Jump to content
The Education Forum

Where is the exit?


Recommended Posts

On ‎8‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 11:25 PM, 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.

 

But what if the shot came from a position much lower than the 6th floor? One of the lower floors of the DalTex building for instance? That's where Robert Harris thinks the shots came from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvqCtaBkyyE

I'm no expert in 3d modeling but if his calculations are right, then the single bullet theory would make sense after all.

Then the only mystery left would be why the doctors couldn't find the bullet's path through the body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 312
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

58 minutes ago, Mathias Baumann said:

But what if the shot came from a position much lower than the 6th floor? One of the lower floors of the DalTex building for instance? That's where Robert Harris thinks the shots came from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvqCtaBkyyE

I'm no expert in 3d modeling but if his calculations are right, then the single bullet theory would make sense after all.

I have no idea what you're claiming here, Mathias.

The lower floors of the Dal-Tex were below the limo?

How does a shot striking the back at T3 cause a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process?

58 minutes ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Then the only mystery left would be why the doctors couldn't find the bullet's path through the body.

I suggest you think this thru before trying to breath life into something born dead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I have no idea what you're claiming here, Mathias.

The lower floors of the Dal-Tex were below the limo?

How does a shot striking the back at T3 cause a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process?

I suggest you think this thru before trying to breath life into something born dead.

Dear Cliff, thank you for your answer.

You've stressed the importance of the physical evidence in this case, and I definitely think that's the right Approach. I would be glad if you could help me understand the evidence a bit better.

That's the way I see things:

The holes in President Kennedy's clothes clearly show that the Warren Commission's single bullet theory can't be correct. The holes can't be reconciled with a trajectory pointing back to the 6th floor of the School Book Depository, because that would imply that the bullet left Kennedy's body at an upward angle if it were to hit governor Connally in the armpit. The wound in Kennedy's back however was, if the official autopsy Report is to be believed, very shallow and no path through the body was found.

So if the Warren Commission is right and only 3 shots were fired that day, that leaves us with only two possibilities:

1) Kennedy and Connally were hit by the same bullet

2) Connally was hit by a bullet, but Kennedy wasn't. Whatever hit him in the back didn't possess the force necessary to penetrate deep into his body. That would rule out a bullet from a rifle. Considering his strong reaction as can be seen in the Zapruder film it does appear more likely that he was indeed hit by a shot.

Now if we assume that more than 3 shots were fired, one of which hit the president in the back, we're confronted with 2 big problems:

1) Why was no bullet path found?

2) Why was no extra bullet found?

 

Robert Harris may not have his trajectory 100 % correct, but I think he might be on the right track. After all, we don't know for sure which exact posture Kennedy was in when he was hit.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

Dear Cliff, thank you for your answer.

You've stressed the importance of the physical evidence in this case, and I definitely think that's the right Approach. I would be glad if you could help me understand the evidence a bit better.

That's the way I see things:

The holes in President Kennedy's clothes clearly show that the Warren Commission's single bullet theory can't be correct. The holes can't be reconciled with a trajectory pointing back to the 6th floor of the School Book Depository, because that would imply that the bullet left Kennedy's body at an upward angle if it were to hit governor Connally in the armpit. The wound in Kennedy's back however was, if the official autopsy Report is to be believed, very shallow and no path through the body was found.

The shallow wound was noted in the FBI report on the autopsy, not the final autopsy report.

That the wound was probed and no path found was revealed in the ARRB testimony of Col. Pierre Finck and the WC testimony of SS SA Roy Kellerman.

3 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

So if the Warren Commission is right and only 3 shots were fired that day, that leaves us with only two possibilities:

But the Warren Commission was clearly wrong.

The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to associate with the throat wound.

That so much energy is expended by so-called "CTs" trying to blow smoke over this fact is mind-boggling.

3 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

1) Kennedy and Connally were hit by the same bullet

2) Connally was hit by a bullet, but Kennedy wasn't. Whatever hit him in the back didn't possess the force necessary to penetrate deep into his body. That would rule out a bullet from a rifle. Considering his strong reaction as can be seen in the Zapruder film it does appear more likely that he was indeed hit by a shot.

Now if we assume that more than 3 shots were fired,

Why assume?

Do I "assume" the back of your neck isn't 4 inches below the bottom of your shirt collar?

No, it's a fact of human anatomy.

3 hours ago, Mathias Baumann said:

one of which hit the president in the back, we're confronted with 2 big problems:

1) Why was no bullet path found?

2) Why was no extra bullet found?

 

The historical record indicates two possibilities -- the rounds were removed prior to the autopsy, or the rounds were high tech ordnance and didn't show up in the body or on x-ray.

The autopsists provided the latter explanation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

The sketch by McClelland on page 16 of this topic has it right, positing the back wound as EXIT for the throat wound ENTRANCE....

170621-kennedy-assassination-shooters-03


From Cliff Varnell's excellent physical evidence, I have nearly perfected the answer to that question, 90-some % I would say.

-- burn, nick on left side of necktie knot

-- 5-6 mm puncture wound in lower third of throat, centrally located

-- right side of trachea grazed at 3rd or 4th tracheal ring; trachea deviated to the left

-- apex of right lung contused, making an upside-down pyramid

-- transverse process of T1 deformed, a "stress-pull", not a direct hit but weakened by all tissues around it being pulled, I believe

-- ABRASION COLLAR in lower part of back wound,  between spine (T3 or 4 level) and shoulder blade.  I believe this indicates that the shot-line was at an acute angle to this abrasion collar, the lower part of the wound.

-- bullet holes in shirt and jacket about an inch right of center, and about six inches down from the top of the collars.  The shirt and jacket were pulled at least an inch to the RIGHT, not up, by Kennedy's right arm motions.  That's why the bullet-hole in the skin was a good two inches off center.

 

SO that shot came from the front left (15 to 20 degrees WAG) and about 15 degrees above the horizontal, about where the railroad bridge meets the South Knoll.

The shot was probably intended for the head, but the limo was slowing so much between the newly-painted stripes on the curb, that the shot didn't track right.  Or possibly Sarti didn't see the roof support and the bullet nicked that.

 

That's an interesting hypothesis Roy. It might find a nice home on this other thread.

It seems like your theory could explain much of the evidence. Here are a couple possible deficiencies that I can see. Maybe you can address them:

  • How could the apex of the right lung have been bruised from this bullet? It appears to me that the bullet would not have passed that far to the right as it passed above the lung. See where the apex is in this diagram:

A-schematic-map-of-the-specific-expressi

 

  • Why would Humes have lied by claiming the back wound was 1) shallow and 2) had a downward-sloping track?


P.S.  Your head shot scenario seems reasonable to me. (FWIW) A bullet shot from the south knoll strikes the left-temple area and blows out the lower-right back part of the skull. And a frangible bullet from the north knoll strikes the right temple, thus creating a constellation of fragments. (Perhaps a frangible bullet was chosen so that Jackie would not be harmed.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

That's an interesting hypothesis Roy. It might find a nice home on this other thread.

It seems like your theory could explain much of the evidence. Here are a couple possible deficiencies that I can see. Maybe you can address them:

  • How could the apex of the right lung have been bruised from this bullet? It appears to me that the bullet would not have passed that far to the right as it passed above the lung. See where the apex is in this diagram:

A-schematic-map-of-the-specific-expressi

 

  • Why would Humes have lied by claiming the back wound was 1) shallow and 2) had a downward-sloping track?


P.S.  Your head shot scenario seems reasonable to me. (FWIW) A bullet shot from the south knoll strikes the left-temple area and blows out the lower-right back part of the skull. And a frangible bullet from the north knoll strikes the right temple, thus creating a constellation of fragments. (Perhaps a frangible bullet was chosen so that Jackie would not be harmed.)

 

Great anatomy illustration, Sandy.

How was the apex of the right lung bruised?  I don't figure the bullet had to pass directly through the affected areas.  All that bone and cartilage in that area has to push and pull with different forces.  The pleural lining had to have been breached at sharp angles, creating who knows what auxiliary damage.

About the back wound, why would Humes lie RE 1. shallowness of the wound, 2.the downward sloping track?  1.he never found the tear in the pleura.  Remember the body was 8 to 12 hours cold, serious rigor mortis must have set in, and probably if prosector doesn't find the exact spot.,..  AND they were moving the skin all around which would further prevent finding that spot.                           2 he didn't find ANY track, just took a WAG that followed along with what the generals and other poobahs told him.  I've always wondered, if the wound was so shallow, how could he make a judgment about the direction?

He wasn't lying.  He was incapable of doing the job; the Keystone Kops  could have done better.  Also, there's that American military going-along-to-get-along that has driven this nation into the ground.

 

PS to your PS: There's a compendium by a kid named Vince Palamara (doesn't look over 30 in his photo) titled JFK from Parkland to Bethesda.  Page 86, a statement by Hugh Huggins (aka Howell), Marine and undercover CIA who claims to have been at both Parkland and Bethesda:  "I distinctly saw an entry wound in the left temple...could not have been fired from the rear...exited the right side of the president's head..."  He had it pretty right, IMO.

PPPPPS:  Are you any relation to Don "World Series Perfect Game" Larsen?  I knew his brother Vic.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2018 at 1:38 AM, Roy Wieselquist said:

"Where is the exit?" (for the throat wound)

 

From Cliff Varnell's excellent physical evidence, I have nearly perfected the answer to that question, 90-some % I would say.

-- burn, nick on left side of necktie knot

-- 5-6 mm puncture wound in lower third of throat, centrally located

-- right side of trachea grazed at 3rd or 4th tracheal ring; trachea deviated to the left

Thanks for your kind words, Roy.  I'm with you up to this point.

Quote

-- apex of right lung contused, making an upside-down pyramid

Result of the back shot.

Quote

-- transverse process of T1 deformed, a "stress-pull", not a direct hit but weakened by all tissues around it being pulled, I believe

Don't forget the air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes.  Draw a line from the T1 TP to the C7 TP and you'll end up with a trajectory pointing to the top of the 4th trach ring.

Quote

-- ABRASION COLLAR in lower part of back wound,  between spine (T3 or 4 level) and shoulder blade.  I believe this indicates that the shot-line was at an acute angle to this abrasion collar, the lower part of the wound.

The HSCA identified a lower margin abrasion collar with the T1 wound in the Fox 5 "back of the head" autopsy photo.

Quote

-- bullet holes in shirt and jacket about an inch right of center, and about six inches down from the top of the collars.  The shirt and jacket were pulled at least an inch to the RIGHT, not up, by Kennedy's right arm motions.  That's why the bullet-hole in the skin was a good two inches off center.

The bullet hole in the jacket is 4.125" below the bottom of the collar, 1.75" to the right of midline.

Shirt defect is 4" below the bottom of the collar, 1.125" right of midline.

JFK's casual movements only moved his clothing a fraction of an inch, never more.

Same with you, and everyone.

 

Quote

 

SO that shot came from the front left (15 to 20 degrees WAG) and about 15 degrees above the horizontal, about where the railroad bridge meets the South Knoll.

The shot was probably intended for the head, but the limo was slowing so much between the newly-painted stripes on the curb, that the shot didn't track right.  Or possibly Sarti didn't see the roof support and the bullet nicked that.

I buy that as a plausible explanation.  If it was a conventional round something needed to slow it down, or it would have gone right thru Kennedy's throat.

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
On 8/8/2018 at 11:17 AM, Denis Morissette said:

She also gave an Oral History to the 6FM in which she Claims X-Rays of JFK were made at Parkland.

 

 

Where did you hear this? I can't find any reference to a Sixth Floor museum interview where Sharon Thuoy said there were x-rays made at Parkland. https://www.jfk.org/wp-content/uploads/TSFM_Oral-History-Full-List-alph.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Where did you hear this? I can't find any reference to a Sixth Floor museum interview where Sharon Thuoy said there were x-rays made at Parkland. https://www.jfk.org/wp-content/uploads/TSFM_Oral-History-Full-List-alph.pdf

Is Sharon Thuoy Sharon Calloway?

 

https://jfk.emuseum.com/objects/21462/sharon-calloway-oral-history?ctx=f11e088c207c7ffb8ed89774e3af0625bf2b4f12&idx=0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Someone asked me a few weeks ago how I knew both women were the same. I could not prove it. From the photos of Sharon Thuoy, they are NOT the same. Thanks for the photo you provided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Denis Morissette said:

Someone asked me a few weeks ago how I knew both women were the same. I could not prove it. From the photos of Sharon Thuoy, they are NOT the same. Thanks for the photo you provided.

Are you sure Thuoy and Calloway can't be the same person?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a tour in CSI and two tours in Detroit Homicide I can tell you that there is no certainty where a bullet might end up. A frangible bullet could be contained in the neck. But when the fix is in as it was at THIS autopsy who know how many bullets they actually recovered?

Link to comment
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...