Jump to content
The Education Forum
Fred Litwin

Need single bullet theory diagram

Recommended Posts

Fred:

In you brook, right under your diagram, for purposes of intellectual and moral honesty you need to add this:

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-impossible-one-day-journey-of-ce-399

Since the Single Bullet Fantasy never happened, is this an adjunct to the Harry Potter series?

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or the one where the shot enters as it should yet exits the chest and then somehow moves from left to right between the 2 men...

The Nutter's intellectual dishonesty knows no bounds...

:up

1173147781_SBTandtheAustralianTVreenactmentprovetheSBTnotpossible.jpg.5eae7151f10fd61f584656853cc2175d.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the segment prior to the Aussie SBT test the "Beyond" producers rigged the Chad Zimmerman chiropractor x-ray test.

Chad put a metal disk four inches below the shirt and jacket collars of his Kennedy stand-in, Stan. 

They produced an x-ray showing a multiple inch elevation of Stan's shirt and jacket.

It took them hundreds of takes because the shirt and jacket kept falling down.

Chad once offered me $10,000 if I could prove Stan was a suitable stand-in for JFK.

That's right, Zimmerman offered me ten grand if I could prove he was on the level in his "Beyond' segment.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, did you ever hear what DVP said about the above?

 

He said the achievement of the show is how close it got to the actual Single Bullet Fantasy.

:help

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr Von Pein,

I always read your posts with interest as you back up your comments with evidence. I have studied an anatomically correct model of the neck. There is no gap for a bullet to pass through, it is built rather like a suit of armour. It can of course flex, but flexion does not result in a gap appearing at any angle (I tried this with the model). With this in mind, please could you point me to evidence that either shows the damage to the neck bones caused by a bullet fired from the TBSD, or provide an alternative explanation for the bullet path if it didn't pass through the neck bones. Thankyou in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Mr Von Pein,

I always read your posts with interest as you back up your comments with evidence. I have studied an anatomically correct model of the neck. There is no gap for a bullet to pass through, it is built rather like a suit of armour. It can of course flex, but flexion does not result in a gap appearing at any angle (I tried this with the model). With this in mind, please could you point me to evidence that either shows the damage to the neck bones caused by a bullet fired from the TBSD, or provide an alternative explanation for the bullet path if it didn't pass through the neck bones. Thankyou in advance.

Correct Eddy...  not only is there no room to simply "pass thru"...  the reality of those kinds of bullets (if used) is shown below with a slightly smaller bullet....

No bullet traveled thru JFK's upper chest... sorry nutters.

1673065892_SBT-MRIScanfortheweb.thumb.jpg.17322b1735ca6421c445936ff7283efb.jpg

 

A 6.5mm bullet would leave at least a quarter inch channel... not to mention the pressure waves and what they do to the soft tissue and bone surrounding the path...

the assertion that the wound closes up on itself is pure rubbish...

Related image

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Evidence?  What evidence?  Call it any kind of bullet you want.  Imagine all the firing angles you can.  None lead back to the Sniper's Nest.

I'm going to stick with Jesse Curry who said he never could put Oswald on the 6th floor with a weapon in his hands.  And, J. Edgar Hoover who said the evidence is not very, very strong. 

You can't prove, by legal standards, beyond a reasonable doubt, that anyone fired a rifle from the 6th floor Sniper's Nest.  5 out of 7 witnesses that were the closest to the Sniper's Nest said the shooting came from some other place.

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Josephs,

"Correct Eddy...  not only is there no room to simply "pass thru"...  the reality of those kinds of bullets (if used) is shown below with a slightly smaller bullet....

No bullet traveled thru JFK's upper chest... sorry nutters."

Great response.  I've got a question for you.  Can we really believe what the autopsy report says.  Can we really believe that JFK was only shot once in the back as described by the autopsy people?  There is so much BS in their report that naturally we might question other parts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, it's easy to sort out.

There is medical evidence which was produced/maintained according to proper autopsy protocol.

There is medical evidence which wasn't produced/maintained according to autopsy protocol.

We weigh the former and ignore the latter...Logical, right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Cliff,

All my life I've tried to avoid medical things.  So, the autopsy stuff is mostly greek to me.  Except for the photo showing JFK's back wounds. 

 

Thanks for you advice.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Thanks Cliff,

All my life I've tried to avoid medical things.  So, the autopsy stuff is mostly greek to me.  Except for the photo showing JFK's back wounds. 

 

Thanks for you advice.  

The photo showing JFK's back wasn't prepared according to autopsy protocol; there is no chain of possession for the autopsy photos, the photo shows a wound in a location two inches off from the location of the bullet holes in the clothes, it shows a wound with a lower margin abrasion collar consistent with a shot from below, shows a ruter that measures nothing; was singled out by the HSCA as "more confusing than informative."

The Fox 5 "back-of-the-head" photo is one of the ones we ignore, logically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

...could you point me to evidence that either shows the damage to the neck bones caused by a bullet fired from the TBSD, or provide an alternative explanation for the bullet path if it didn't pass through the neck bones.

Hi Eddy,

If the bullet that entered JFK's upper back truly had no possible way of exiting the front of his body without hitting some bones (as most conspiracy theorists believe), then I kind of doubt the three autopsy surgeons would have said this in their final report....do you? ....

"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body." -- JFK's Autopsy Report (Page 6); Warren Report, Page 543

----------------------------

There is also this conclusion reached by the Clark Panel in 1968....

"The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." -- From Clark Panel Report

Replay (for emphasis)....

"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds..."

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

-----------------------------

More:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-812.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another interesting part of the 1968 Clark Panel Report is the portion of the report in which the Clark Panel concludes that the bullet hole in President Kennedy's throat was located 3.5 centimeters LOWER (anatomically) than the bullet wound in the President's upper back....

"There is an elliptical penetrating wound of the skin of the back located approximately 15 cm. medial to the right acromial process, 5 cm. lateral to the mid-dorsal line and 14 cm. below the right mastoid process. This wound lies approximately 5.5 cm. below a transverse fold in the skin of the neck. This fold can also be seen in a lateral view of the neck which shows an anterior tracheotomy wound. This view makes it possible to compare the levels of these two wounds in relation to that of the horizontal plane of the body. .... The center of the circular wound [in the front of the neck] is situated approximately 9 cm. below the transverse fold in the skin of the neck described in a preceding paragraph. This indicates that the bullet which produced the two wounds followed a course downward and to the left in its passage through the body." -- From Clark Panel Report

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anybody pivot like Davey?

So you are saying that there was no damage to any of the bones in the neck, correct?

From David Mantik, "The JFK Assassination: Cause for Doubt" in Assassination Science.

"... the bullet necessarily would have had to pass directly through  the C7 transverse process...The corresponding  cervical fracture , which should have been severe from such a direct hit, is not seen.  It is also useful to recall that the cervical transverse processes present  a very tight barrier in the vertical direction, so that this argument is independent of the vertical level in the cervical spine.  The proposed  transit trajectory therefore seems  purely imaginary--at both the cervical and upper thoracic levels.  Humes was admittedly ignorant  of the cross sectional anatomy which is pertinent to this proposed trajectory."  P.  102

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And by the way, this point noted above by Mantik, was not the first time a doctor alerted about it.

The late, very much underrated , Dr. John Nichols also said it was very hard to believe that such a trajectory would not go through the transverse process.  He testified for Jim Garrison at the trial of Clay Shaw.

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

×
×
  • Create New...