Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Ashton Gray

There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat

Recommended Posts

Both Robert and I have told you where to go to see where we each pretty much prove -- independent of one another -- that the throat wound is below the shirtline. Using the physical evidence (photos, and some statistics dug up by James Gordon, and also Robert). Ashton has done the same using an animated GIF. (I believe Robert rejects Ashton's GIF, but I think it's valid.)

But you simply ignore it.

The witnesses in Dealey described JFK reacting to a throat shot and you can't come up with a cogent explanation for JFK reflexively placing his hands in front of his throat.

Who says I can't? At the very least, JFK was reacting to a collapsed lung. In addition, there may have been bullet fragments racing down through his neck muscles, and a projectile out his throat.

A projectile out of his throat from the back shot? :help

Bullet fragments racing down through his neck from the back shot? :idea

So he got shot in the back and that didn't hurt and then his lung collapsed but that didn't hurt since he never reached for his chest -- he reached for his throat because he reflexively couldn't breathe? :clapping

All of that happened on the first strike but Clint Hill didn't see it even though it was right in front of him? ;)

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Ashton, that is your theory. You laid it all out for us...

*PLONK*

Anybody else want to join him? The Kook File is infinitely expandable, so there is plenty of room. Just let me know.

Ashton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CV: And the cricoid cartilage is not the same as the thyroid cartilage.

Carrico said the wound was below the thyroid cartilage.

Why didn't he say the wound was below the cricoid cartilage, instead?

Did he forget his anatomy?

Cliff, everybody knows that the wound was below the cricoid cartilage. It was between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Same place as the tracheostomy. Are you disputing this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, Ashton, that is your theory. You laid it all out for us...

*PLONK*

Anybody else want to join him? The Kook File is infinitely expandable, so there is plenty of room. Just let me know.

Ashton

Brilliant response, Ashton. I'd be cautious about labelling others "kooks" on this forum. Remember, you're the one that brought up the theory about the Parkland doctors poisoning JFK and then "obliterating" the evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CV: And the cricoid cartilage is not the same as the thyroid cartilage.

Carrico said the wound was below the thyroid cartilage.

Why didn't he say the wound was below the cricoid cartilage, instead?

Did he forget his anatomy?

Cliff, everybody knows that the wound was below the cricoid cartilage. It was between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Same place as the tracheostomy. Are you disputing this?

I'm not discounting the possibility of significant deflection of the round.

You're disputing the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photographic evidence when you deny JFK was shot in the throat from the front on the first-strike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You brought up the lapel -- which has nothing to do with anything.

*PLONK*

There. That screeching is out of my life for good. Now I won't have to put up with 800 more repetitions of Carrico's exquisitely ambiguous influenced testimony about a tie knot. Now I won't have to endure someone insisting hysterically, repeatedly, over and over and over and over and over, that the back of a rearview mirror in a photo is a face. Now I won't have to deal with the sad shambles of those too technology challenged to be able to quote messages in a forum—while insisting that they are superior to all others. Now I won't have to be subjected to the tag-team disinformation twins—unless there are others who are determined to be their water carriers by quoting them over and over and over and over again.

But there's a solution for that, too. The wonderful thing about the Kook File is that it is a marvel of modern technology, because it is infinitely expanding. There's plenty of room for anyone who would like to join the resident Tweedledee and Tweedledum there, and dance round and round and round until the end of time, singing the same sheepheaded songs endlessly, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and...

Ashton

Edited by Ashton Gray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both Robert and I have told you where to go to see where we each pretty much prove -- independent of one another -- that the throat wound is below the shirtline. Using the physical evidence (photos, and some statistics dug up by James Gordon, and also Robert). Ashton has done the same using an animated GIF. (I believe Robert rejects Ashton's GIF, but I think it's valid.)

But you simply ignore it.

The witnesses in Dealey described JFK reacting to a throat shot and you can't come up with a cogent explanation for JFK reflexively placing his hands in front of his throat.

Who says I can't? At the very least, JFK was reacting to a collapsed lung. In addition, there may have been bullet fragments racing down through his neck muscles, and a projectile out his throat.

A projectile out of his throat from the back shot? :help

I didn't say that.

Bullet fragments racing down through his neck from the back shot? :idea

I didn't say that.

So he got shot in the back and that didn't hurt and then his lung collapsed but that didn't hurt since he never reached for his chest -- he reached for his throat because he reflexively couldn't breathe? :clapping

I didn't say that.

All of that happened on the first strike but Clint Hill didn't see it even though it was right in front of him? ;)

Bullet fragments racing down through neck muscles are not visible from the outside. Same is true of a collapsed lung.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You brought up the lapel -- which has nothing to do with anything.

*PLONK*

There. That screeching is out of my life for good. Now I won't have to put up with 800 more repetitions of Carrico's exquisitely ambiguous influenced testimony about a tie knot. Now I won't have to endure someone insisting hysterically, repeatedly, over and over and over and over and over, that the back of a rearview mirror in a photo is a face. Now I won't have to deal with the sad shambles of those too technology challenged to be able to quote messages in a forum—while insisting that they are superior to all others. Now I won't have to be subjected to the tag-team disinformation twins—unless there are others who are determined to be their water carriers by quoting them over and over and over and over again.

But there's a solution for that, too. The wonderful thing about the Kook File is that it is a marvel of modern technology, because it is infinitely expanding. There's plenty of room for anyone who would like to join TweedlePrudhomme and TweedleVarnell there, and dance round and round and round until the end of time, singing the same sheepheaded songs endlessly, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and...

Ashton

Just can't stand the fact that your arguments don't hold water, and I can poke holes in them all day long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice how little people always resort to slander and name calling, right about the time they run out of logical arguments? You might as well just leave now, Ashton, or would you like us all to witness your meltdown?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Cliff believes the dart his above the shirtline, then took a sudden southern turn


CV: And the cricoid cartilage is not the same as the thyroid cartilage.

Carrico said the wound was below the thyroid cartilage.

Why didn't he say the wound was below the cricoid cartilage, instead?

Did he forget his anatomy?

Cliff, everybody knows that the wound was below the cricoid cartilage. It was between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Same place as the tracheostomy. Are you disputing this?

I'm not discounting the possibility of significant deflection of the round.

You're disputing the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photographic evidence when you deny JFK was shot in the throat from the front on the first-strike.

Significant deflection??? My god Cliff, the dart would have to stop short of hitting the throat above the shirtline, turn downward, travel an inch between the skin and the collar band of the shirt, turn toward the throat again, and ....finally enter the throat! Now that, my friends, is a magic bullet!

Edited by Sandy Larsen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You brought up the lapel -- which has nothing to do with anything.

*PLONK*

There. That screeching is out of my life for good. Now I won't have to put up with 800 more repetitions of Carrico's exquisitely ambiguous influenced testimony about a tie knot.

That's odd. You have no trouble with Arlen Specter torturing testimony out of the throat entrance witnesses.

Now I won't have to endure someone insisting hysterically, repeatedly, over and over and over and over and over, that the back of a rearview mirror in a photo is a face.

...I think you're right. I stand corrected. His face was behind the back of the rearview mirror.

Blue line points to his hairline, red line to his shoulder-tip, yellow line to his left hand which was clearly in front of his throat.

alt6_zps5imbm5wh.png

Unless you want to claim JFK had a loooooong face.

Now I won't have to deal with the sad shambles of those too technology challenged to be able to quote messages in a forum—while insisting that they are superior to all others. Now I won't have to be subjected to the tag-team disinformation twins—unless there are others who are determined to be their water carriers by quoting them over and over and over and over again.

But there's a solution for that, too. The wonderful thing about the Kook File is that it is a marvel of modern technology, because it is infinitely expanding. There's plenty of room for anyone who would like to join TweedlePrudhomme and TweedleVarnell there, and dance round and round and round until the end of time, singing the same sheepheaded songs endlessly, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and...

Contentless dismissals don't go for a dime a dozen any more. The market is flooded.

Dealey Plaza witnesses described JFK grabbing at his throat but they can't be correct because Ashton Gray says otherwise.

Witness bashing is cheap.

Ashton

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Cliff believes the dart his above the shirtline, then took a sudden southern turn

CV: And the cricoid cartilage is not the same as the thyroid cartilage.

Carrico said the wound was below the thyroid cartilage.

Why didn't he say the wound was below the cricoid cartilage, instead?

Did he forget his anatomy?

Cliff, everybody knows that the wound was below the cricoid cartilage. It was between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Same place as the tracheostomy. Are you disputing this?

I'm not discounting the possibility of significant deflection of the round.

You're disputing the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photographic evidence when you deny JFK was shot in the throat from the front on the first-strike.

Significant deflection??? My god Cliff, the dart would have to stop short of hitting the throat above the shirtline, turn downward, travel an inch between the skin and the collar band of the shirt, turn toward the throat again, and ....finally enter the throat! Now that, my friends, is a magic bullet!

No, the round could have deflected off the cricoid cartilage down the right side of the trachea ending up at the right T1 transverse process.

Bullets are known to take unpredictable paths in the body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Cliff believes the dart his above the shirtline, then took a sudden southern turn

CV: And the cricoid cartilage is not the same as the thyroid cartilage.

Carrico said the wound was below the thyroid cartilage.

Why didn't he say the wound was below the cricoid cartilage, instead?

Did he forget his anatomy?

Cliff, everybody knows that the wound was below the cricoid cartilage. It was between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Same place as the tracheostomy. Are you disputing this?

I'm not discounting the possibility of significant deflection of the round.

You're disputing the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photographic evidence when you deny JFK was shot in the throat from the front on the first-strike.

Significant deflection??? My god Cliff, the dart would have to stop short of hitting the throat above the shirtline, turn downward, travel an inch between the skin and the collar band of the shirt, turn toward the throat again, and ....finally enter the throat! Now that, my friends, is a magic bullet!

No, the round could have deflected off the cricoid cartilage down the right side of the trachea ending up at the right T1 transverse process.

Bullets are known to take unpredictable paths in the body.

But how could that be? The testimony is clear that the tracheostomy was performed 1) directly over the throat wound, and 2) at the location of the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Which means that the wound was located at the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. What you are positing contradicts this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But how could that be?

The wound could have been as much as 5/16 of an inch in diameter.

The doctors were in a hurry.

You're quibbling over fractions of an inch.

The testimony is clear that the tracheostomy was performed 1) directly over the throat wound,

Could have been a fraction of an inch off.

and 2) at the location of the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Which means that the wound was located at the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. What you are positing contradicts this.

Dr. Malcolm Perry's WC testimony:

<quote on, emphasis added>

Mr. SPECTER - Would you now describe as particularly as possible the neck wound you observed?

Dr. PERRY - This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm. in diameter.
It was exuding blood slowly which partially obscured it. Its edges were neither ragged nor were they punched out, but rather clean.

<quote off>

Dare say it's possible the hurried doctors mis-estimated the wound location by a fraction of an inch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JFK+TIE+BULHOLE.jpg

Above should have at the bottom : "Portion of JFK's tie showing hole through it." from R Prudhomme #262 Jan 24 (I don't know why the above didn't quote and have a heading. I had a helluva time doing all this.)

Robert and all,

This is a nick rather than a hole in the tie, right?

I have a big favor to ask everyone. I am certain that I read, many years ago, in a primary source, that: "There was a nick in the lower left of the tie-knot." Can anyone help me out with a reference?

If you rotate the above photo 90 degrees clockwise (as you did in the GIF that follows), as a tie goes horizontally around the knot, that would put the blood-stain (and burn mark I would argue), slightly on the back side of the knot. IF the nick were on the side. Small potatoes, that. I just wonder if this closeup photo of the tie on JFK was THAT morning, because it looks like the nick and stain(s) should be one vertical row of icons to JFK's left. Maybe he tightened his tie sometime after this pic was taken. That would pull it over some to his left. Again, small potatoes.


JFK-Love-Field-TIE-NICK-COMPARE-ANIM.gif

Both the photos are great finds and resources, and the GIF is great.

And this topic is great about clarifying the bullet wound that is, was, and always will be in JFK's throat.

Cliff Varnell #757: Linda Willis testimony, "...first turned from waving,...grabbed his throat and kind of slumped forward."

Nellie Connally: "It was just a frightening noise and it came from the right. (Trans: it passed by HER right. She didn't know the origin. I believe this shot, the first to hit inside the limo, came from the South Knoll, Over Greer's left ear, might have nicked the roof support, making "a frightening noise" [along with the sonic boom] and causing it to land lower than the gunman was sighting, into "lower anterior third" of JFK's neck, instead of his head. OR just because Greer was slowing so much, THAT could have made the bullet lower than intended.)

Nellie (cont.): she turned right "and saw the President as he had both hands at his NECK." "no utterance, no cry" (She didn't hear him exclaim "My God, I'm hit" because the "frightening noise" briefly deafened her OR she was scared temporarily deaf OR she was l***g)

Nellie finish: "...and he just sort of slumped down." Which corroborates Linda Willis and everyone else who saw him, including the heavily messed-with Zapruder film.

Cliff Varnell #763 and 765 --Nurse Henchliffe is simply GREAT. Very simple, two obvious wounds: a small, clean puncture ENTRANCE wound in the throat and a blowout in the right back of the head. Dr Carrico concurs.

Humes probably has one thing right, only because he had the time to study it closely, carefully. The nick on the right side of the trachea was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal rings. Not the 2nd and 3rd as the rushed Parkland doctors estimated.

To CONCLUDE -- a high-velocity small-bore round from a muzzled rifle came from the South Knoll over Greer's left ear, Then MAYBE glanced off the underside of the roof support. And struck JFK in the neck (just above the collar bone), contused right lung apex, and exited the back between spine and scapula at T4 level.. Ripped holes in the shirt and coat, which evidence was not destroyed, miraculously. I know this sounds like one of those impossible basketball shots -- off the roof, onto the metal bed of a passing turnip truck, through the tree, and SWISH through the hoop -- but it's snot.

James Gordon in the "Shallow" back wound topic (with ref. to Gary Murr) had a lot about the FBI tests for metal residue on the coat and shirt holes. They found a lot of metal there and none on the front clothing. Because the bullet was nearly pristine entering the throat and messed up and drastically slowed exiting the back. Therefore, the throat was the entrance and the back was the exit for that one missile from South Knoll.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×