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

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff. You said, and I quote:

"But Perry found no evidence of a collapsed lung."

To which I replied, and I quote:

It's obvious from everything we know (all the testimony presented by Robert) that Kennedy was treated for pneumothorax.

I didn't say Kennedy certainly had pneumothorax. Though I believe he may have. Just like Perry believed he may have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting for a cogent explanation for how JFK was shot in the back first and yet his hands reflexively moved in front of his throat/chin.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff. You said, and I quote:

"But Perry found no evidence of a collapsed lung."

To which I replied, and I quote:

It's obvious from everything we know (all the testimony presented by Robert) that Kennedy was treated for pneumothorax.

I didn't say Kennedy certainly had pneumothorax. Though I believe he may have. Just like Perry believed he may have.

The autopsy witnesses put the kibosh on that scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff. You said, and I quote:

"But Perry found no evidence of a collapsed lung."

To which I replied, and I quote:

It's obvious from everything we know (all the testimony presented by Robert) that Kennedy was treated for pneumothorax.

I didn't say Kennedy certainly had pneumothorax. Though I believe he may have. Just like Perry believed he may have.

The autopsy witnesses put the kibosh on that scenario.

Some might say they covered it up. A back wound so low as to potentially cause pneumothorax wouldn't have been compatible with the magic bullet theory.

Edited by Sandy Larsen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff

Do you believe the back entrance wound was at the level of the C7/T1 vertebrae, or the level of the T3 vertebra?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not bashing witnesses, Cliff.

The hell you the aren't!

I want you to do more than link us to a couple of vague reports.

Tough shoot, Sherlock. Quit projecting your Pet Theorist mentality onto me.

I want you to tell us, in your own words, where you think the assassin that delivered the dart stood.

The throat shot came from somewhere in front.

The back shot came from somewhere behind.

JFK was murdered in a military-style ambush.

The rest is speculation I'll leave to you guys.

I want you to tell us what the delivery mechanism looked like, what the dart looked like and how the dart was propelled.

Nothing vague in the testimonies of Senseney and Colby.

It's a "lead," not a certainty.

Savvy "lead"?

Interpretation: "I got nothin'!!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff.

*PLONK*

Ashton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The autopsists said that the bullet entering near the EOP "tunneled" under the skin. From reading that I got the impression that the bullet had hit at such a tangential angle that it skidded down the back of the cranium.

Lt Lipsey stated that the autopsists were sure that the bullet that entered near the EOP exited from the throat.

Both Bob and I believe the bullet (or fragments thereof) could have gone down the neck and resulted in a projectile exiting the throat. I am partial to the possibility of that projectile being a chard of bone.

Some have ridiculed that thought. One pointed to some WC testimony stating the the wound was smooth. Somehow that was supposed to have shown the projectile couldn't have been a chard of bone.

Well here is some WC testimony I just read on another thread that pertains to this:

"Dr. Jones: ....There appeared to be relatively smooth edges around the wound, and if this occurred as a result of a missile, you would have probably thought it was a missile of very low velocity and probably could have been compatible with a bone fragment of either--probably exiting from the neck, but it was a very small, smooth wound."

Just wanted to point that out.

I'm glad we agree on the possibility of a bullet skidding underneath the back of the cranium. In fact, with the way Humes moved wounds around on JFK's body, it wouldn't surprise me if the bullet never touched the cranium at all, and only entered high on the neck.

With this in mind, I go back to the HSCA interview of Jerrol Custer, the x-ray tech who took all of the x-rays of JFK at the autopsy. In his interview, he was quite adamant that the x-ray he recalled seeing of JFK's neck was not the one in the Archives, and that the x-ray he recalled showed "many fragments" (presumably bullet fragments) in the vicinity of cervical vertebrae C3/C4.

2303W.jpg

Diagram shows cervical vertebra C7 on the bottom. By counting backward, while going up, C4 is three vertebrae above C7. Use the "spinous processes" (dorsal projections) to identify each individual vertebra. Counting down from the thyroid cartilage just above the trachea (windpipe) we are looking for the space between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings. Te projectile that wounded the trachea was travelling on a downward angle, back to front, that left a tear extending from the 2nd to the 3rd tracheal ring; nicely lined up with our high neck entrance wound and the C3/C4 vertebrae.

I still believe some type of frangible bullet was used against JFK, although there was not really any such type bullet on the market in 1963, and the first commercially available frangible, the Glaser Safety Slug, would not be introduced until 1974. I do know that many inventors had been trying to develop a lethal frangible bullet for years before the assassination, and God only knows what the CIA were cooking up.

The point to be made is that, while modern frangible bullets are quite sophisticated and extremely lethal, a frangible bullet in 1963 may have been a crude forerunner of its modern day form. In other words, while it might have been quite lethal in the right wound, ie. brain or lung, it may have been quite ineffective in another type of wound.

Another thing we have to remember is that the throat wound was described as being a neat little round wound 3-8 mm in diameter. As Dr. Jones described it, it could have been an entry wound, as there was so little disturbance to surrounding tissue. However, he went on to say it could also have been a bullet exit wound, but only of a bullet that was travelling at an extremely reduced velocity. Both this and the roundness of the wound I believe to be very important.

I also find it very important that traces of metal were found on the shirt and coat, where the bullet entered JFK's back, but no traces of metal were found on the "slits" below the shirt collar button nor on the nick on the tie.

Let's take another look at the Glaser Safety Slug and see if these clues can be tied together.

https://www.corbon.com/glaser-safety-slug.html

Anatomy-Glaser.jpg

It is conceivable that one of these bullets, or a bullet very similar in construction, entered high on the right rear of JFK's neck, and impacted his cervical vertebrae at the level of C3/C4. Designed to disintegrate when in contact with hard surfaces, it may have broken up on impact. It had already travelled 2 inches through the muscles in the back of JFK's neck and, as the tests with ballistic gel showed, this alone would have this bullet well on its way to disintegration, with the impact at C3/C4 merely being the final push. As videos of the Glaser round fired into ballistic gel will show, the bullet may have been breaking up and slowing down before it impacted the vertebrae, explaining the lack of massive damage to the neck.

The #6 or #12 shot would account for the "many fragments" observed by Jerrol Custer.

The blue polymer (plastic) ball in the tip of the bullet could have found its way through the right side of the vertebral stack, leaving the rest of the bullet behind it, although its velocity would be greatly reduced if it had to smash through interlocking vertebral bones to do so. This would satisfy the requirements of Dr. Jones' bullet exiting the throat at a greatly reduced velocity.

Regardless of how it was spinning, following its impact with C3/C4, the blue polymer ball would still be a ball, and could not make an exit wound that was NOT round, regardless of whether it exited at 90° to the body or not. In comparison, a tumbling bullet, or a bullet leaving the body at an oblique angle, will leave an oblong wound instead of a round wound.

As it was a blue polymer ball made from plastic, it would naturally leave no metallic traces on JFK's shirt or tie.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff

Do you believe the back entrance wound was at the level of the C7/T1 vertebrae, or the level of the T3 vertebra?

T3, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not bashing witnesses, Cliff.

The hell you the aren't!

I want you to do more than link us to a couple of vague reports.

Tough shoot, Sherlock. Quit projecting your Pet Theorist mentality onto me.

I want you to tell us, in your own words, where you think the assassin that delivered the dart stood.

The throat shot came from somewhere in front.

The back shot came from somewhere behind.

JFK was murdered in a military-style ambush.

The rest is speculation I'll leave to you guys.

I want you to tell us what the delivery mechanism looked like, what the dart looked like and how the dart was propelled.

Nothing vague in the testimonies of Senseney and Colby.

It's a "lead," not a certainty.

Savvy "lead"?

Interpretation: "I got nothin'!!"

Got no pet theories for you, Bob.

That's your department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff. You said, and I quote:

"But Perry found no evidence of a collapsed lung."

To which I replied, and I quote:

It's obvious from everything we know (all the testimony presented by Robert) that Kennedy was treated for pneumothorax.

I didn't say Kennedy certainly had pneumothorax. Though I believe he may have. Just like Perry believed he may have.

The autopsy witnesses put the kibosh on that scenario.

Some might say they covered it up. A back wound so low as the cause pneumothorax wouldn't have been compatible with the magic bullet theory.

A back wound you could explore entirely with your little finger destroys the SBT.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff. You said, and I quote:

"But Perry found no evidence of a collapsed lung."

To which I replied, and I quote:

It's obvious from everything we know (all the testimony presented by Robert) that Kennedy was treated for pneumothorax.

I didn't say Kennedy certainly had pneumothorax. Though I believe he may have. Just like Perry believed he may have.

The autopsy witnesses put the kibosh on that scenario.

Some might say they covered it up. A back wound so low as the cause pneumothorax wouldn't have been compatible with the magic bullet theory.

A back wound you could explore entirely with your little finger destroys the SBT.

If you had fingers like a four year old girl. The back wound was only 1/4 inch in diameter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had fingers like a four year old girl. The back wound was only 1/4 inch in diameter.

Flesh stretches, Bob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the difference between Sandy, Bob et al and me:

The doctors are Parkland entertained the possibility JFK suffered a collapsed lung.

The doctors at Bethesda entertained the possibility JFK was struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in an autopsy.

Sandy, Bob & Co. morph a possibility into a certainty.

I take the Prosectors' Scenario seriously, but it's not a certainty.

I did no such thing, Cliff.

*PLONK*

Ashton

Huh?

Ashton, show me where I said that Kennedy certainly suffered pneumothorax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had fingers like a four year old girl. The back wound was only 1/4 inch in diameter.

Flesh stretches, Bob.

Really, Cliff? Is that just a guess on your part, or are you speaking from experience?

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

×