The Back Wound

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Situated on the upper rt. posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 X 4mm oval puncture wound."

Handwritten autopsy notes of Dr. Humes

Note: The word "puncture" has been lined through in the notes.

Edited August 8, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Situated on the upper rt. posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 X 4mm oval puncture wound."

Handwritten autopsy notes of Dr. Humes

Note:  The word "puncture" has been lined through in the notes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

HSCA exhibit JFK F-56

In the event the forensic and ballistic experts neglected to inform you, a downward angle of entry for a bullet is supposed to create a vertically elongated wound of entry.

Not a horizontally elongated entry wound.

"Red Flag" time again.

Tom

Edited August 7, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Robin Unger]

HSCA Backwound Colorized.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

HSCA Backwound Colorized.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Robin;

I am slowly getting to that one.

Just that I like going around in circles to get somewhere!

Tom

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Situated on the upper rt. posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 X 4mm oval puncture wound."

Handwritten autopsy notes of Dr. Humes

Note:  The word "puncture" has been lined through in the notes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More Backwounds.

These happen to be my personal photographs from ballistic testing.

The top photograph is from a typical WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullet, and represents what a typical entry wound appears like.

The bottom photograph is of a wound which was created with a "wadcutter" bullet to simulate what an "atypical" entry wound appears like.

Dr. Boswell has described the entry wound into the back of JFK as being "atypical".

In addition to this "red flag" anomaly, it was also found that the entering bullet had carried considerable fabric from the coat and shirt into the wound of entry.

This too is another "red flag", as a normal bullet entry does not carry fabric or fibers from the clothing into the wound.

This is evidenced by the back wound of JBC which had no such fibers carried into the wound.

The primary reason for this being that the rounded/pointed nose of the bullet basically "drills through" and pushes aside the material of the fabric, and in most cases, removes virtually none of the actual fabric.

Edited August 8, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Situated on the upper rt. posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 X 4mm oval puncture wound."

Handwritten autopsy notes of Dr. Humes

Note:  The word "puncture" has been lined through in the notes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More Backwounds.

These happen to be my personal photographs from ballistic testing.

The top photograph is from a typical WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullet, and represents what a typical entry wound appears like.

The bottom photograph is of a wound which was created with a "wadcutter" bullet to simulate what an "atypical" entry wound appears like.

Dr. Boswell has described the entry wound into the back of JFK as being "atypical".

In addition to this "red flag" anomaly, it was also found that the entering bullet had carried considerable fabric from the coat and shirt into the wound of entry.

This too is another "red flag", as a normal bullet entry does not carry fabric or fibers from the clothing into the wound.

This is evidenced by the back wound of JBC which had no such fibers carried into the wound.

The primary reason for this being that the rounded/pointed nose of the bullet basically "drills through" and pushes aside the material of the fabric, and in most cases, removes virtually none of the actual fabric.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, exactly what is a "Wadcutter" bullet?

Wadcutter rounds were developed for target practice on paper targets.

A normal bullet entry through thin paper targets seldom removed any of the paper and in fact merely made a series of radial tears from the entry point outward into the paper.

These tear sections did not separate from the paper and therefore anyone wishing to see where he hit the target frequently either had to travel down to the target or in the case of good ranges, pull the target to him in order to see exactly where the bullet struck.

Wadcutter bullets, on the other hand, operated exactly as would a paper punch onto paper.

In that they would "Punch-out" a complete circular portion of the paper, thus allowing the person to observe at close range targets where the round struck, and at longer range targets, one could look through the rifle scope or a set of bino's and see exactly where the round struck.

The significance of this in relationship to the back wound of JFK is considerable.

Under the general assumption (which happens to be fact) that CE#399 is the bullet which is responsible for this wound in the back/upper neck of JFK, then we must ask several relevant questions.

1. Why is the entry wound of JFK not elongated vertically as it should be for a downward angle of fire.?(in fact the wound is elongated horizontally)

2. Why is the entry wound of JFK an "atypical" wound as stated by Dr. Boswell, and as demonstrated by comparison the the standard wound created by a 6.5mm carcano bullet as demonstrated?

3. Why did the entry wound into the back/lower neck of JFK have considerable fabric from his coat and shirt carried into the wound by the penetrating bullet when it is a FORENSIC FACT, that this does not normally happen?

4. Why does the "puncture" wound of the back of JFK with it's relatively clean cut edges, more closely resemble an entry wound which has been created by a bullet with a flat nose, than the wound resembles a normal bullet entry wound?

5. Why does the "puncture" wound of the back of JFK appear more as if some out-of-round paper punch created the wound, than a normal bullet entrance?

As an answer to these questions, I would reiterate that the "punch"-type wound of entry into the back of JFK was measured to be 7mm X 4mm by the autopsy surgeons.

It should therefore come as no great suprise that the deformed base of CE399 is also measured to be 7mm in width X 4mm in height.

And of course, the base of CE# 399 is also flat, not unlike the nose of a wadcutter bullet, or the end of a paper punch.

Edited August 8, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Situated on the upper rt. posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 X 4mm oval puncture wound."

Handwritten autopsy notes of Dr. Humes

Note:  The word "puncture" has been lined through in the notes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More Backwounds.

These happen to be my personal photographs from ballistic testing.

The top photograph is from a typical WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullet, and represents what a typical entry wound appears like.

The bottom photograph is of a wound which was created with a "wadcutter" bullet to simulate what an "atypical" entry wound appears like.

Dr. Boswell has described the entry wound into the back of JFK as being "atypical".

In addition to this "red flag" anomaly, it was also found that the entering bullet had carried considerable fabric from the coat and shirt into the wound of entry.

This too is another "red flag", as a normal bullet entry does not carry fabric or fibers from the clothing into the wound.

This is evidenced by the back wound of JBC which had no such fibers carried into the wound.

The primary reason for this being that the rounded/pointed nose of the bullet basically "drills through" and pushes aside the material of the fabric, and in most cases, removes virtually none of the actual fabric.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, exactly what is a "Wadcutter" bullet?

Wadcutter rounds were developed for target practice on paper targets.

A normal bullet entry through thin paper targets seldom removed any of the paper and in fact merely made a series of radial tears from the entry point outward into the paper.

These tear sections did not separate from the paper and therefore anyone wishing to see where he hit the target frequently either had to travel down to the target or in the case of good ranges, pull the target to him in order to see exactly where the bullet struck.

Wadcutter bullets, on the other hand, operated exactly as would a paper punch onto paper.

In that they would "Punch-out" a complete circular portion of the paper, thus allowing the person to observe at close range targets where the round struck, and at longer range targets, one could look through the rifle scope or a set of bino's and see exactly where the round struck.

The significance of this in relationship to the back wound of JFK is considerable.

Under the general assumption (which happens to be fact) that CE#399 is the bullet which is responsible for this wound in the back/upper neck of JFK, then we must ask several relevant questions.

1. Why is the entry wound of JFK not elongated vertically as it should be for a downward angle of fire.?(in fact the wound is elongated horizontally)

2. Why is the entry wound of JFK an "atypical" wound as stated by Dr. Boswell, and as demonstrated by comparison the the standard wound created by a 6.5mm carcano bullet as demonstrated?

3. Why did the entry wound into the back/lower neck of JFK have considerable fabric from his coat and shirt carried into the wound by the penetrating bullet when it is a FORENSIC FACT, that this does not normally happen?

4. Why does the "puncture" wound of the back of JFK with it's relatively clean cut edges, more closely resemble an entry wound which has been created by a bullet with a flat nose, than the wound resembles a normal bullet entry wound?

5. Why does the "puncture" wound of the back of JFK appear more as if some out-of-round paper punch created the wound, than a normal bullet entrance?

As an answer to these questions, I would reiterate that the "punch"-type wound of entry into the back of JFK was measured to be 7mm X 4mm by the autopsy surgeons.

It should therefore come as no great suprise that the deformed base of CE399 is also measured to be 7mm in width X 4mm in height.

And of course, the base of CE# 399 is also flat, not unlike the nose of a wadcutter bullet, or the end of a paper punch.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

P.S. I neglected to mention that the "atypical" wound was created with the 6.5mm wadcutter bullet shown.

Tom

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Situated on the upper rt. posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 X 4mm oval puncture wound."

Handwritten autopsy notes of Dr. Humes

Note:  The word "puncture" has been lined through in the notes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

More Backwounds.

These happen to be my personal photographs from ballistic testing.

The top photograph is from a typical WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullet, and represents what a typical entry wound appears like.

The bottom photograph is of a wound which was created with a "wadcutter" bullet to simulate what an "atypical" entry wound appears like.

Dr. Boswell has described the entry wound into the back of JFK as being "atypical".

In addition to this "red flag" anomaly, it was also found that the entering bullet had carried considerable fabric from the coat and shirt into the wound of entry.

This too is another "red flag", as a normal bullet entry does not carry fabric or fibers from the clothing into the wound.

This is evidenced by the back wound of JBC which had no such fibers carried into the wound.

The primary reason for this being that the rounded/pointed nose of the bullet basically "drills through" and pushes aside the material of the fabric, and in most cases, removes virtually none of the actual fabric.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So, exactly what is a "Wadcutter" bullet?

Wadcutter rounds were developed for target practice on paper targets.

A normal bullet entry through thin paper targets seldom removed any of the paper and in fact merely made a series of radial tears from the entry point outward into the paper.

These tear sections did not separate from the paper and therefore anyone wishing to see where he hit the target frequently either had to travel down to the target or in the case of good ranges, pull the target to him in order to see exactly where the bullet struck.

Wadcutter bullets, on the other hand, operated exactly as would a paper punch onto paper.

In that they would "Punch-out" a complete circular portion of the paper, thus allowing the person to observe at close range targets where the round struck, and at longer range targets, one could look through the rifle scope or a set of bino's and see exactly where the round struck.

The significance of this in relationship to the back wound of JFK is considerable.

Under the general assumption (which happens to be fact) that CE#399 is the bullet which is responsible for this wound in the back/upper neck of JFK, then we must ask several relevant questions.

1. Why is the entry wound of JFK not elongated vertically as it should be for a downward angle of fire.?(in fact the wound is elongated horizontally)

2. Why is the entry wound of JFK an "atypical" wound as stated by Dr. Boswell, and as demonstrated by comparison the the standard wound created by a 6.5mm carcano bullet as demonstrated?

3. Why did the entry wound into the back/lower neck of JFK have considerable fabric from his coat and shirt carried into the wound by the penetrating bullet when it is a FORENSIC FACT, that this does not normally happen?

4. Why does the "puncture" wound of the back of JFK with it's relatively clean cut edges, more closely resemble an entry wound which has been created by a bullet with a flat nose, than the wound resembles a normal bullet entry wound?

5. Why does the "puncture" wound of the back of JFK appear more as if some out-of-round paper punch created the wound, than a normal bullet entrance?

As an answer to these questions, I would reiterate that the "punch"-type wound of entry into the back of JFK was measured to be 7mm X 4mm by the autopsy surgeons.

It should therefore come as no great suprise that the deformed base of CE399 is also measured to be 7mm in width X 4mm in height.

And of course, the base of CE# 399 is also flat, not unlike the nose of a wadcutter bullet, or the end of a paper punch.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

P.S. I neglected to mention that the "atypical" wound was created with the 6.5mm wadcutter bullet shown.

Tom

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The round peg goes in the round hole!

The square peg goes in the square hole!

The 4mm X 7mm ovoid peg (bullet base) goes into the 4 X 7mm ovoid hole (back entrance wound)

Shortly, I will also demonstrate how the base of CE399 was able to easily cut the skin as it entered in this base first attitude, as it also probably has some bearing on the removal of the base of the copper jacket of CE399.

Edited August 9, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Mark Knight]

OK...

Appears to be logical to this point, Tom.

Please continue.

Edited August 8, 2005 by Mark Knight

[Ron Ecker]

Please continue.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Without repeating and re-repeating in full every previous post. Give us a break.

[Mark Knight]

Ron, I take it you're from the "Joe Friday" school of evidence gathering:

"Just the facts, ma'am..."

[Ron Ecker]

When Joe Friday asked a question, he didn't first repeat every previous question he had asked. Unless, of course, he was trying to drive the person nuts and get a confession.

[Mark Knight]

Actually, that sounds more like a tactic used by Friday's partner, Gannon.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

When Joe Friday asked a question, he didn't first repeat every previous question he had asked. Unless, of course, he was trying to drive the person nuts and get a confession.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Repetition is at the heart of and an essential elelment in learning.

However, Specter & Company so confused and confounded the evidence in this matter, that one must occassionally reach back and re-interject how one piece of the manipulation is related to another, which is related to another, etc.

The WC lie, with the assistance of the FBI is a complete "masterpiece" of mazes and separate puzzles which are related to another puzzle which is related to another unanswered question.

This is why the puzzles and manipulations have never been placed into there proper perspective.

Virtually with any indication of common sense can and has recognized that there is an inherent problem with the manner in which the WC conducted their task.

To date, there have been two basic schools of thought on this:

1. The John McAdams/Ken Rahn approach:

Just human errors and problems due to hampering by the FBI etc.

2. The CT/Multiple Assassin/Body Kidnapper, etc;

Which has proven nothing and continues to only hamper factual research.

3. The "boy is Tom out on a limb" school:

Which states that the WC was an intentional lie; that there was only a single assassin; and that another reason other than conspiracy to assassinate has to do with the reasons for the WC misrepresentation of the evidence.

Tom

[Ron Ecker]

3.  The "boy is Tom out on a limb" school:

Which states that the WC was an intentional lie; that there was only a single assassin; and that another reason other than conspiracy to assassinate has to do with the reasons for the WC misrepresentation of the evidence.

So what were the reasons? What is your theory?

I also have a question on the back wound. If I understand what you've said, the bullet that you say lodged in JFK and didn't exit (except for the fragment out the front of the throat) was CE399. How can that be when no bullet was found in the body, and CE399 was received separate from the body after being found at Parkland?