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
Sign in to follow this  
Evgenia Plotnikova-Doumerc

Student's question: Single Bullet Theory

Recommended Posts

Hello to everyone! ;)

I was recently reading some information about JFK assasination and was particularly interested by the Single Bullet Theory, perhaps because this topic seemed to me very controversial and quite confusing.

As far as I understood, the statement by Warren Commission that so called ''Magic bullet'' wounded JFK in the throat and also Connally in the shoulder, is now believed false if the President and Connally were sitting at relatively same heigths, one in front of the other. The reason is that if bullet was fired from the Book Depository, it would have such a flight path that it would not hit Connally. (Correct me, please if I am wrong, I may have misread the information).

So, can we suggest that the bullet that wounded both the President and Connally was still one, but was fired from the Grassy Knoll? I read that some witnesses claimed to see/hear the shots from there too, but would it be the right trajectory and is there any evidence that would prove it?

Thank you very much! :)

Background details of the people answering this questions can be found at:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1169

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hello to everyone! ;)

I was recently reading some information about JFK assasination and was particularly interested by the Single Bullet Theory, perhaps because this topic seemed to me very controversial and quite confusing.

As far as I understood, the statement by Warren Commission that so called ''Magic bullet'' wounded JFK in the throat and also Connally in the shoulder, is now believed false if the President and Connally were sitting at relatively same heigths, one in front of the other. The reason is that if bullet was fired from the Book Depository, it would have such a flight path that it would not hit Connally. (Correct me, please if I am wrong, I may have misread the information).

So, can we suggest that the bullet that wounded both the President and Connally was still one, but was fired from the Grassy Knoll? I read that some witnesses claimed to see/hear the shots from there too, but would it be the right trajectory and is there any evidence that would prove it?

Thank you very much! :)

Eugenia... the problem with your question is that it is based on incorrect information from the Warren Commission report. It is impossible to give a short answer to your question as phrased. There is much more involved than shooting sites and trajectories. Whole chapters in many JFK books are dedicated to this subject. I suggest that you use Google search engine and type SINGLE BULLET THEORY, and you will have 163,000 entries to choose from, and most of them do a better job than I can give in explaining it.

Remember... Google often provides easier answers than asking us. It is like having your own private library of JFK books.

Jack White ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part one

Evgenia,

Let me see if I can help you better understand what happen without making it too complicated. Connally was indeed sitting lower in the car than JFK was and the first picture below gives you a side view of their seating heights. The photo was taken on Elm Street by Robert Croft. On the drawing located at top left center of the picture is a Warren Commission exhibit that shows a hole on the rear right side of Kennedy's neck. I have taken a red dot and placed it where the actual hole was on the President's back as seen on the autopsy photo and added a red arrow pointing to the new erroneous location the Warren Commission created. Gerald Ford is said to have been the author of the moving of the wound location on the Commission exhibits. I placed on the Croft photo a red dotted line that shows the needed trajectory to have a bullet pass through JFK without hitting any bones and then travel on to Connally unmolested. A trajectory heading downward and hitting JFK in the back where his actual wound was located would mean that the bullet had to have been deflected to exit out near the President's Adams Apple and then that would have caused all kinds of problems for the Commission to get a one shot trajectory to account for all the wounds to both men. Let's try and see why that wound needed to be raised on paper in order to make the SBT work by what is shown on the Zapruder film.

Click on the second picture and watch it run. We see as JFK is coming out from behind the road sign that he is bringing his hands up to his opened mouth while Connally is grimacing in pain at the instant a bullet is ripping through his torso. Because the President has been hidden behind the road sign, it appears at first glance that JFK's reaction to being hit starts at the same time Connally first reacts to being hit.

To understand what is happening as JFK is behind the road sign for that fraction of a second before he emerges, we need to go back and watch the President before going behind the sign and apply that to what the actual witnesses had stated. If you click on the third attachment and let it run, you will see JFK looking to his right and waving to the crowd. Halfway through the clip you see JFK immediately start his hand moving inward towards the middle of his person. Assassination photographers Hugh Betzner and Phil Willis seem to have locked the timing of the first shot in between their photographs. Betzner's photo equates with Zapruder frame 186 and the photo Willis took equates with Zapruder frame 202. Betzner had said he had just taken his photo just before the first shot rang out and Willis said he took his photo just after he heard the first shot. The halfway mark in the clip posted below is when JFK flipped his hand over and started it inward to a position directly in front of him in less than 1.5 seconds. I believe that every witness that heard the first shot and could see the President had stated that this first loud explosion was the shot that hit Kennedy. (go on to part 2 of my answer)

Edited by Larry Peters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Part two

If we take the two frames showing Kennedy first coming out from behind the road sign, we will see that he was already reacting to being hit - his hands are now directly in front of him in a defensive posture and his moth is already open. With JFK's image being seen like this gives a false impression that he is just now starting his reaction, but as I said before - the evidence points to that as being an illusion. JFK's reaction seemed to have started just before going behind the road sign at around Z193/194/195.

The next film clip attached below is a wider view and I can tell you that a bullet traveling around 2000 feet per second will have passed through these men in less than a fraction of one film frame. Yet as JFK is emerging from behind the road sign ... his hands are already in a reactive posture - one more frame and his face is visible and it too his distressed and his mouth is already open. Between Frames Z223 and Z224 is when we see John Connally react to the bullet slamming into his back. So there was more than just a trajectory problem with the wounding of both of these men with the same bullet.

Why was the Z193 to Z195 wounding a JFK a problem for the Commission? It was because the alleged Oswald rifle needed a minimum of 2.3 cycles to recycle a shot. Form Z193 to Z223 when Connally is starting to react - we have a little over 1 1/2 seconds being used before the next shot is fired and it simply was not enough time for the Oswald rifle to have done the job. So the Commission moved the first shot back to around Z163 - Z165 and claimed that bullet missed the car altogether and struck the curb near James Tague. The problem here is James Tague said it was not the first shot that stung him on the cheek. But the official version ignored Tague and the two photographers who locked the first shot in between the moments that they had taken their photographs. Gerald Ford moved the wound from JFK's back to the right rear side of the President's neck to get an alignment that would make the SBT plausible. It was an all do or die attempt to make the SBT work because without it - there was a conspiracy and our Government was doing everything in their power to avoid admitting there was a conspiracy.

I will let you digest what I have shown so far and I'll try to answer any specific questions you may have. The film clips are found at Lancer and Miller is the one who posted them there and went into more detail that I have provided here. The Croft photo example was one I did for you. I hope this material has helped in some way in answering your question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,

have you seen Dale Myers´s great animation that shows that the single bullet theory is true after all.

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl2.htm

Of course that is until you see that in the animation (picture) Connally is hit in the center of his back - not below his right shoulder as one picture correctly shows before. Unbelievable!

Edited by ville huoponen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale Myers 3D animation response Part One

Larry,

Have you seen Dale Myers´s great animation that shows that the single bullet theory is true after all.

Of course that is until you see that in the animation (picture) Connally is hit in the center of his back - not below his right shoulder as one picture correctly shows before. Unbelievable!

Yes, your point is well taken. A researcher addressed some of his stuff on Lancer quite well. He checked one of the Myers frames and he found the limo had no vanishing point lines which would show that Myers had his images in the correct perspective. For those who might not know what a vanishing point is - a vanishing point is a spot on the horizon that an artist uses to keep his drawing in the proper perspective. I have offered a brief example below in picture one.

Picture two shows how the side to side lines on the limo should all go to a vanishing point. The photo used is the Moorman number five photo. It was discovered in the Myers Frame posted on Lancer that his lines running from side to side across the limo were parallel to one another. This alone is enough to call into question the accuracy of Myers 3D animation. I believe it was also posted on Lancer that Tony Cummings (computer software expert) said that Myers admitted that his snipers window may be off by an inch or so. Anyone who has measured angles knows that the further away you are measuring something - an inch mistake at your starting point can cause a huge error at the end of your measurement.

Edited by Larry Peters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale Myers 3D animation response Part Two

Look at the first attachment in this post. When an overlay was done of the actual Zapruder frame that corresponded to that created by Dale Myers - please note the John Connally sitting height to the cross bar in the Myers animation against the same in the actual Zapruder film. This should give a good idea as to the amount of error that is going on in an animation that has said we should believe in the SBT.

The next attachment shows some parallel references found in Myers 3D animation. These were shown in reference to the vanishing point discussion in the Part One post.

Anyone wanting to know more about Myers animation and the critiques pertaining to it can type in the name "Dale Myers 3D animation" in the Lancer forum search engine to find the threads pertaining to this topic.

http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...page=&mode=full

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Zhenia,

If your attention span is good, here are the facts for you to read through. (You might want to copy this and paste it into a word document for easier reading.)

The first written reports from Dallas on November 22, 1963, stated, “He was shot today by an assassin who sent a rifle bullet crashing into his temple.”

On January 23, 1964, the doctors who worked on Kennedy described the effort to save his life in an article in the Texas State Journal of Medicine.

“Dr. William Kemp Clark, a specialist in head injuries, said most of the right side of the back of the skull was gone . . . Dr. Charles J. Carrico, the first physician to see Mr. Kennedy, noted two external wounds, one in the neck and another in his head. In the head wound, he saw shredded brain tissue.”

An article on November 23, 1963, the day after Kennedy was shot, said that Dr. Clark had described Kennedy’s head wound as “a large gaping wound with considerable loss of tissue.”

On December 18, 1963, the Washington Post reported that the “as yet unofficial report of pathologists who performed the autopsy on the President’s body the night of November 22” says that “the second bullet to hit the President tore off the right rear portion of his head so destructively as to be ‘completely incompatible with life.’”

Regarding Kennedy’s neck wound, “the findings of the as yet unofficial report of pathologists” on December 18, 1963, twenty-six days after Kennedy was killed, alleged to “clear up confusions, particularly whether one shot hit him in the neck from the front.”

The lengthy article said none of the doctors at Parkland Hospital were aware that he had been shot “in the back shoulder, five to seven inches below the collar line,” because he’d been on his back “until the body was covered with a sheet after he was pronounced dead.”

The article, seemingly verbose, was already touting the official line that he was shot from behind. The first words of the article are: “President Kennedy was shot twice, both times from behind,” and several paragraphs later it blends in the part about doctors being unaware of a bullet in his shoulder, which serves as a premise for how the doctors allegedly explained things.

When it gets to the part about the neck wound, it says, “The Dallas doctors admittedly were in disagreement. Some believed the President had been shot twice, the neck wound being from a glancing hit: one of the surgeons explained over television that he was shot only once, and that a fragment from the bullet that hit his head coursed downward and emerged through the front of his throat.” (As will be seen, it must have been an anonymous surgeon.)

The “as yet unofficial report of pathologists” also said a bullet was “found deep in his shoulder,” but the fact is, it was a rifle shot to the front neck that put a bullet “deep in his shoulder.”

The doctors trying to save the President’s life knew he wasn’t shot in the back and they also knew he wasn’t shot in the back of his neck, but the article headlined “Kennedy Autopsy Report: Final Bullet Was Lethal” touting “the findings of the as yet unofficial report of pathologists” was obviously being used to preclude any statements by the doctors that would interfere with a cover up.

Although it was taking the official line that Kennedy was shot from the rear, the article ran contrary to what the official line has since become. It said that a bullet other than the two that struck the President had struck Connally. It claimed that “Both bullets that struck the President were tied by ballistics tests to the rifle found in that building where Lee Harvey Oswald worked,” and it said, “The one bullet that struck Governor Connally, however, could not be similarly traced to any rifle because it fragmented.”

The Autopsy article also said that the bullet found in Kennedy’s shoulder caused “a hematoma, a pooling of blood inside the neck and shoulder muscles.”

It also said “the lower right back side, the occipito-parietal region of the head,” was “smashed off” by a bullet. The “unofficial report of pathologists” allegedly concurred on the idea that “a fragment was deflected and passed out the front of the throat,” which had allegedly been “explained over television” by “one of the surgeons” from the hospital.

Even though the article ran contrary to what the official line has since become, the wording was clearly meant to drive home the idea that the bullets came from the rear. The fifteen paragraphs of the article cite the “doctors” and the “pathologists who performed the autopsy” several times as sources of information for bullets coming from the rear and for how the wounds were caused. The story of the bullets and how the wounds were caused would change completely, but the idea that Kennedy was shot from behind would remain intact.

The description in this article twenty-six days after the President of the United States was assassinated, of how the neck wound was caused, eventually became inconsequential.

In 1965, the New York Times reported that medical examinations of the neck wound had been made “before a tracheotomy had altered the wound in the front of the President’s neck . . . Doctor Rufus Baxter said the neck wound was ‘unlikely’ to be a wound of exit and ‘would more resemble a wound of entry’ . . . Doctor Charles Carrico described the wound as ‘fairly round, had no jagged edges’ . . . Doctor Ronald Jones had described it as the sort ‘you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting from a patient.’”

In January 1964, the Texas State Journal of Medicine reported that Dr. Carrico, “the first physician to see Mr. Kennedy, noted two external wounds, one in the neck and another in his head. In the head wound, he saw shredded brain tissue.” A bullet did not enter the back of Kennedy’s neck, but at that time, the official line was that a bullet fragment coursed downward through his head and emerged through the front of his throat.

During public hearings in 1969, Colonel Pierre Finck, one of three pathologists who performed the autopsy on President Kennedy, testified that he made no attempt to dissect the President’s neck to trace the path of the bullet because, “We were told not to.” He “said he did not recall who had given the order not to dissect the President’s neck.” (If he had traced the path of the bullet, he would have traced it from the front of Kennedy’s throat until he found it deep in Kennedy’s shoulder.)

Colonel Finck also testified at the public hearings in 1969 that the bullet that allegedly struck Kennedy in the back of the head “exploded through the right top” and “a five-inch star-shaped wound resulted where the bullet exited,” and he testified that the bullet “disintegrated.”

According to the article, Colonel Finck testified that the bullet “entered nearly in the center of the back of President Kennedy’s head . . . exploded through the right top . . . a five-inch star-shaped wound resulted where the bullet exited . . . ‘The general direction of the missile was from the rear, going downward’” and the bullet “disintegrated.”

The downward angle and the five-inch star-shaped exit wound were undoubtedly supposed to account for it exiting in the rear before it allegedly disintegrated. (Was the bullet supposed to have disintegrated in his head, which actually makes the idea of a fragment more plausible, or was the bullet supposed to have “smashed off” the back of his head before disintegrating?)

As if Colonel Finck’s description wasn’t hard enough to figure out, he then said that another bullet allegedly fired by Oswald had a decidedly different angle than the alleged downward missile that allegedly took off a five-inch star-shaped piece of President Kennedy’s skull. He alleged that the bullet that was supposed to have struck Kennedy in the back of the shoulder five to seven inches below the collar line (the “as yet unofficial report of pathologists”), had “entered the back of the President's neck, had gone through the throat, and exited in front.” This was supposedly the “magic bullet” that caused Governor Connally’s wounds.

Colonel Finck’s account in 1969 was in keeping with the Warren Commission report that claimed the bullet exited through Kennedy’s throat and struck Connally, but both were in stark contrast to “the findings of the as yet unofficial report of pathologists” on December 18, 1963. In the first paragraph of that article, it says that the first bullet to hit Kennedy “was found deep in his shoulder.”

Toward the end it says, “The shot that killed was the third one fired; the second struck Governor John Connally.”

It also said, “All the shots, the investigations have shown, had trajectories that would line them up with the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository building, where the assassin has been traced.”

The autopsy article cited trajectories and “the assassin,” but the alleged “trajectories” did not account for Connally’s wounds, which is why the story of how Connally was wounded had to change.

Even the story of Kennedy’s wounds had to completely change. After the original reports, he would no longer be shot in the “temple,” and eventually there would no longer be a bullet “found deep in his shoulder,” nor would there be a fragment that coursed downward through his head.

The story had to be changed so that they could still claim that the shots came from behind, specifically from “the sixth floor window of the Texas School Book Depository,” where “the assassin” has been traced, “that building where Lee Harvey Oswald worked.”

The fact is, twenty-six days after the President of the United States was violently assassinated, neither the American public nor the American press were entertaining the idea that anyone would claim that one of the bullets passed through President Kennedy and wounded the Governor of Texas.

This original information less than four weeks after the assassination went a long way toward solidifying claims made by Dallas police that Oswald was “the assassin” and that he was guilty “beyond a shadow of a doubt,” but since it was in stark contrast to later positions of how the assassination officially took place, the quasi-official statements obviously didn’t stand up to scrutiny.

They did, however, pave the way for a palatable “magic bullet” and a Warren Commission statement that “although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President’s throat also caused Governor Connally’s wounds.”

The memo from the Justice Department to President Johnson, suggesting the establishment of the Warren Commission specifically states, “The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.”

Obviously in order to do what they were directed to do by the President of the United States, they had to say, “It is not necessary to any essential findings of the commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally.”

Another obvious fact is that it was absolutely “necessary” to claim that “the same bullet which pierced the President’s throat also caused Governor Connally’s wounds.” (The idea that a bullet had gone through President Kennedy’s neck had not been alleged by anyone until the Warren Commission came out with its report in September 1964. Stating that it was “the same bullet which pierced the President’s throat” makes it seem as though it was already an established fact that a bullet had passed through Kennedy’s neck, but the Warren Commission was the original source of this allegation of how Kennedy’s wounds were caused. Until the Warren Commission came out with its report in September 1964, that bullet was officially “found deep in his shoulder.”)

The doctors who tried to save Kennedy’s life refuted the Warren Commission’s “new story” within a few months. As has been cited, the New York Times reported in 1965 that medical examinations of the neck wound had been made “before a tracheotomy had altered the wound in the front of the President’s neck . . . Doctor Rufus Baxter said the neck wound was ‘unlikely’ to be a wound of exit and ‘would more resemble a wound of entry’ . . . Doctor Charles Carrico described the wound as ‘fairly round, had no jagged edges’ . . . Doctor Ronald Jones had described it as the sort ‘you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting from a patient.’”

Malcolm Kilduff, acting White House press secretary on November 22, 1963, stated in November 1966 that he didn’t accept the idea that a single bullet passed through Kennedy and caused Connally’s wounds in the chest and wrist because the bullet was “in almost perfect condition.” (Maybe it was a really great bullet, but the one that disintegrated was a piece of junk.)

On November 23, 1963, the Dallas Morning News reported that on November 22, Mrs. John Connally told the Governor’s administrative aide, Julian Read, that the first bullet struck President Kennedy.

“Mrs. Connally said she heard the first shot and Governor Connally turned around and looked at the President. Then, she said, just as Connally turned around he was hit by the second bullet.”

Obviously he wasn’t hit by the first shot and the bullet that struck him didn’t pass through Kennedy first, but the official line is that the first bullet passed through Kennedy’s neck, wounding Governor Connally, and the second one “smashed off” a five-inch piece of President Kennedy’s skull before “disintegrating.” As previously noted, for quite some time after the assassination, the official line was tailored to the knowledge that Kennedy was not wounded in the back of his neck, and tailored to the knowledge that the bullet that caused Connally’s wounds did not pass through Kennedy.

The article that cited Malcolm Kilduff and the bullet “in almost perfect condition” began with: “On the third anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination today, the two-year-old Warren Commission report on his death is the subject of intensive attacks,” but just as the unofficial report of pathologists didn’t stand up to scrutiny, the Warren report apparently didn’t stand up to scrutiny either as the Warren Commission’s schematic drawing actually showed the bullet entering Kennedy’s back.

So much had been said about the bullet entering his shoulder from behind that they had a schematic drawing made to show that happening. They simply left the impression that it changed directions and exited through his throat, which was a primary reason for the “intensive attacks” on the Warren Commission’s report in November of 1966, the third anniversary of Kennedy’s death.

The story was obviously in need of more doctoring and it evolved further, five years and two months after the “intensive attacks.”

In January of 1972, a urologist who examined the autopsy photographs and X-rays, in response to continuing criticism of the Warren report, claimed that the bullet passed through Kennedy’s neck “at a distinctly downward angle, more than was shown in the schematic drawings released by the Warren report . . . the path of the projectile into the back of President Kennedy’s neck and out the base of his throat . . . the front hole is considerably lower than the one in back.”

(A urologist? Twenty-six days after the President of the United States was assassinated, the American public had no problem with that bullet having been “found deep in his shoulder, five to seven inches below the collar line.” The alleged fragment that allegedly coursed downward through his head and caused the wound in the front of Kennedy’s neck may have been less acceptable.)

The urologist also “said that the wound that destroyed most of the right side of the brain was ‘horrible’ and that the pictures should never be made public.”

The urologist, purported to be “a student of assassinations by firearms,” (a student of assassinations by firearms?) “had published articles supporting the commission’s conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald had acted alone in killing the President.”

The story in the newspaper of how this “urologist” allegedly became “a student of assassinations by firearms” is that he had been in World War II, and like all doctors in a war he had to treat wounded soldiers, and it was at this point that he allegedly became “a student of assassinations by firearms.”

In August of 1972, Dr. Cyril Wecht, “coroner of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, Pa. and a past president of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences,” became “the first critic of the Warren Commission’s report on the assassination to be allowed to see the items from the autopsy on the President.”

Dr. Wecht said that “the preserved brain of President Kennedy, plus microscopic slides of tissues removed from his bullet wounds, have been withheld,” and “that the slides should show definitely if all of President Kennedy’s gunshot wounds were from the rear.”

“Entering bullets burn and soil tissues around the wound of entry but not at the point of exit,” according to Dr. Wecht, “who is both a pathologist and a lawyer.” He also said that the bullet alleged to have caused the severe wounds to Governor Connally after passing through the President was in “almost perfect condition” and this “made it virtually impossible that it could have caused such damage.”

“The slides, the brain, and possibly some other items were not included” when “autopsy materials were placed in the National Archives in 1966 by Burke Marshall.”

Mr. Marshall “said that Nicholas Katzenbach, as Attorney General, had ruled that certain X-rays, color transparencies and photographs taken at the autopsy were evidence relevant to the assassination, and that he, Mr. Marshall, obtained these from the Kennedy family and lodged them with the Archives in 1966.”

“Mr. Marshall said that other items had not been requested by the Justice Department because ‘they have no bearing on who killed the President.’”

(Withholding the microscopic slides that would prove Kennedy was not shot from behind was neither the first nor the last favor that Nicholas Katzenbach would do for the CIA. As Undersecretary of State in 1967, Katzenbach headed a three-man committee that glossed over the CIA’s first large scale domestic operation when it was exposed. Their official statement was that the CIA has “national policies established by the National Security Council from 1952 through 1954.” Katzenbach also set up the killing of Oswald when he had Oswald moved "basically for his own protection." And Katzenbach wrote the memo to set up the Warren Commission.)

The wound in President Kennedy’s temple wasn’t referred to after initial reports from Dallas said that an assassin “sent a rifle bullet crashing into his temple.”

Those reports also said that as the car sped to Parkland Hospital, “President Kennedy was on his back and Mrs. Kennedy had his head in her arms. Blood was pouring from the President’s temple.”

He wasn’t shot from behind. His skull didn’t crack like an eggshell, and the back of it didn’t fall off either. It was blown off by the bullet sent crashing into his temple.

Edited by Anthony Frank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The world's leading expert on the single bullet theory is a man caled Cyril H. Wecht.

Here are a couple of extracts from his testimony. You will find more at:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKwecht.htm

(1) Cyril Wecht was interviewed by Donald A. Purdy for the Select Committee on Assassinations about the single-bullet theory (8th September, 1978)

Donald Purdy: Dr. Wecht, what are the major conclusions of the forensic pathology panel with which you are in disagreement?

Cyril Wecht: The major disagreement is the single-bullet theory which I deem to be the very essence of the Warren Commission report's conclusions and all the other corroborating panels and groups since that time. It is the sine qua non of the Warren Commission report's conclusions vis-a-vis a sole assassin. Without the single-bullet theory, there cannot be one assassin, whether it is Oswald or anybody else.

I am in disagreement with various other conclusions of the panel. I am most unhappy and have been extremely dismayed by their failure to insist upon the performance of appropriate experiments, which I believe could have been undertaken with a reasonable degree of expenditure of time, energy, and money to once and for all show whether a bullet 6.5-millimeter, copper-jacketed, leadcore piece of military-type ammunition could indeed strike a rib and a radius in a human being and emerge in the condition which Commission exhibit 399 is today.

I am extremely unhappy about the fact that a greater and more intensive effort was not made to locate the missing pieces of very important medical evidence in this case, which I pointed out back in the summer of 1972. Not that I was the first to learn of this, but amazingly, nobody had made that public disclosure prior to that time. I have raised same questions concerning the head wound and the possibility, albeit remote, of a second shot fired in synchronized fashion from the right side or the lower right rear, synchronized with the head shot that struck the President in the back of the head. And this is related to a few pieces, a couple of pieces of evidence and, again, emphasizes the necessity of having the brain to examine. These are the major areas. There are, of course, numerous facets of all of these disagreements that are related to the so-called single-bullet theory.

Donald Purdy: Dr. Wecht, is it your opinion that no bullet could have caused all of the wounds to President Kennedy and Governor Connally or the Commission exhibit 399 could not have caused all of the wounds to both men?

Cyril Wecht: Based upon the findings in this case, it is my opinion that no bullet could have caused all these wounds, not only 399 but no other bullet that we know about or any fragment of any bullet that we know about in this case...

Donald Purdy: Dr. Wecht, what is the basis for your opinion that Commission exhibit 399 could not have caused all of the wounds to President Kennedy and Governor Connally?

Cyril Wecht: It is a composite based upon several things: The timing of the Zapruder film, which we know runs at 18.3 frames or individual units of the film strip per second; the evaluation of the wounds in the President and Governor Connally; the timing of the test-firing in the hands of the most skilled marksman the Government could find in 1964 of this Mannlicher-Carcano weapon, the bolt action nonautomatic World War II Italian carbine, a grossly inferior weapon; the very vivid testimony of Governor John Connally about which he has been completely consistent for the past 14 years concerning the fact that he was struck by a different bullet; the vertical and horizontal trajectories that must be attributed to Commission exhibit 399 if the single-bullet theory is to be substantiated. These are the various factors that relate to the single-bullet theory.

Donald Purdy: So, Dr. Wecht, it is your opinion, that were tests to be conducted to simulate these wounds, such tests could sufficiently duplicate the wounds in question to have an accurate illustration?

Cyril Wecht: Let me point out, that these tests that I am referring to have been performed, in fact, by a pathologist, Professor John Nichols, University of Kansas School of Medicine, a full-time academician, who shot them through ribs and wrists. I know Dr. Nichols. He is not an independently wealthy man. He was able to do this; he was able to get the materials; he was able to set up the experiments and follow through. Why our panel of distinguished experts with all our expertise and this staff representing a very prominent committee which, in turn, represents the House of Representatives of the United States Congress, why such tests could not be performed is beyond me. I feel constrained to say that they were not performed because people knew full well what the results would be. I also want to take strong exception with the statement that if one were to shoot through bones that are not innervated and vascularized as they are in living human beings, one cannot be sure that one is getting similar reactions. Here, we are not talking about how the President's body would have reacted to the head wound. We are not talking about that. We are talking only about whether a bullet, as several members of the House Committee have questioned Dr. Baden, we are talking about what the condition of the bullet would be if it went through these bones. There is no problem in setting up that experiment.

(2) Cyril Wecht was interviewed by Gary Cornwell for the Select Committee on Assassinations about the direction of the shot that hit Kennedy in the head (8th September, 1978)

Gary Cornwall: Directing your attention, next, to the single-bullet theory, as I understand your testimony, it is not that one bullet of the Mannlicher-Carcano type would not have been powerful enough to go through the neck, the chest, the wrists and imbed itself in the thigh, is that correct, as a matter of mere power?

Cyril Wecht: Yes; I believe that it is possible for that kind of ammunition to go through those several portions of human body.

Gary Cornwall: And if the single-bullet theory is not correct, how many bullets, in your view, did strike the two occupants of the car?

Cyril Wecht: Of course, then - let me answer that, I believe that the President was struck definitely twice, one bullet entering in the back, and one bullet entering in the back of the head. I believe that Gov. John Connally was struck by a bullet, and I believe that another bullet completely missed the car. I think that there were four shots most probably fired. I eagerly await with extreme anticipation the results of the consulting firm that I understand your committee has retained in Boston, Bolt, Beranek & Newman, concerning their interpretative studies of the motorcycle policeman's tape from that day; as to whether or not they have definitely found evidence of four shots having been fired. But I think your question was, how many bullets struck the occupants, and I think that there is definite evidence for three. There is a possibility of more, but I can't really introduce evidence that would corroborate that; more than three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot for all these posts! That was really interesting to read and I think that this topic seems a bit less confusing to me, although it does stay interesting. ;)

Can I ask a follow-up question? In his post Mr Simkin posted the following phrase of Cyril Wecht: ''I believe that Gov. John Connally was struck by a bullet, and I believe that another bullet completely missed the car. I think that there were four shots most probably fired. I eagerly await with extreme anticipation the results of the consulting firm that I understand your committee has retained in Boston, Bolt, Beranek & Newman, concerning their interpretative studies of the motorcycle policeman's tape from that day; as to whether or not they have definitely found evidence of four shots having been fired.''

What were the results of this study? Was there evidence found about the number of shots? (I know, Mr White asked not to ask about the number of shots, as that would be an essay-type question, but what about just this particular study? What conclusion was reached there? And where could I find these results?)

And thank you very much one more time, that was really fascinating reading!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The number of shots is about anyone's guess and here is why ...

From what I have gathered by what some other people who have considered the evidence in any depth - there seems to be several possibilites. During the making of Oliver Stone's movie it has been reported that over 30+ takes of shots being fired were conducted. Each take consisted of 7 shots each. It was discovered that depending on where you were standing in the plaza would determine on how many shots you had heard. Some shots were fired close enough together to sound like one shot, while other shots were just not heard at all by people at the other end of Elm Street. If we consider the evidence by going by what the witnesses said and by considering every wound, spark and dent was caused by a separate bullet, then we have -----

1) Bullet strike to JFK's throat

2) Bullet strike to JFK's back

3) Bullet strike to JFK's head

4) Bullet strike to John Connally's back

5) Bullet strike to John Connally's wrist

6) Bullet strike that witnesses saw spark off the asphalt

7) Bullet strike to the chrome molding atop of the windshield

8) Bullet strike to the windshield

9) Bullet strike to the Main Street curb by the Triple Underpass

*Then there is the alleged furrow where a bullet hit the turf on the South side of

Elm.

*There is the alleged bullet strike near the manhole cover on the South pasture.

*There is the alleged bullet strike to the sidewalk on the north side of Elm.

The official version is now up to four shots being fired.

Edited by Larry Peters

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What were the results of this study? Was there evidence found about the number of shots? (I know, Mr White asked not to ask about the number of shots, as that would be an essay-type question, but what about just this particular study? What conclusion was reached there? And where could I find these results?)

The House Select Committee on Assassinations was established in September 1976. A 12-member select committee was authorized to conduct an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King.

Louis Stokes of Ohio was named as the chairman of the committee and G. Robert Blakey as chief counsel.

The House Select Committee of Assassinations set up a panel of forensic pathologists to examine the autopsy materials and other medical evidence. Most of the members concluded that two bullets, both fired from the rear, struck Kennedy. However, one member, Cyril H. Wecht, rejected this theory claiming it was medically impossible, and suggested that at least one bullet had been fired from the right front.

During the investigation the committee discovered that the Dallas Police had a recording of the assassination. A microphone, mounted on one of the motorcycles escorting the motorcade, had picked up sounds in Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination. Acoustic experts analysed the recording and were able to distinguish four rifle shots. They concluded that there was a 95 per cent probability of the third bullet was fired from the Grassy Knoll.

As a result of this acoustic evidence G. Robert Blakey was able to state that there were "four shots, over a total period of 7.91 seconds were fired at the Presidential limousine. The first, second and fourth came from the Depository; the third from the Grassy Knoll."

The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that "scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy." It added that on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKassassinationsC.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The House Select Committee of Assassinations set up a panel of forensic pathologists to examine the autopsy materials and other medical evidence. Most of the members concluded that two bullets, both fired from the rear, struck Kennedy. However, one member, Cyril H. Wecht, rejected this theory claiming it was medically impossible, and suggested that at least one bullet had been fired from the right front.

Robert Tanabaum, who replaced Richard Sprague for a brief period, has said that the HSCA were given a false report concerning the rear head wound to President Kennedy. The report said that no Bethesda witness claimed to have seen a large wound on the back of JFK's head and as Robert Groden put it, "The photo panel never knew what to look for." Had the panel of known that each and every person at the autopsy did in fact see the large hole on the back of Kennedy's head while having the autopsy photos in front of them showing no such wound, then they would have been forced to denounce the offical autopsy photos and not been able to say from which direction the President had been shot. The bigger question would then be - Why was there a need to alter the photographs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The House Select Committee on Assassinations was established in September 1976. A 12-member select committee was authorized to conduct an investigation of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King.

Louis Stokes of Ohio was named as the chairman of the committee and G. Robert Blakey as chief counsel.

Congressman Henry Gonzalez, a Representative from Texas since 1961, was the original Chairman of the House Assassinations Committee after it was formed in 1976, and he was determined to get to the bottom of President Kennedy’s assassination, but as such, threatened the CIA’s security. CIA machinations resulted in Congressman Gonzalez resigning from the Committee in March 1977.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×