Where is the exit?

[James DiEugenio]

One of the judges in the New Orleans circuit would not let the Commission be entered as evidence in court.  In fact, he giggled when Shaw's lawyers tried to do so.

No she is not a man, but that is not her real name.

The HSCA data and raw information is much better than the Warren Commission.  Which is why it was classified.  The interviews by the HSCA, and by the ARRB under Jeremy Gunn and Doug Horne, the sum total of that evidence contains a quantum leap in this case. I could not have written what I did in The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today without that declassification and investigatory process.  To me it was a continuation and extension in detail of what Finck said under oath at the Shaw trial.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

12 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I'm not hypothesizing anything.

I'm pointing out readily observed physical reality: the bullet holes in the clothes are too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

What bone?  The only damage to bone was the hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, a couple of inches above the T3 back wound.

The only way you can make your theory work is to make stuff up.

 

1

Cliff,

I'm not hypothesizing anything. - WRONG - You are hypothesizing and so am I.

I'm pointing out the readily observed physical reality: the bullet holes in the clothes are too low to have been associated with the throat wound. - WRONG - You don't know how the shirt was placed on JFK.  There are photographs showing that his jacket was bunched up at the neckline.  He also had back brace on, his skin could have been pushed up a couple of inches.

What bone?  The only damage to bone was the hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, a couple of inches above the T3 back wound. - EXACTLY - The right T1 transverse has a hairline fracture.  It got hit by something!

The only way you can make your theory work is to make stuff up. - WRONG - There is photographic evidence of a bullet stuck in the top of the windshield.  That bullet entered from an upward angle from right to left.  That bullet aligns back to JFK and the sniper nest at the sixth-floor of the TSBD.  Hard evidence.

Cliff,

You may be right, I may be crazy...

[Cliff Varnell]

16 minutes ago, John Butler said:

I call the 19 people standing between the light pole near the R L Thornton sign and the Stemmons sign on the north side of Elm Street Mannequin Row.  This group of people is non-existent and are in the Zapruder film so the presidential limousine can have context as it travels down Elm.  They are there to be looked at and capture your attention rather than looking at the limousine which is some frames is badly edited.

The 19 people group are seen in the first 200 frames of the Zapruder film.  A non-existent group makes those frame what?  Fake?

I can prove that those frames are fake.  Can you prove that they are real? 

Fire in, boys.  Tell me how delusional I am.  Remember, you can't be as insulting as in prior days.  Show me the facts of your argument.  I can show you mine.

So you're arguing for Zap fakery...How does that establish all other films and photos as fake -- save the one you base your theory on?

[B. A. Copeland]

On 7/24/2018 at 6:55 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Gees Joe, that is about the last thing I wanted to do.

I really wanted this to be more than about Varnell's ego.

But in your first reply, if it went into the chest, did it deflect off something?  It must have, right?

The other point I wanted to air is this:  Is JFK's reaction with his hands going up, is that really an indication about his neck wound?  Other people, like Don Thomas and Martin Hay, have argued its actually not.

I can easily see someone being hit in the back with a round (whilst wearing a back brace, mind you) and throwing their arms up like that. While his hands and arms seem directed towards the throat, I never see him actually clutching it but that the shot has always seemed to me to be one of just him reacting to a powerful hit in the back. I'm always open to the facts as this is my speculation. I don't blame anyone who doesn't necessarily believe JFK is reacting to the throat wound though.

[Cliff Varnell]

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

Cliff,

I'm not hypothesizing anything. - WRONG - You are hypothesizing and so am I.

There is nothing hypothetical about bullet holes in clothes -- concrete, measurabl;e, observable physical evidence.

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

I'm pointing out the readily observed physical reality: the bullet holes in the clothes are too low to have been associated with the throat wound. - WRONG - You don't know how the shirt was placed on JFK.

Of course I do.  Are you saying JFK didn't wear his shirt like anyone else?

It's an iron-clad, infallible physical LAW of clothing design that casual body movement causes fractions of an inch of fabric to ease.

This is the most readily observable phenomenon on the planet -- how shirts move when you move around.

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

 

There are photographs showing that his jacket was bunched up at the neckline.

Of course the jacket was "bunched up"!

Bullet defect in shirt: 4" below the bottom of the collar.

Bullet defect in jacket: 4.125" below the bottom of the collar.

The jacket was bunched up 1/8 of an inch.

All of JFK's movements were casual, his clothing eased a fraction of an inch every time he moved.

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

 He also had back brace on, his skin could have been pushed up a couple of inches.

The brace was around his waist, held in place by an Ace bandage.

You're making stuff up again.

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

What bone?  The only damage to bone was the hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, a couple of inches above the T3 back wound. - EXACTLY - The right T1 transverse has a hairline fracture.  It got hit by something!

By a shot in the throat from the front.  The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to have caused the T1 fracture; no bullet or skull fragment could have caused it.

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

The only way you can make your theory work is to make stuff up. - WRONG - There is photographic evidence of a bullet stuck in the top of the windshield.  That bullet entered from an upward angle from right to left.  That bullet aligns back to JFK and the sniper nest at the sixth-floor of the TSBD.  Hard evidence.

Only if you beg the question by assuming the truth of your made up trajectory.

Just now, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

Cliff,

You may be right, I may be crazy...

I dunno about you, but I studied the case for 5 years before I ever wrote a word on the internet.

Do some more homework...and stick to the historical record, especially the First Day Evidence.

[Cliff Varnell]

32 minutes ago, B. A. Copeland said:

I can easily see someone being hit in the back with a round (whilst wearing a back brace, mind you) and throwing their arms up like that. While his hands and arms seem directed towards the throat, I never see him actually clutching it but that the shot has always seemed to me to be one of just him reacting to a powerful hit in the back. I'm always open to the facts as this is my speculation. I don't blame anyone who doesn't necessarily believe JFK is reacting to the throat wound though.

SS SA Glenn Bennett wrote a contemporaneous account that enjoys 3 points of corroboration.

Bennet wrote on AF1 back to DC that he was facing to the right when he heard the first shot.  Willis 5 shows Bennett sitting to the right. 

He said he then turned to look at Kennedy.  Altgens 6 shows him with blurred features.

He said he saw "the Boss" get hit in the back 4 inches down the shoulder right before the head shot.  The bullet holes in the clothes are 4 inches below the collars.

Close proximity witnesses Nellie Connally and Linda Willis describe Kennedy responding to a throat shot.

...What Steve Jaffe writes in the next post!

Edited August 6, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Steve Jaffe]

This is an endless and interesting argument but of the doctors at Parkland who I talked to who saw President Kennedy when he was first brought in, they all referred to the throat wound as an "entrance wound." If one of those Parkland attending physicians changed that view, who was it and where is it written that they said it could have been an exit wound?

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

There is nothing hypothetical about bullet holes in clothes -- concrete, measurabl;e, observable physical evidence.

Of course I do.  Are you saying JFK didn't wear his shirt like anyone else?

It's an iron-clad, infallible physical LAW of clothing design that casual body movement causes fractions of an inch of fabric to ease.

This is the most readily observable phenomenon on the planet -- how shirts move when you move around.

Of course the jacket was "bunched up"!

Bullet defect in shirt: 4" below the bottom of the collar.

Bullet defect in jacket: 4.125" below the bottom of the collar.

The jacket was bunched up 1/8 of an inch.

All of JFK's movements were casual, his clothing eased a fraction of an inch every time he moved.

The brace was around his waist, held in place by an Ace bandage.

You're making stuff up again.

By a shot in the throat from the front.  The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to have caused the T1 fracture; no bullet or skull fragment could have caused it.

Only if you beg the question by assuming the truth of your made up trajectory.

I dunno about you, but I studied the case for 5 years before I ever wrote a word on the internet.

Do some more homework...and stick to the historical record, especially the First Day Evidence.

Cliff,

You are hypothesizing that the bullet entered from the front of the throat that caused the T1 to get a hairline fracture.  I am hypothesizing that the bullet entered from the back and exited the throat and his bullet got lodged in the top of the windshield.

Below is the back brace JFK used during the assassination.  As you can see, the back brace is held together with laces that compress JFK's back and skin.  Unfortunately, you don't know exactly how the back brace was positioned, so you cannot say definitely that because the bullet hole in the back of JFK is lower than the hairline damage to the T1 that there is no way the bullet that caused the damage to the T1 entered from the back.  You cannot make that statement, you can hypothesize it.  My interpretation is that his skin was pushed up slightly. The bullet hole in JFK's skin was measured after his back brace was taken off, located about six inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.  This is an adequate explanation as to why there is a discrepancy.  You are biased to your own research. You are making stuff up and you are hypothesizing.

 

[Ron Bulman]

5 hours ago, Steve Jaffe said:

This is an endless and interesting argument but of the doctors at Parkland who I talked to who saw President Kennedy when he was first brought in, they all referred to the throat wound as an "entrance wound." If one of those Parkland attending physicians changed that view, who was it and where is it written that they said it could have been an exit wound?

Which doctors did you talk to?  This is already discussed in some detail in the thread as well as on the forum. Spring of 2013 I asked Dr. McClelland if he though Dr. Perry changed his statement from 11/22/63 that it was a entry wound as a result of persuasion of others after the fact.  He said yes.

Edited August 7, 2018 by Ron Bulman

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

Cliff,

You are hypothesizing that the bullet entered from the front of the throat that caused the T1 to get a hairline fracture.

That's a conclusion based on the physical evidence, which you are trying to re-write.

Quote

 

  I am hypothesizing that the bullet entered from the back and exited the throat and his bullet got lodged in the top of the windshield.

And to support this scenario you just make stuff up.

Quote

Below is the back brace JFK used during the assassination.  As you can see, the back brace is held together with laces that compress JFK's back and skin.  Unfortunately, you don't know exactly how the back brace was positioned, so you cannot say definitely that because the bullet hole in the back of JFK is lower than the hairline damage to the T1 that there is no way the bullet that caused the damage to the T1 entered from the back. 

  The brace was wrapped around his waist -- how in hell is that going to displace two inches of his skin on his upper back?

Quote

You cannot make that statement, you can hypothesize it.  My interpretation is that his skin was pushed up slightly.

But your interpretation is not based on anything you can replicate.  The skin was pushed up 2 inches?

Show us.

Quote

 

The bullet hole in JFK's skin was measured after his back brace was taken off, located about six inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.  This is an adequate explanation as to why there is a discrepancy.  You are biased to your own research.

Prove your hypothesis.  Show us how tight you'd have to cinch a back brace to push two inches of skin above the top of the back.

Otherwise you're pulling this stuff out of your nether zone.

 

Edited August 7, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Ron Bulman]

29 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Which doctors did you talk to?  This is already discussed in some detail in the thread as well as on the forum. Spring of 2013 I asked Dr. McClelland if he though Dr. Perry changed his statement from 11/22/63 that it was a entry wound as a result of persuasion of others after the fact.  He said yes.

Regarding the throat entry wound which there is no exit wound for.  The subject of this thread.

[Joseph McBride]

A rare photo of JFK wearing his back brace: https://www.scoopnest.com/user/NotableHistory/684841930631458816

[Joseph McBride]

Another one of JFK in his back brace: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/396246467207161124/

[Joseph McBride]

Earl E. T. Smith, the Florida neighbor in the first picture linked above of JFK with the back brace, was Eisenhower's ambassador to Cuba. JFK offered

Smith the ambassadorship to Switzerland, but he declined. His wife

Florence Pritchett Smith reportedly was romantically involved with JFK. She was a journalist and friend of Dorothy Kilgallen. Florence Pritchett's death

two days after Kilgallen's in 1965 has led to her inclusion in some "mysterious deaths" lists. http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKsmithF.htm

Edited August 7, 2018 by Joseph McBride

[Sandy Larsen]

I tried to pull my back skin up and was able to move it by only half an inch.

Looking at this photo posted by Joseph McBride....

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/396246467207161124/

.... with JFK sitting, it is apparent to me that, if anything, the brace would pull the skin down  -- not up -- if JFK leaned forward at all. I don't see any reason to believe the brace would push the skin up as a result of sitting (or leaning).

If somehow the brace did happen to push the skin up, for example as it was put on Kennedy, it certainly wouldn't lift the skin on the full length of his back above the brace. Try this yourself. When I push my skin up as much as possible on my upper arm (which I did so I could observe it) I can raise it only 3/8" or so. This was immediately above the finger pushing it. At an inch above that, the skin moved up by only 1/16". And there was no effect at all 2" above the finger.

I don't think the brace could have raised Kennedy's skin near T3 at all. However, it could have pulled it down by up to 1/2" or so if he leaned over while sitting. It seems that skin is like string... you can pull it but you can't push it. So I have to disagree with Keyvan on that point.

P.S. So where does the excess skin go when you push it up? It just bunches up against the thing pushing it.

 

Edited August 7, 2018 by Sandy Larsen