Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
David Von Pein

DEBUNKING CONSPIRACY MYTHS -- Lt. J.C. Day And The Print On The Rifle

Recommended Posts

One more time, for the literacy challenged among us, how did the bullet get through JFK's neck without hitting any vertebrae?

You know it couldn't have happened, I know it couldn't have happened, everybody else knows it couldn't have happened. That makes it u-nan-i-mous.

Give up. Go back to selling used cars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even IF the bullet could clear the outer tip of the right transverse process of C7, it would be travelling at a right to left angle of a minimum of 23°.

Investigators determined the Sniper's Nest on the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD was only 9° laterally removed from a line drawn lengthwise through the limo at roughly z224. How did it travel through JFK's neck at an angle of 23°?

Robert P.

I understand how the 9 degree angle has been measured. Is the 23 degree angle also measured relative to "a line drawn lengthwise through the limo at roughly z224"? If not, then what angle relative to the limo line would be required to clear the "outer tip of the right transverse process of C7?"

Thanks for any info,

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 23° angle, from right to left through JFK's neck, is measured from a line running lengthwise through the limo at z224, and assumes JFK to be facing forward at the moment the Magic Bullet was fired, with a 5° allowance for the possibility JFK may have been turned 5° to his right.

Arriving at the figure of 23° (actually closer to 28° if JFK's shoulders and head were perpendicular to the limo centre line) required careful study and measurement of many anatomical cross sectional diagrams of the human neck at cervical vertebra C7. These diagrams were drawn after careful study and measurement of many CAT scans of the human neck and, using these diagrams, I feel the accuracy of my measurements to be within at least a couple of degrees. Considering the vast difference between 9° and 23-28°, I would say there is room for a very broad margin of error here.

I should point out that, according to the WCR, the Magic Bullet passed to the outside of the extreme right tip of the C7 right transverse process, yet passed over and grazed the upper surface of the right transverse process of thoracic vertebra T1, directly below C7. This ties the WC into one precise location for the entrance wound, plus the path of the bullet. The passing of the bullet through the extreme right side of JFK's trachea, also noted by the WCR, completes the picture and allows us to draw a very precise track of the bullet.

As in most cases, the WCR's own evidence is the WCR's worst enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Ray. Like Bennett SAW THE BULLET IN FLIGHT as it entered the President's back.

You must be kidding.

Yet another bona fide witness who was lying then. Strange how the ones who don't support the Warren Commission were all lying or mistaken.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said Bennett was "lying". I merely pointed out the obvious --- SS Agent Glen Bennett could not possibly have seen the bullet entering JFK's upper back, and therefore, Glen Bennett could not possibly have known for certain how far down on JFK's back the bullet entered.

Isn't this fact even obvious to you, Ray Mitcham?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP,

Point of logic. Just because Bennett couldn't have seen the bullet that struck JFK in the back doesn't mean Bennett couldn't have seen where the bullet struck JFK's back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, Ray. Like Bennett SAW THE BULLET IN FLIGHT as it entered the President's back.

You must be kidding.

Once again Von Pain, you use the trick of quoting something which hasn't been written. Where did anybody say the "Bennett saw the bullet in flight". You seem to have the gift of misquoting other posters entries.

It is not just sloppy posting , but deliberate misquoting by you. Typical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said Bennett was "lying". I merely pointed out the obvious --- SS Agent Glen Bennett could not possibly have seen the bullet entering JFK's upper back, and therefore, Glen Bennett could not possibly have known for certain how far down on JFK's back the bullet entered.

Isn't this fact even obvious to you, Ray Mitcham?

The fact is enough for me.

Special Agent Bennett.

"I heard another fire-cracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder"

No matter what rubbish you come up to try to defend your position, it is untenable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are others much more qualified to comment than I but I did a good bit of hunting as a young man and its not necessary to see the bullet in flight. Often you can be pretty clear about

where the strike was from watching the target you shot at the time of impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are others much more qualified to comment than I but I did a good bit of hunting as a young man and its not necessary to see the bullet in flight. Often you can be pretty clear about

where the strike was from watching the target you shot at the time of impact.

Larry, nobody said Bennett saw the bullet in flight.It is just one of Von Pain's straw man arguments he is usually associated with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Bennett....

Once again.....

I was merely stating an obvious fact --- i.e., the only way that Glen Bennett could KNOW for certain that a bullet hit the President "about four inches down from the right shoulder" would be to either see the bullet in flight (which, of course, is humanly impossible) or to see the bullet hole in Kennedy's body or clothing or to see the blood oozing from a wound in the President's back. Other than these methods, tell me HOW a witness could state for certain exactly where on JFK's back the bullet entered?

Main point being --- Bennett GUESSED. And his GUESS wasn't too far afield, I will say that. And he also GUESSED about the head entry wound too, which, interestingly enough, is a guess that is completely at odds with the LOW head entry found in the autopsy report, but is consistent with the autopsy photos....

"A second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the President's head."

-- Glen A. Bennett; 11/23/63

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/Sa-benne.htm

And as a side note here .... you can bet your last greenback that you'll never ever hear a conspiracy theorist quoting the above Bennett quote concerning the head shot that Bennett said came FROM BEHIND. But the CTers sure love Glen Bennett when it comes to his amazing ability to pinpoint the location of President Kennedy's back wound.

So, Bennett's guesswork was fairly accurate as things turned out. But there's no way he could have known with any certainty precisely how many inches below the shoulder JFK was struck.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 23° angle, from right to left through JFK's neck, is measured from a line running lengthwise through the limo at z224

Robert,

Thanks for elaborating.

As a devout reader of your posts I was certain you had it all calculated down to the size of a gnat's arse...but I wanted to be sure that both angles were measured relative to the same reference plane, as I had assumed.

I feel the accuracy of my measurements to be within at least a couple of degrees. Considering the vast difference between 9° and 23-28°, I would say there is room for a very broad margin of error here.

Isn't it interesting how someone like Dale Myers can calculate the coordinates of the bullet entrance and exit with such a high degree of precision that according to him, the trajectory line through JFK's head wounds "passed right through the open window" in the sniper's nest? I wonder if a 0.1 degree error in roll, pitch and yaw would cause the trajectory to miss the entire window...

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"As a devout reader of your posts I was certain you had it all calculated down to the size of a gnat's arse...but I wanted to be sure that both angles were measured relative to the same reference plane."

LOL With colourful language like that, you would have made a good logger. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL With colourful language like that, you would have made a good logger.

I'm flattered! [blush...]

Edited by Tom Neal

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  

×
×
  • Create New...