Head Shot at z230?

[Bob Prudhomme]

I just had a crazy, or maybe not so crazy thought. We have all been so brainwashed by the SBT that it has affected our ability to think outside of the box.

As JFK emerged from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, in the Zapruder film, he was clearly in distress and his hands are seem moving toward his throat. Then, at about z230, he clearly experiences something else. His arms go up, his head almost seems to whip slightly to the rear and his whole body appears to move forward.

With the first bullet disintegrated in the top of his right lung, what if the event at z230 is a bullet entering his skull just to the right of his external occipital protuberance ?

No exit wound, you say? Why does there have to be an exit wound?

In my next post I will lay out the evidence that led me to contemplate this possibility.

[Drew Phipps]

Bob: You should write cliffhanger episodes for TV series.

[Bob Prudhomme]

Sorry about that. I meant to get back onto this later in the day but other obligations and distractions came up.

Anyways, the evidence I was referring to that made me think JFK had suffered a shot to the back of the head can be found in the HSCA interview of Gawler's Funeral Home director Thomas Robinson:

[size=12]Purdy: We've just gone through the backgrounds of when you were
present at the autopsy prior to beginning your work. Could
you please detail for us your recollection of events and
what you saw once you began your work.

Robinson: Once I began the work? I remember the tracheotomy; I
remember the bones of the skull and face badly shattered.

Purdy: Where on the face were they shattered, which of the bones?

Robinson: You cannot see that from the outside. This is looking
through the opening that the physicians had made at the
back of the skull.

As far as I can tell, Robinson was the only person involved with the autopsy that mentioned the breakage of JFK's facial bones. This kind of damage is typical of a bullet that breaks up so completely, it comes to a stop in the wound and hydraulically transfers all of its energy to surrounding tissue.

Although it was not in this interview and I am unable to recall exactly where I saw it, Robinson also mentioned there were two small "leaks" in JFK's face that necessitated being filled with wax, in order to prevent fluid leaking onto JFK's face while he was in the casket.

Once again, I refer the reader to my thread "Inexplicable Wounds made by Special Bullets", in which I discuss the 6.5mm Carcano M37 frangible bullet.



As seen above, the jacket is in two pieces, plus a very deep cannelure near the base. Inside, there is sand in the base, powdered lead in the middle and a solid maillechort pellet in the nose. Converting this to a lethal bullet would only require deepening the opening in the nose by 1 or 2 mm. and making a true hollow point out of this bullet.

With the hollow point breaking up first inside JFK's skull, the maillechort pellet would be reduced to many small fragments, and it is likely these that inflicted the wounds that left the "leaks" in JFK's face. Once the maillechort pellet was gone, the powdered lead and sand would spread out into a 3-4 inch cloud, come to an abrupt halt partway through the brain, and create an enormous pressure wave that would break all of JFK's facial bones and destroy the right side of JFK's brain; leaving a cloud of dustlike fragments inside the cranial cavity. No other type of bullet is capable of being reduced to powder or dust. As I have stated before, lead is malleable, not brittle. This complete breakup of the bullet would also mean there was a very good chance there would be no exit wound.

So, if there were no exit wound, would the coordinator of the sniper team be able to tell if a fatal wound had been inflicted at z230? Of course not, and this is why there were additional shots, with the final shot exiting the back of JFK's skull almost precisely where the first bullet entered.
[/SIZE]

[Herbert Blenner]

I just had a crazy, or maybe not so crazy thought. We have all been so brainwashed by the SBT that it has affected our ability to think outside of the box.

As JFK emerged from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, in the Zapruder film, he was clearly in distress and his hands are seem moving toward his throat. Then, at about z230, he clearly experiences something else. His arms go up, his head almost seems to whip slightly to the rear and his whole body appears to move forward.

With the first bullet disintegrated in the top of his right lung, what if the event at z230 is a bullet entering his skull just to the right of his external occipital protuberance ?

No exit wound, you say? Why does there have to be an exit wound?

In my next post I will lay out the evidence that led me to contemplate this possibility.

The mechanical reaction to a bullet entering the head is movement of the head alone as far as permitted by its attachment to the torso. The head shares its angular momenta with the torso upon reaching the limits of its independent rotations and yields imperceptible composition motions of the torso and the head.

Clearly the Zapruder film fails everywhere to show this physically necessary mechanical reaction to an off-centered head shot.

[Bob Prudhomme]

I just had a crazy, or maybe not so crazy thought. We have all been so brainwashed by the SBT that it has affected our ability to think outside of the box.

As JFK emerged from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, in the Zapruder film, he was clearly in distress and his hands are seem moving toward his throat. Then, at about z230, he clearly experiences something else. His arms go up, his head almost seems to whip slightly to the rear and his whole body appears to move forward.

With the first bullet disintegrated in the top of his right lung, what if the event at z230 is a bullet entering his skull just to the right of his external occipital protuberance ?

No exit wound, you say? Why does there have to be an exit wound?

In my next post I will lay out the evidence that led me to contemplate this possibility.

The mechanical reaction to a bullet entering the head is movement of the head alone as far as permitted by its attachment to the torso. The head shares its angular momenta with the torso upon reaching the limits of its independent rotations and yields imperceptible composition motions of the torso and the head.

Clearly the Zapruder film fails everywhere to show this physically necessary mechanical reaction to an off-centered head shot.

How many deer have you shot, Herb?

[Herbert Blenner]

I just had a crazy, or maybe not so crazy thought. We have all been so brainwashed by the SBT that it has affected our ability to think outside of the box.

As JFK emerged from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign, in the Zapruder film, he was clearly in distress and his hands are seem moving toward his throat. Then, at about z230, he clearly experiences something else. His arms go up, his head almost seems to whip slightly to the rear and his whole body appears to move forward.

With the first bullet disintegrated in the top of his right lung, what if the event at z230 is a bullet entering his skull just to the right of his external occipital protuberance ?

No exit wound, you say? Why does there have to be an exit wound?

In my next post I will lay out the evidence that led me to contemplate this possibility.

The mechanical reaction to a bullet entering the head is movement of the head alone as far as permitted by its attachment to the torso. The head shares its angular momenta with the torso upon reaching the limits of its independent rotations and yields imperceptible composition motions of the torso and the head.

Clearly the Zapruder film fails everywhere to show this physically necessary mechanical reaction to an off-centered head shot.

How many deer have you shot, Herb?

The eye can only perceive the physiological, not the meaningful mechanical, reaction to a head shot by a hand held gun. However, a motion picture film has a sufficiently high frame rate to enable still frames to provide meaningful information on the decisive mechanical reaction.

So how many analyzes of mechanical motions have you tested in the lab?

[Drew Phipps]

[size=12]

This kind of damage is typical of a bullet that breaks up so completely, it comes to a stop in the wound and hydraulically transfers all of its energy to surrounding tissue.

[/SIZE]

I don't mean to argue with the main thrust of your work, but breaking the relatively delicate facial bones is not a particular property of a speciality bullet. In fact, the FBI test/films of the WCC slug entering the rear of the gelatin-filled skulls all show significant damage to the facial area.

You would be far better off using "Presumed Guilty" (Roffman 1976)-'s data to support your point, in that it is the resulting sprinkling of particles in the JFK head x-ray that is most inconsistent with the passage of a FMJ slug, and the FBI tests demonstrate this.

[Bob Prudhomme]

It is not just the significance of all of the facial bones being broken that I am pointing out; it is the fact that the bullet was able to break the facial bones and not have it, or a major fragment of it, exit JFK's face under his nose. All the broken facial bones are doing is telling us at least one bullet entered JFK's skull from behind, and the dust like particles tell us it completely broke apart and came to a stop inside JFK's skull. Can you think of a bullet, outside of a frangible bullet, capable of doing this?

[Drew Phipps]

The broken facial bones, in and of themselves, don't tell us anything useful about the nature of the bullet. In order to conclude that the bullet disintegrated inside the skull, you have to ASSUME that the bullet didn't exit the skull. Given the wide debate about the exact location of the large hole in the "right rear" portion of JFK's skull, is this really a safe assumption to make?

I'm NOT trying to hijack your thread, or start a debate on the location of the head wounds. I am asking you to rely on less controversial assumptions (like the well-documented existence of small particles in the skull), which should be sufficient to support your argument.

[Bob Prudhomme]

The broken facial bones, in and of themselves, don't tell us anything useful about the nature of the bullet. In order to conclude that the bullet disintegrated inside the skull, you have to ASSUME that the bullet didn't exit the skull. Given the wide debate about the exact location of the large hole in the "right rear" portion of JFK's skull, is this really a safe assumption to make?

I'm NOT trying to hijack your thread, or start a debate on the location of the head wounds. I am asking you to rely on less controversial assumptions (like the well-documented existence of small particles in the skull), which should be sufficient to support your argument.

I don't think you quite follow what I am saying here, Drew.

The problem with the large exit hole in the right rear of JFK's head is this. How would a bullet entering the right temple, just inside the hairline, and exiting the right rear of the head manage to break all of JFK's facial bones? I have shot enough deer with soft and hollow point bullets to know the damage created by a bullet is mainly downstream of the entry point. Therefore, the only way to explain the damage to JFK's head is to assume he was hit in the head by two bullets; one entering in the right rear and one entering later in the right temple. I don't believe the first bullet exited, but the second bullet created a sufficient pressure wave, as it disintegrated into powder, to cause a blowout of the skull in the right rear of JFK's head.

The main point to be made here is that frangible bullets turn to dust and do NOT exit. Any "exit" wound seen is a blowout caused by elevated internal pressures.