Shirt bunching experiment (SBT)

[Jake Hammond]

Known facts

- Jfk Throat wound 

- JC armpit , wrist and leg wounds.

- There was no reaction to the shot, i.e it was not loud enough to hear over the ambient noise. 

- The wounds line up with each other and a shot from high up in the TSBD or Daltex

- Unless the Z film has been CGI'd then the two men react at the same time. ( With the stabilized and HD film we have now this is simply not debatable like it used to be) 

- Unless the Shirt and jacket have been faked and the originals disposed with then we have a hole in each which line up with each other but , at first glance, seem slightly anomalous to the throat wound position. 

- There was a vertical fracture to the T1 vertebrae ( Cliff likes to place this vertebrae up near the skull but please see the x ray image attached for the real position, its a crop of the official JFK X ray annotated with positions of vertebrae)

 

Null / mainstream / WC Explanation

The first loud shot came from the snipers nest with a Carcano rifle and went through the soft tissue of kennedy's neck, straight out in to JC and ended up in his leg. 

Strengths - the men react at the same time, the wounds all line up, assuming bunching to the shirt and jacket ( I have just realised,Sandy, that you don't need to prove shirt bunching because you have a jacket hole and shirt hole that line up and we can see the jacket) the holes and wounds all line up.

Weaknesses - The Carcano rifle obviously wasn't used, assuming that all the witnesses who described three loud shots 1.......2.3 weren't lying then the first loud shot is at 285, the shot that hit the men was not heard, or at least reacted to by the limo passengers, crowd or Zapruda, the back wounds, at first glance, don't line up with the neck wound, Some felt that the neck wound, at Parkland, was an entry wound. 

So what would make the Null work ?

 A suppressed high power rifle using FMJ rounds, military specification would have caused the exact damage we see. A clean through and out shot leaving a neat exit wound indistinguishable from the entry wound and easily powerful enough to rip through both men. Bunching to the shirt and jacket ( which all images of JFK en route show, bar the one or two where he is turning to his left and waving across with his right hand, the ones Cliff uses as evidence) explain the apparent discrepancy in heigh, along with the incline of Elm street and the slouching of JFK , as seen in almost all images.

 

Ok, an alternative hypothesis...

JFK was shot twice and JC once - Ok, to make this work is tricky but I'll try. The shot to the back came from a CIA only ( because thats the weapon they'd use when trying to frame a lone nut) futuristic ice bullet / subsonic weapon that hit the back but left no bullet on the seat or in Kennedy, it sort of went in then fell out and wasn't seen again, Kenedy reacted but we don't see it behind the sign. At almost the exact same time he was hit from the front with another low velocity, disappearing bullet ( it may have been removed at Parkland by a nefarious player). This bullet would have had to have come from the grassy knowl / triple underpass junction area. Neither of these shooters thought to aim again and try to finish the job. At the same time someone else mistakenly hit JC with a regular round. This must have been from the West side of the TSBD otherwise it would have gone through Kennedys back/neck, for a visual imagine somewhere halfway between the throat wound and the hole in the jacket. The professional assassin missed badly and didn't bother trying again. The bullet that damaged T1 either was made of ice or was removed at Parkland. 

Thats how I understand the incident , it would be of value in this topic for alternatives and conflicting evidence to be presented. 

 

Edited November 26, 2021 by Jake Hammond

[Chris Davidson]

Jake,

Once again, without even getting into the trajectory/ballistic specs, Specter knew he had problems fitting everything back to the TSBD southeast 6th floor and was trying to remedy them.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25394-shirt-bunching-experiment-sbt/?do=findComment&comment=390064

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 44 feet from station C--91.6 feet to the rifle in the window from the actual chalk mark on the coat. All measurements were made to the chalk mark on the coat.
Mr. SPECTER. On the coat of the President?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

[Cliff Varnell]

7 hours ago, Jake Hammond said:

Known facts

- Jfk Throat wound 

- JC armpit , wrist and leg wounds.

- There was no reaction to the shot, i.e it was not loud enough to hear over the ambient noise. 

Factually incorrect.  Where do you get this stuff, Jake?

Would it kill you to do some homework before you post?

...Responding to this pile of garbage is beneath me, seriously...

 

[Chris Davidson]

On 12/17/2018 at 8:24 AM, Adam Johnson said:

Here is the FBI report

Adam,

Thank you for providing this document.

[Cliff Varnell]

49 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

Jake,

Once again, without even getting into the trajectory/ballistic specs, Specter knew he had problems fitting everything back to the TSBD southeast 6th floor and was trying to remedy them.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25394-shirt-bunching-experiment-sbt/?do=findComment&comment=390064

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is 44 feet from station C--91.6 feet to the rifle in the window from the actual chalk mark on the coat. All measurements were made to the chalk mark on the coat.
Mr. SPECTER. On the coat of the President?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.

Chris, you're wasting your time trying to school this guy on anything.

[Cliff Varnell]

8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Cliff,

Why is it that you believe the slits in the shirt are due to cutting the tie off and not from a high-tech projectile penetrating the shirt before hitting the throat?

I have a hard time believing that the nurses would use a scalpel so close to the throat when it would have been so easy to pull the tie loop away from the throat before cutting. Plus it seems like too much of a coincidence that they would cut/nick the shirt right where the bullet entered the throat.

 

This thread is beyond creepy, Sandy, so I'll start a new thread on our polite disagreements when I get back from Xmas vacation.

I greatly appreciate how you've chimed in on the back wound issue, btw.  If you choose to continue to engage with people determined to spread idiocy, good luck.

Now I gotta go take a shower...

[Sandy Larsen]

31 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

This thread is beyond creepy, Sandy, so I'll start a new thread on our polite disagreements when I get back from Xmas vacation.

That's fine with me. BTW, I don't necessarily disagree with you. I just wonder if you know something I don't know that makes you believe the collar hole/slits weren't caused by something like a poison dart.

Actually, while writing that, one thought came to mind. If the wound in the throat is larger in diameter that the holes in the shirt, then it doesn't  seem possible they were caused by the same thing. But I don't know. I don't know, for example, if a 6.5 mm bullet makes a 6.5 mm hole in flesh. Or if the flesh stretches and then closes up after the bullet has passed.

 

[John Butler]

In order to speak about the SBT or a throat shot from the front one needs to agree on where the bullet struck.  For the SBT, one needs to connect the hole in the tie (throat wound) to an area on John Connally.  This spot would be just below the right nipple of John Connally where the bullet exited his chest.  This angle would look something like this.

This was posted in another thread.  It is an approximation that is close enough to suggest that the bunched jacket and shirt really isn't much of an argument.

[Jake Hammond]

9 minutes ago, John Butler said:

In order to speak about the SBT or a throat shot from the front one needs to agree on where the bullet struck.  For the SBT, one needs to connect the hole in the tie (throat wound) to an area on John Connally.  This spot would be just below the right nipple of John Connally where the bullet exited his chest.  This angle would look something like this.

This was posted in another thread.  It is an approximation that is close enough to suggest that the bunched jacket and shirt really isn't much of an argument.

That line is way too low on JC, which is the known data point. I mean, you say its just below his nipple but then the image you post shows it exiting JFK's chest and exiting JC's stomach, raise the line up to where the throat wound is on kennedy, where the jacket hole is, and if a little bunching is added and where the shirt hole is. Bunching does not need to be proved on the shirt as the hole location is the same as the jacket, and we can see the jacket. 

 That was a strange choice of  image to use as evidence to disprove the SBT. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Jake Hammond

[John Butler]

This, also was posted in another thread:

In the last sentence "shots" should be "spots".

[Jake Hammond]

4 minutes ago, John Butler said:

This, also was posted in another thread:

In the last sentence "shots" should be "spots".

But then those the holes would be exit wounds. You then can't have Crenshaw's theory of an entrance wound to the neck. Choose one. 

 ( The theory goes that Crenshaw saw ' what looked like' an entrance wound. Thing is, FMJ rounds going through soft flesh leave exits identical to entrance. Crenshaw only had experience with hand guns and messy exit wounds. Crenshaw is mistaken IMO )

[John Butler]

"That line is way too low on JC, which is the known data point. I mean, you say its just below his nipple but then the image you post shows it exiting JFK's chest, exiting JC's stomach, raise the line up to where the throat wound is on kennedy, the jacket hole is, if a little bunching is added and where the shirt hole is. Bunching does not need to be proved on the shirt as the location is the same as the jacket, and we can see the jacket. 

 That was a strange image to use as evidence. "

The chest wound exits below Governor Connally's right nipple.  That spot is on the red line.  The line extends beyond the wound area.  Your black line is just another conjecture.  See the next post on angles that people have argued for.

Take a look at the AMIPA film.  Use software that will allow you to look at one frame at a time.  I used imagery from the AMIPA film because it shows the images of how Kennedy and Connally were sitting in multiple images throughout the film.  It is actually a better look at there seating arrangements then the Zapruder film.

[Jake Hammond]

5 minutes ago, John Butler said:

"That line is way too low on JC, which is the known data point. I mean, you say its just below his nipple but then the image you post shows it exiting JFK's chest, exiting JC's stomach, raise the line up to where the throat wound is on kennedy, the jacket hole is, if a little bunching is added and where the shirt hole is. Bunching does not need to be proved on the shirt as the location is the same as the jacket, and we can see the jacket. 

 That was a strange image to use as evidence. "

The chest wound exits below Governor Connally's right nipple.  That spot is on the red line.  The line extends beyond the wound area.  Your black line is just another conjecture.  See the next post on angles that people have argued for.

Take a look at the AMIPA film.  Use software that will allow you to look at one frame at a time.  I used imagery from the AMIPA film because it shows the images of how Kennedy and Connally were sitting in multiple images throughout the film.  It is actually a better look at there seating arrangements then the Zapruder film.

Perhaps a little high for the JC exit but to be honest its not important because JFK is in a very different position, when he goes behind the freeway sign he is a bit lower a and sitting further back, not leaning forward so much as in this one. The fact that even in other photos we are so close to matching up the wounds in a nice straight line, which reconciles all the evidence, tells me that the SBT is almost certainly the explanation. 

Previously I have posted an image of JFK just before going behind the sign on the Z film and his arm is flat on the door top. 

Edited December 21, 2018 by Jake Hammond

[John Butler]

Not all the time.  Examine the wounds in the autopsy photo No. 1 and No. 2.  They are a carbon copy of each other except for size.

[John Butler]

I posted these mainly for myself to take a better look at the argument.  No one is going to change their position on the SBT.  They basically haven't in 55 years.  The argument is basically a useless endeavor but, it goes on endlessly.

What I posted may help someone new to the argument.