Jump to content
The Education Forum

Anyone care to disprove this throat shot scientific theory from the South Knoll?


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I'll start you off with this:

When the WC created CE884 they used 3.27ft as the shot elevation above the street on JFK's body throughout the entire document.

Therefore, they determined the street elevation for JFK at extant z313 to be .98ft higher in elevation than the southknoll video shows.

.98 x 18.3ft(1ft elevation change = 18.3ft horizontal) on a street slope of 3.13° = 17.934ft

Off to the races you go.

CE884.png

 

 

 

Edited by Chris Davidson
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody testified to a bullet wound in the throat at Parkland or Bethesda,

and John Stringer autopsy photographer in his AARB questioning 

indicated the probe from the shallow back wound did not enter the chest cavity with the lungs removed,Dr. Perry stated 3-5 mm slightly oval ENTRY wound , he cut through this in order to place a trach pipe in the throat as the hand breather was having no effect ,no debris in the throat(otherwise the trach tube could not have passed) David Lifton measured the wound as 1 inch deep and it did not cross the trachea.

The entry wound was only seen after the cutting of the shirt and tie,therefore the bullet would have to pass through a minimum of 15layers of cloth which it did not as the tie only has a small slit and does not penetrate all the layers making up the tie.
same with the shirt the slits line up when buttoned.

Dr. Perry did not leave the throat in the same way we see at Bethesda,but then nobody has seen the official Stringer Photographs

just the Fox edition With the military towel under the head and not taken by Stringer ,Although he was ordered to sign for the envelope containing

the false pictures as were others these “authorisations” were utilised

By the Justice Department through the senate and Church committee
hearings .

the Justice Department also wrote Humes scripts for the NBC “ Oswald did it “ specials.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ian Kingsbury said:

Nobody testified to a bullet wound in the throat at Parkland or Bethesda,

  • Dr. PERRY: This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm. in diameter. (3H372)
  • Dr. CARRICO: This was probably a 4-7 mm. wound, almost in the midline, maybe a little to the right of the midline, and below the thyroid cartilage. (6H3)
  • DR. CARRICO: There was a small wound, 5- to 8-mm. in size, located in the lower third of the neck, below the thyroid cartilage, the Adams apple. (3H361)
  • Dr. PERRY: I determined only the fact that there was a wound there, roughly 5 mm. in size or so. (6H9)
  • Dr. JONES: The wound in the throat was probably no larger than a quarter of an inch in diameter. . . . [I]t was a very small, smooth wound. (6H54)
  • Nurse HENCHLIFFE: It was just a little hole in the middle of his neck. . . . About as big around as the end of my little finger. (6H141)

Ian...  I was sure some of the Drs and Nurses mentioned this hole.   In fact I know I recently got a report explaining that the hole was actually more over to the anatomical right than center....

Can't seem to put my hands on it this second...   So I guess I'm not DIS proving but providing more compelling evidence that it may very well have come from the south knoll...   I think McClellen's drawing and the above testimonies put an exit wound to rest...

What I did do when I investigated this was to find that CE394 WAS the tie yet it changed to the shirt   https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=52&tab=page but the original CE394 showed the tie cut in two with a focus on the only "hole" on the entire length of the tie...

https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk7/ce395.htm  this actually shows CE394 as the tie, not shirt along with a close-up in color of the only hole in the tie....

As Ian said, a bullet would need to penetrate the knot which would leave holes in multiple places on the tie - OR just graze it as it appears, on the anatomical left side of JFK... giving even more credibility to the South knoll shot.... grazing the left side of the tie and entering the shirt behind the tie and lodged in the right side....  can't imagine this is the "FBI bullet behind the ear" mentioned in the Tolson/Belmont memo... but it might be.

(that is if it wasn't an ice flechette ala CV)

629155860_JFKtiehasnickonthefront-notaholefromtheback.jpg.90943b63de05c19c0d93c6eca2e2e185.jpg

732152923_JFKtiehole-onlyoneonthetie.jpg.347ef6efb3ab373ee294903c0032d33a.jpg

 

Then we look at the button/hole vs the tear: and they appear to line up....  so from the SOUTH KNOLL a shot grazes the left side of his tie and enters BEHIND the tie...

I don't think we can tell from the bare thread whether it extends out or in...

52295472_jfkshirtfrontbuttonandholelineupwithtearinshirt.jpg.a2486fb717ec6325438039a41ad47e88.jpg

 

McAdams provides the Parkland references to the wound....  and then I just came across this:

1354176220_DrRobertMcClellendrawingofJFKstatingthroatwoundoneofENTRANCE.jpg.7b16f87c76550900ad2701b3102d39b3.jpg

 

 

 

 

Edited by David Josephs
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

The second picture references the head shot, not the throat shot. 

Indeed - both the vids are worth a watch if you have time. They cover both with the theory that one South Knoll shooter fired twice inflicting two wounds, one through the windshield and another through a gap that opened up. Its interesting when you consider the angle of the car, the cars position and where JFK is positioned/facing. Its like the Zapruder film plays a mind trick on you.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/16/2020 at 2:06 PM, David Josephs said:

McAdams provides the Parkland references to the wound....  and then I just came across this:

1354176220_DrRobertMcClellendrawingofJFKstatingthroatwoundoneofENTRANCE.jpg.7b16f87c76550900ad2701b3102d39b3.jpg

 

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

Mcclelland made about two dozen of those drawings, some looking nearly identical.

I don't think I've seen these before. I'm curious though, 2 of these are annotated "did not see this." How is he making the reference/drawing then? What was the purpose of this drawing? Why does he draw wounds he didn't see?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's been several years now since I bought and read Sherry Fiester's Enemy Of The Truth.  It did not convince me there was a shot from the South knoll.  But it did open my mind to the possibility.  What it also did was cause me to walk all the way across the the triple overpass the last time I was in Dealy Plaza and examine the area and view from it.

Great place for a shot.  Crouched down beside the last pillar only the gun barrel, a shooters right shoulder and side of his face could be seen from the area around the limo at the time of the shots.  Nor would he be seen by others on the far side of the overpass.  

What I still had a problem with regarding a head shot is back and to JFK's left from the impact which blew out the right rear of his head from this angle, the physics don't work for me. They do from behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll to JFK's right.

The throat shot has long intrigued me in where did it come from.  A smaller caliber than the head shot, it didn't blow out the back of his neck.  Not from the same gun. Both of these shots from the grassy knoll, side by side, spaced somewhat apart, two shooters?  Nothing points to this.  But the 4-5-6 mm wound observed at Parkland by multiple doctors does.

Could it have come from the South knoll?  A 22 would fit the bill regarding the wound but what about the range?  I guessed the distance at close to 100 yards just eyeballing it.  I've never tried any shots with a 22 at over about maybe 40-50 yards at squirrels and rabbits.  Googling says sighting in at 75.  But, up to 150 from an expert is possible.  Well within the range.

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

 

I don't think I've seen these before. I'm curious though, 2 of these are annotated "did not see this." How is he making the reference/drawing then? What was the purpose of this drawing? Why does he draw wounds he didn't see?

McClelland is saying that, although he does personally believe in a gunman situated on the right-front of Kennedy, he did not personally see an entry wound on the right-front of Kennedy's head, but such a wound could have existed if it was hidden by the hair and blood. Here are some links I made with McClelland's other drawings (I know i'm missing at least one): 10/5/2015 drawing 1 [link]; 10/5/2015 drawing 2 [link] [link 2]; 11/12/2015 interview at Allen Public Library; 12/22/2016 drawing [link]; 2016 speech at Berkner High School; 2/28/2017 drawing [link]; 4/6/2017 drawing 1 [link] [link 2]; 4/6/2017 drawing 2 [link]; 4/10/2017 drawing 1 [link]; 4/10/2017 drawing 2 [link]; 6/14/2017 drawing 1 [link]; 6/14/2017 drawing 2 [link]; 7/17/2017 drawing [link] [link 2] [link 3]; 2/16/2018 drawing [link]; Undated drawing 1; Undated drawing 2 [link] [link 2] [link 3] [link 4] [link 5] [link 6]; Undated drawing 3 [link] [link 2] [link 3]; Undated drawing 4 [link]; Undated drawing 5 [link]; Undated audio at studentsforrenew.org)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was glad to see they pointed out the different perspectives of Alt 6 and 7 with regard to the location of the windshield hole relative to the mirror. They also noted how the Sun reflected through the hole in Alt 7 which obscured the hole with glare. In addition the view of the hole in Alt 7 would have been an oval as opposed to Alt 6 which would be much closer to round and more visible.
It is definitely thought provoking but there were some  mistakes too. At 31:40 they show the 25 degree line to the shooter from a near overhead view. They compare it to a Z film frame in which an insert shows another 25 degree blue line over JFK's head to indicate that he is looking 25 degrees left. It is an unworkable  comparison because the near overhead view is a measure of direction(N,S,E,W) but the blue line they laid over the Z frame insert has almost nothing to do with the 4 directions. Z was filming from a position much closer to horizontal so the blue line represents a measure of change of height not direction.
I wish we had a photo through a scope to a matching limo from the South knoll position. There are some variables that are pretty subtle. They placed the hole at 50 inches and that looks like the half way point of the windshield viewed from the side. But it looks like the hole was about 6 /10th of the way up from the bottom of the windshield, maybe.
 One big variable is just how much a bullet will deflect downward as it passes through the windshield. Every degree of deflection would mean the shooter position would have to be 6 feet lower. They put the shooter up in the parking lot but two degrees difference would put him on the sidewalk of Commerce St. 3 degrees deflection and there is no place for a shooter above ground.  
Another hard calculation for me was finding the inclination of the limo. Going straight down Main a limo would incline the full 3 1/2 degree slope of the plaza. The limo was actually going at a 45 degree angle to the Westward slope at Z223. But being at 45 degrees does not mean the slope was cut in half. The change of slope from 3.5 to zero as a car would change direction  from due West to Due South is not  consistent. It starts slow and so the limo facing 45 degrees South of West meant the slope was reduced by only about 25%. The slope was roughly 2.6 degrees. That combined with approximations of JFK's neck height and the windshield hole and especially the amount of bullet deflection make it hard to really tell if the shot would work. I think the distance from the windshield to the neck was 4 feet? That would mean every degree of change would alter the position on JFK's neck or the windshield. by .8 inches vertically or the shooters position by 6 feet vertically.
 I think many of us have used the official overhead drawing of the limo  before and it is most helpful in finding the trajectory angle,,, I thought!! Look at the image below of the overhead drawing, the model, and the side view. Most of it lines up but the windshield is too far forward in the overhead and in the model. I drew two lines plotting the trajectory on the overhead drawing that depicts both possible angles from both windshield locations. They vary by two degrees so a bit more ambiguity. That only moves the shooter 12 feet left or right , it is not a deal breaker. But the variation in vertical angles like the bullet deflection could place the shooter down on the street which seems impossible since there is no cover. However there was a covered truck on Commerce which could have allowed for a shooter hidden at street level, maybe.

limo low.jpg

Edited by Chris Bristow
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

It's been several years now since I bought and read Sherry Fiester's Enemy Of The Truth.  It did not convince me there was a shot from the South knoll.  But it did open my mind to the possibility.  What it also did was cause me to walk all the way across the the triple overpass the last time I was in Dealy Plaza and examine the area and view from it.

Great place for a shot.  Crouched down beside the last pillar only the gun barrel, a shooters right shoulder and side of his face could be seen from the area around the limo at the time of the shots.  Nor would he be seen by others on the far side of the overpass.  

What I still had a problem with regarding a head shot is back and to JFK's left from the impact which blew out the right rear of his head from this angle, the physics don't work for me. They do from behind the picket fence on the grassy knoll to JFK's right.

The throat shot has long intrigued me in where did it come from.  A smaller caliber than the head shot, it didn't blow out the back of his neck.  Not from the same gun. Both of these shots from the grassy knoll, side by side, spaced somewhat apart, two shooters?  Nothing points to this.  But the 4-5-6 mm wound observed at Parkland by multiple doctors does.

Could it have come from the South knoll?  A 22 would fit the bill regarding the wound but what about the range?  I guessed the distance at close to 100 yards just eyeballing it.  I've never tried any shots with a 22 at over about maybe 40-50 yards at squirrels and rabbits.  Googling says sighting in at 75.  But, up to 150 from an expert is possible.  Well within the range.

I guess the only way the right rear blowout is explained is by a simultaneous grassy knoll shot or is that far fetched. The problem is, the angle he is facing and where the hole is described the size of a grapefruit in the back of JFK’s head. Was that Occipital bone fragment also to the right rear of the limo on the grass or left rear? Is there some kind of Zapruder film tampering thats misled us? Watching those vids the angle is plausible. I have never been to Dealey Plaza, I am certain walking around gave you some ideas and put things in perspective. 
 

p.s. Thats the very odd thing, obviously we have no bullet but, it hasn’t blown out of his throat. The entry hole would look smaller than it is because the throat skin would contract I guess (elasticity). I like the angles on the video, I would love to know what was seen on the original film. You’re right, its 100 yards. 

Edited by Chris Barnard
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:

I was glad to see they pointed out the different perspectives of Alt 6 and 7 with regard to the location of the windshield hole relative to the mirror. They also noted how the Sun reflected through the hole in Alt 7 which obscured the hole with glare. In addition the view of the hole in Alt 7 would have been an oval as opposed to Alt 6 which would be much closer to round and more visible.
It is definitely thought provoking but there were some  mistakes too. At 31:40 they show the 25 degree line to the shooter from a near overhead view. They compare it to a Z film frame in which an insert shows another 25 degree blue line over JFK's head to indicate that he is looking 25 degrees left. It is an unworkable  comparison because the near overhead view is a measure of direction(N,S,E,W) but the blue line they laid over the Z frame insert has almost nothing to do with the 4 directions. Z was filming from a position much closer to horizontal so the blue line represents a measure of change of height not direction.
I wish we had a photo through a scope to a matching limo from the South knoll position. There are some variables that are pretty subtle. They placed the hole at 50 inches and that looks like the half way point of the windshield viewed from the side. But it looks like the hole was about 6 /10th of the way up from the bottom of the windshield, maybe.
 One big variable is just how much a bullet will deflect downward as it passes through the windshield. Every degree of deflection would mean the shooter position would have to be 14 feet lower. They put the shooter up in the parking lot but one degree difference would put him on the sidewalk of Commerce St. 2 degrees deflection and there is no place for a shooter above ground.  
Another hard calculation for me was finding the inclination of the limo. Going straight down Main a limo would incline the full 3 1/2 degree slope of the plaza. The limo was actually going at a 45 degree angle to the Westward slope at Z223. But being at 45 degrees does not mean the slope was cut in half. The change of slope from 3.5 to zero as a car would change direction  from due West to Due South is not  consistent. It starts slow and so the limo facing 45 degrees South of West meant the slope was reduced by only about 25%. The slope was roughly 2.6 degrees. That combined with approximations of JFK's neck height and the windshield hole and especially the amount of bullet deflection make it hard to really tell if the shot would work. I think the distance from the windshield to the neck was 4 feet? That would mean every degree of change would alter the position on JFK's neck or the windshield. by .8 inches vertically or the shooters position by 6 feet vertically.
 I think many of us have used the official overhead drawing of the limo  before and it is most helpful in finding the trajectory angle,,, I thought!! Look at the image below of the overhead drawing, the model, and the side view. Most of it lines up but the windshield is too far forward in the overhead and in the model. I drew two lines plotting the trajectory on the overhead drawing that depicts both possible angles from both windshield locations. They vary by two degrees so a bit more ambiguity. That only moves the shooter 12 feet left or right , it is not a deal breaker. But the variation in vertical angles like the bullet deflection could place the shooter down on the street which seems impossible since there is no cover. However there was a covered truck on Commerce which could have allowed for a shooter hidden at street level, maybe.

limo low.jpg

Great analysis, looks like more than 4ft from windshield hole to the neck it is the model out of scale. Just looking at JFK’s thigh,  can’t quite make out the measurements on the diagram. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

McClelland is saying that, although he does personally believe in a gunman situated on the right-front of Kennedy, he did not personally see an entry wound on the right-front of Kennedy's head, but such a wound could have existed if it was hidden by the hair and blood. Here are some links I made with McClelland's other drawings (I know i'm missing at least one): 10/5/2015 drawing 1 [link]; 10/5/2015 drawing 2 [link] [link 2]; 11/12/2015 interview at Allen Public Library; 12/22/2016 drawing [link]; 2016 speech at Berkner High School; 2/28/2017 drawing [link]; 4/6/2017 drawing 1 [link] [link 2]; 4/6/2017 drawing 2 [link]; 4/10/2017 drawing 1 [link]; 4/10/2017 drawing 2 [link]; 6/14/2017 drawing 1 [link]; 6/14/2017 drawing 2 [link]; 7/17/2017 drawing [link] [link 2] [link 3]; 2/16/2018 drawing [link]; Undated drawing 1; Undated drawing 2 [link] [link 2] [link 3] [link 4] [link 5] [link 6]; Undated drawing 3 [link] [link 2] [link 3]; Undated drawing 4 [link]; Undated drawing 5 [link]; Undated audio at studentsforrenew.org)

Thanks Micah,

So if I'm understanding, based on the wounds he did actually see he thinks the other wounds are probable and could have a correlation to the wounds he did see?

For instance, due to the large wound on the back of the head (rear right) that he did see, he believes it's probable there was a entry wound in the front right hairline area?

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...