-Contra was just a few misguided patriots, that James Earl Ray could possibly know when or where MLK would appear on the balcony, or that Israel attacked the Liberty for an hour and a half without realizing that it was a US ship, or that they just can't find the surveillance camera footage from OKC, etc. etc.
The arrogance and contempt of the Elite is unending. They will continue to spew more and more crap and expect us to believe it. And many ignorant people, content with their shopping and cable TV, will believe it. They WILL believe that Vietnam was a noble cause, that Saddam was involved in 9/11, that Anglo-American power is a force for good around the world, that the next terrorist attack is caused by ISIS, that we do need to occupy the entire Muslim world from Algeria to Pakistan for their own good, that a total surveillance society in the US and UK is absolutely necessary for our safety.
So I think at this point we need to stop wasting time and energy on the single-bullet theory.
* The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, "Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush," quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove):
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that realityjudiciously, as you willwe'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Tracy Riddle Wrote:In my opinion, the SBT has been discredited since the '60s for people who live in the "reality based community." But for the governmental/corporate elites, who have always believed they have the power to define reality however they choose* - and we're supposed to just accept it - the SBT will never be discredited no matter what we do.
These are the people who insist that home-made bombs or aluminum airliners can do the kind of damage that only military explosives can inflict, or that numerous witnesses were mistaken when they saw an object streak up toward TWA 800, or Sirhan could really shoot RFK at point blank range when he was standing several feet away, or that Watergate was really just a third rate burglary, that Iran-Contra was just a few misguided patriots, that James Earl Ray could possibly know when or where MLK would appear on the balcony, or that Israel attacked the Liberty for an hour and a half without realizing that it was a US ship, or that they just can't find the surveillance camera footage from OKC, etc. etc.
The arrogance and contempt of the Elite is unending. They will continue to spew more and more crap and expect us to believe it. And many ignorant people, content with their shopping and cable TV, will believe it. They WILL believe that Vietnam was a noble cause, that Saddam was involved in 9/11, that Anglo-American power is a force for good around the world, that the next terrorist attack is caused by ISIS, that we do need to occupy the entire Muslim world from Algeria to Pakistan for their own good, that a total surveillance society in the US and UK is absolutely necessary for our safety.
So I think at this point we need to stop wasting time and energy on the single-bullet theory.
* The source of the term is a quotation in an October 17, 2004, The New York Times Magazine article by writer Ron Suskind, "Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush," quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove):
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that realityjudiciously, as you willwe'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
By all means, Tracy, if you consider this research a waste of time, don't bother reading any more of these posts. What this forum needs are more threads on Oswald's tonsils or the heighth of his mother.
While the SBT is easy to discredit, we are still left with completely inexplicable wounds on both JFK and Connally. This is what my work is concentrating on. It is mere coincidence that I am further disproving the SBT in the process. My ultimate goal is to put together a very logical case that, in order to inflict such strange wounds, a very unique type of bullet was employed by several shooters.
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
28-09-2014, 07:15 PM (This post was last modified: 28-09-2014, 07:40 PM by Tracy Riddle.)
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:By all means, Tracy, if you consider this research a waste of time, don't bother reading any more of these posts. What this forum needs are more threads on Oswald's tonsils or the heighth of his mother.
Which would be even more trivial and pointless, and that means you didn't read any of my post after the first paragraph.
Sorry to be so blunt, but I think the end game is approaching and we have less and less time left.
Bob Prudhomme Wrote:By all means, Tracy, if you consider this research a waste of time, don't bother reading any more of these posts. What this forum needs are more threads on Oswald's tonsils or the heighth of his mother.
Which would be even more trivial and pointless, and that means you didn't read any of my post after the first paragraph.
Sorry to be so blunt, but I think the end game is approaching and we have less and less time left.
Sorry to be blunt right back but, this was a murder committed with a rifle. To not fully understand the terminal ballistics, and the wounds, is to ignore the very basics of this case.
I believe the general lack of firearms, ballistics and medical knowledge amongst most of the JFK researchers has steered us onto far too many wild goose chases and robbed us of the precious time you speak of.
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
![[Image: Photo_hsca_ex_84.jpg]](http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/90/Photo_hsca_ex_84.jpg)
![[Image: Photo_hsca_ex_85.jpg]](http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/97/Photo_hsca_ex_85.jpg)