David Josephs

Tom's thought about a "breakthrough" is very interesting as there have been threads trying to list the most compelling evidence for conspiracy. If we take some of the key threads and look at a theme it keeps coming back to MULTIPLE OSWALDS. Whether Lee and Harvey, or just imposters there is occasion after occasion where Oswald is reported as being in 2 places at once without the least bit of "official" follow-up. Reading thru "Unspeakable" about the Tippit Murder and the "real" Oswald seen entering the Theater at 1:05 and buying popcorn at 1:15 COMPLETELY DESTROYS the Tippit case against Oswald... and his going to the balcony with the imposter arriving much later, also going to the balcony and being seen escorted out the BACK of the theater and driven away while the real Oswald is arrested in the main seating area, NOT the balcony as reported. http://www.ctka.net/2008/jfk_unspeakable.html Then I went over Jim E's review of Unspeakable after searching Google for the name Robert Vinson. He is yet another in a long line of witnesses who saw a second Oswald in Dallas that afternoon (not to mention the shooting range, car dealership, gun shop, Jiffy Mart - twice..... along with Wes Wise's story told to him by TF White about the second Oswald. and Roger Craig's coroborated report of seeing an Oswald coming out the TSBD and getting into the Paine's station wagon. Or the phony police car #107... it never ends The license plate of the Red Falcon TF White sees with the other Oswald in it was linked to Carl Mather, a Collin's Radio employee who knew Tippit personally. He and his wife visited Tippit's widow not soon after his death.... Robert Vinson tells a very compelling story about an Oswald being flown out of Dallas with a heavy set Latino/Cuba looking man, the same man seen driving the Paine car that an Oswald gets into. (the theory being this imposter Oswald is driven to Oak Cliff to kill Tippit with the other man while the real Oswald goes to the theater and proceeds to sit next to each person in the theater, buy popcorn and ultimately get arrested) If any one of these stories if factual, game over. The two visits to the Jiffy Mart on the day of the assasination while the real Oswald is at work should be evidence enough... the driver's license even had the correct birthdate. Once the Research Community realizes that at least 2 Oswalds (again whether Lee/Harvey I don't know) were running around Dallas in the weeks and months before as well as the day of the assasination I believe we have a basis for moving forward. It would be interesting to hear a rebuttal for all these incidences of "Oswald" being in two places at once and placed there by mulitple witnesses testimony who come to support each other and tells a very compelling story of the set-up of LHO. Need another one.... Homer believed he was looking at the original - would a replacement include 6-8 shots from 3 directions? “…Although McMahon personally thought he saw JFK reacting to 6 to 8 shots fired from at least three directions, he said that the Secret Service agent arrived with his mind made up that only three shots had been fired, and that they all came from the Texas School Book Depository, behind the limousine.” The Break Throughs have been coming fast and furious for years now... what we need is someone with a bit more profile and credibility than Jesse Ventura exposing the situation for what it was.... yet the cover-up continues unabated.

Tony, When all is said and done, didn't even the CIA rely on the US Military for most everything? Weapons/Ammo were stolen/appropriated for CIA actions from the military, or thru an arms dealer who had to get their supply from the military, or military contractors. EVERYONE in the CIA, in fact the entire US Government in 1963, had made their way thru the US Military. Or most everyone. The CIA did not want to bomb the USSR with nuclear weapons FIRST and let the chips fall where they may, the JCS did. The CIA did not create policy with their desire to invade Cuba... this was a military plan with the leadership of VP Nixon using the CIA (whose personnel come from the military revolving door and vice versa) since it had to be kept "off the books" Without military support and sanction, the CIA gets nowhere fast... imo. Truman was concerned about the CIA Eisenhower moreso the Military Idustrial Congressional Complex Finally, there were just as many "spy outfits" in the military branches to carry on their own campaigns... the CIA was just more dirty about it and with much less oversight and control. The Anti-Castro Cubans were pawns... emotionally unstable, highly motivated pawns never the less. JFK used them, RFK, the CIA and the military used them. When the MILITARY concluded that Vietnam and SE Asia was the panacea for their cashflow concerns as well as one of the ripest part of the earth they could and needed to control... Cuba was no longer important... to be honest, I don't think Cuba was all that important to begin with other than to maintain a hieghtened state of fear... and to secure the US business interests. Now, if Cuba had an opium crop......

Chris... Starting to make sense to me... a little. Not sure if it matters but the 164 thru 483 frames is 320 minus 1 damaged is 319. If you had frames 164 thru 165 you would have 2 frames, not the 1 when you subtract the 2 numbers... fwiw. And I still don't see how the Nix and Muchmoore films stay in sync with the "revised" Zfilm with the removal of a limo stop. I saw the few frame skip in Nix AFTER the headshot but that was not more than 3-4 frames... not long enough for a limo stop I'd guess. Again, thanks for bringing in the quantifiable... this thread gets more interesting every day DJ

David, Frame 183 will give you a better picture of the area in question. The ghost image area in frame 183 includes part of the signal light post on the Houston St corner, along with the top of the "backside black sign" and "somewhat above" in the background. Just put your curser on the objects within the red box to check it. That area is not part of the TSBD. chris Thanks Chris... I see what you mean. I found the Costella presentation a bit wanting... in that there were many conclusions just not a lot of example or evidence supporting the conclusions... he kept refering to buildings in the sproket area that were out of place so I went looking under that impression. I don't think it was a complete fabrication but a careful alteration... yet nothing is beyond possibility. One last point here.... Homer is quoted in Unspeakable, via his AARB interview by Horne, as saying the film he was given, after he was asked to enlarge frames showing the wounding of both men, claims there were 6-8 shots that hit JFK yet he was ultimately ignored.... If Dino sees the "real" film on Saturday and Homer gets his on Sunday... and is the "fake" from which board are produced... why are there still 6-8 shots left on the film and how did they mitigate that away for the briefing to the President??? Wouldn't we have expected the Homer film to be the extant fim of today? DJ

Here is one of the best images I have of the limo's windshield... I believe there was blood on the sunshades and some on the inside windshield as well.... In terms of your question... I just don't see how, given any angle other than thru or above the windshield, the back splatter would go in that direction. The other image shows a yellow line that depicts where JFK was facing.. if he was even farther down the road the angle from the GK would be even more perpendicular. So unless the side impact shot was explosive, which it may have been, I was inquiring whether blood shooting off to the right (from a GK shot) makes sense... or whether a second head shot entering higher up and leaving that particle/vapor trail didn't cause the blood to splatter on the windshield and mirror. and then of course there is the dent in the chrome which had to come from behind. the real bottom line is once you dismiss "3 shots" and realize there were a few more: the injuries, dents, furrow in the grass, sparks on the street, Tague's injury, the back and throat wounds... you realize there HAD to be 2-3 directions for the shots to do the damage we have evidence for.... a few more that we don't. DJ

Was this what you were after Pat?

Greg - you got it... "ignore" is about the only thing he seems to understand on this forum - not that he gets the hint, and if you've noticed, his posts describe the fun and entertainment he derives from showing off his ignorance and causing nothing but disruption with each and every post.... but enough time on the old man Having just watched the Costella youtube video when he explains some of his thoughts on zapruder he mentions a ghost image that does not seem to fit. I've enlarged that area and it dawns on me that it looks like th front of the TSBD.... I did not hear if he spoke of light leaking in in that manner... if this is the TSBD it would make some sense since it disappears as Zapruder pans to his right.... could this be a normal function of the camera? Would be interested in other's interpretation. This is from frame 180 btw The other comment that bothers me is the insistance that the people on the sidewalk do not move or turn toward the limo and this is just not true... in the few seconds we see them and the limo actually passes them, they clap, move their heads, the scarf and coats move in the wind, etc... I took the time to stabilize/align the frames within Photoshop so the people remain in the same location... it becomes very apparent that they are live, there and watching the parade.... imo.

I do have a question though... With as much blood splatter on the rear view mirror and a frontal shot coming from an angle that would preclude any "back-splash" from going in THAT direction (unless the shot thru the windshield is the kill shot and no one has offered that up) then how does so much of JFK's blood get on the mirror and windshield as well as JC...? doesn't this support a shot, whether additional or not, from behind?

Hey there Pat... does this help?

Thank you all for your input... Robert, I am in agreement with you about the CFR and its influence... yet you don't mention Nixon. During the Ike years what was his relation to the CFR? It seems to me that Nixon was much more involved in the assassination "planning", maybe even moreso than LBJ because of all he was involved in setting up during those years... just my opinion though It is disappointing to understand that Arthur may not be considered a "reliable" source of information... so what about his 2 volume book on RFK? Thanks John, my problem with the whole Lincoln thing is if indeed JFK did confide in her and was his secretary, a political activist, etc... why does she write such a book at all? I thought people of that time and in those circles had a bit more respect and consideration for the affairs of state. Was it just the money? Her desire to set the record straight? David L, Maybe I am not following correctly.... The conversations I am quoting occur in October of 1963 and are directly (supposedly) from JFK and from Stephen Smith. RFK's comments in 1968, denying what EL wrote has little to do with what he is quoted as saying in 1963 as well as the other supporting evidence.... Is Arthur really making this stuff up? O'Donnell? Powers? I guess I need to cross reference these sentiments with what these other men may have said.. any help there? Did Bradlee, Smith and Smathers confirm this info? It does make some sense that JFK would look pretty foolish for not knowing what his VP was doing, or that his administration was by proxy so corrupt... He had fired a number of other people close to him who were doing things behind his back... he took responsibility but dropping the VP would only raise more questions than quiet them - no? So between what EL writes and what Arthur writes... who do we trust? I guess it's possible JFK "kept his enemy closer" by spreading rumors he would NOT be dropped to certain people shile those like Evelyn heard the truth??? Back to the books... DJ

Excuse me if this was already posted... all I've read here is about the dumping of LBJ and no mention of these statements from Schlesinger. In Robert Kennedy and His Times, chapter 26 pages 631-632 When the campaign group met, without LBJ, to discuss strategy, the press seems to have jumped to conclusions... On Oct 22, 1963, the President said to Ben Bradlee that the idea of dumping Johnson was "proposterous on the face ot ir. We've got to carry TX in '64, and maybe Georgia." 'When George Smathers mentioned it: "George, you must be the dumbest man in the world. If I drop Lyndon, it will make it look as if we have a really bad and serious scandal on our hands in the Bobby Baker case, which we haven't and that will reflect on me." The footnote refers to O'Donnel and Powers. "Johnny, We Hardly Knew Ya" 5. With regards to the Lincoln comments... Arthur alerted RFK from an advance copy of the book, while RFK was skiing... He said again there was never any intention to drop Johnson, addin, "Can you imagine the President ever havin a talk with Evelyn about a subject lilke this?"* *Author's journal, Feb 10, 1968. The nonexistence of any dump-Johnson plan is fully and emphatically confirmed by Stephen Smith. (Smith was in charge of the campaign) Seems to me then that the press perpetrated this rumor... and we all know who was running most of the press at that time.... DJ

In case people are still looking for that document... and the U-R-A-F-I-N-K is what we get when we replace the numbers under the "General Offense Report" with the letters in that numerical place in the alphabet.... "...His name was actually Alek Hidel" !?!?!? Must have gotten that info from one of the 4 wallets he carried

Huh??????????? Do I have the name wrong...? the mentally impaired, loner, ex-marine arrested/detained in Chicago right before JFK's visit. He worked over- looking the motorcade route and was primed as the "patsy" for that assassination attempt.... I'm simply asking if there was more to that story as well... look-alikes planting/staging incriminating evidence against Vallee.. that may have needed a quick clean up since the assassination attempt never happened. If not, then I fail to see how the Chicago plot and "Cover-up" was functionaly similiar to Oswald's set-up. That there was much more involved with the fingering and set-up of Oswald... if JFK was killed in Chicago, would Oswald have been used for something else? just food for thought. Quite amazing how many people wind up looking like Oswald in and around Dallas....

They are indeed very close in appearance.... I wonder if Arthur Vallee had "look-alikes" wandering around Chicago in the weeks before... If not... while the scenarios are very similiar it appears as if Oswald was much more deeply in place as a "patsy"... DJ

Found this while wandering around looking for some Oswald chronology data.... Further confirmation of the occupants and locations. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=40392&relPageId=17

Thought some might be interested..... Kennedys' Home Movies Kennedys' Home Movies 01/27 - 02/11 Jan 30, 9:00 pm (120 minutes) TV-PG (LV) Three generations of Kennedys as we've never seen them before captured in home movies and rare footage.

Yo Tom.... So you can explain it in 10 minutes to him but can't write a simple paragraph to illustrate how he is so completely wrong with this, and ONLY this specific bullet hitting this specific person.... As the resident ballistics expert then.... can you please take a second and point out how he is wrong in the paragraph below... I have to assume that his statement "If... an explosive wound of entry." is the problem in that you believe a round that hit JFK in the head was indeed a FMJ 6.5mm bullet and it breaks apart leaving a particle and vapor trail because.....???? thanks DJ Massad Ayoob, The JFK Assassination: A Shooter's Eye View, American Handgunner, March/April 1993. "The explosion of the President's head as seen in frame 313 of the Zapruder film is simply not characteristic of a full metal-jacket rifle bullet traveling at 2,200 fps or less. It is far more consistent with an explosive wound of entry with a small-bore, hyper-velocity rifle bullet traveling between 3,000 and 4,000 fps, and probably toward the higher end of that scale ... An explosive wound of entry occurs when a highly liquid area of the body, such as the brain, is struck by a high velocity round. The tissue swells violently during the microseconds of the bullet's passing, and seeks the line of least resistance. That least resistance is the portal of the entry wound that appeared a microsecond before, and the bullet will not bore an exit hole to relieve the pressure for another microsecond or two--perhaps not at all if the bullet fragments inside the brain. If the cataclysmic cranial injury inflicted on Kennedy was indeed an explosive wound of entry, the source of the shot would have had to be forward of the Presidential limousine, to its right, and slightly above...the area of the grassy knoll." The wound we see happening in frame 313 in the Zapruder film--and see the results of most clearly in frame 337--is simply not consistent with this rifle cartridge, at that distance in living tissue. It is particularly inconsistent with a round-nose full metal-jacket bullet of the type Oswald had in his rifle."

Excellent find Duncan... thanks btw - I did a screen grab at the end of the video... in a different thread Jack and others discussed the retouching of Cabluck and now watching this... The retouched area is directly infront of the Storm Drain entrance/exit and should only show the picket fence... was there a hole in the fence that day? side note: I thought the drain-shot was proven impossible... but sure would make up for all those people saying they hear shots "that sounded like firecrackers or motocycle engine pops" since these sounds were all described as AT STREET LEVEL and not 65 feet up and 120 feet back behind the limo. (sorry I forget whether it was DSL or Lane who brought this simple concept to light... but if sounds are all coming from the STREET LEVEL.... it might be prudent to assume that some of the shots also originiated AT STREET LEVEL.

A matter for interpretation but I don't think so... the temple hole, or above the eye hole is well forward of that flap, imo. DJ

Sure thing JR.... Be nice too if MR. P weighs in on Mr. Ayoob's conclusions but I imagine like most things there are 10 sides to the issue, each with their own expert.... so this too goes nowhere. And where is Jim F???? I don't think it works both ways... if the bullet exploded it did not blow out the opposite side of anything... if the damage in front and above the ear is connected to the hole so many claim to have seen in the back, then what? From what I've seen of witness testimony there is indeed a difference between the very back of the head and the top side so many put their hands... how there can be that much difference in witness recollection is astounding, but there none the less. I've been studying the xrays and photos trying to see if they make any sense, as well as Pat's F8 chapter trying to find a correct orientation. Unless they were completely breaking from procedure... the scallp is pulled forward over the face... Given we see the "flap" on the right side of the photo once the pulled forward skin is placed at the top of the photo... be interesting to see how far that one wide crack continues toward the right front... So I guess, given the questionable source of the autopsy photos, we cannot reconstruct what occurred from these photos/xrays. But given what the witnesses saw and say... that flap being opened or closed might make a large difference.

"Where's Mr. Purvis? Mr. Williams?" Can not speak for Mr. Williams, but you may rest assured that I am still around, watching others go around (frequently in circles) about the bullet entrance to the top rear of the head as well as exactly how (and why) this FMJ bullet managed to fragment in the manner which it did. (Hint): A full review of the anterior/posterior X-ray, along with the lateral X-ray, along with the X-ray of the skull fragments; and the testimony of Dr. Humes (coupled with the autopsy report), and evaluation of the bullet fragments found in the front of the Limousine, will sufficient answer the questions of anyone who properly evaluates this evidence. Does a FMJ Carcano bullet normally create such a wound as that suffered by JFK?----------Nope! Does a FMJ Carcano bullet normally fragment in the manner of which this one did?-------Nope! Did the FMJ Carcano bullet to the top rear of JFK's head severely fragment?------------Yep! Is there a simple and fully explainable explanation as to why this bullet acted in this manner, contrary to what one would think of as "normal" for a FMJ Carcano bullet?--------------------------------------Yep! Would it be considered as somewhat "normal" for a FJM Carcano bullet to fragment as well as create the damage to the skull & brain, provided that it struck anyone else in a similar manner?-------------Yep! Would it be a complete waste of time to attempt to convince "Conspiracy Theorist" of the simplicity of the facts related to this bullet impact to the rear of the head of JFK and it's resulting fragmentation as well as damage to the brain & skull of JFK?------------------------------------------------------------Yep! In event that one ceases to deal in "theory" and thereafter actually evaluates the factual evidence, would they be considerably more likely to come to the understanding as to why this FMJ Carcano bullet created the majority of the damage attributed to it as a result of it's impact, to include the WHY? this bullet fragmented in the manner which it did?---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yep! Well Mr. P, this is what I found an expert to write about FMJ bullets and the JFK assassination thanks to Pat Speer's website. the non-quoted text are Pat's words. Please help me understand why we should be reading this information with an air of disbelief... or is what being said correct? Massad Ayoob, The JFK Assassination: A Shooter's Eye View, American Handgunner, March/April 1993. "The explosion of the President's head as seen in frame 313 of the Zapruder film is simply not characteristic of a full metal-jacket rifle bullet traveling at 2,200 fps or less. It is far more consistent with an explosive wound of entry with a small-bore, hyper-velocity rifle bullet traveling between 3,000 and 4,000 fps, and probably toward the higher end of that scale ...An explosive wound of entry occurs when a highly liquid area of the body, such as the brain, is struck by a high velocity round. The tissue swells violently during the microseconds of the bullet's passing, and seeks the line of least resistance. That least resistance is the portal of the entry wound that appeared a microsecond before, and the bullet will not bore an exit hole to relieve the pressure for another microsecond or two--perhaps not at all if the bullet fragments inside the brain. If the cataclysmic cranial injury inflicted on Kennedy was indeed an explosive wound of entry, the source of the shot would have had to be forward of the Presidential limousine, to its right, and slightly above...the area of the grassy knoll." So here we have a respected gun expert and author laying it all out...Kennedy's large head wound is not at all what one would expect from the ammunition used in Oswald's rifle, should it have impacted as claimed by the likes of Olivier and Sturdivan. His words also suggest that, if the bullet impacted as proposed by Olivier and Sturdivan, and Kennedy's head exploded as a consequence of the temporary cavity created by the bullet, blood and brain matter would most certainly have sprayed back out the entrance. But Ayoob doesn't stop there... "The evidence does not rule out the possibility that a hyper-velocity rifle bullet evacuated the President's cranial vault without any other bullet hitting him in the head. The 6.5mm Carcano throws a 162 gr. bullet at a bit under 2,300 fps muzzle velocity. The closest commonly used cartridge to it in terms of ballistics is probably the .30/30, which has a .308" diameter. The Carcano round, about a .263" diameter. Ask any homicide detective if he's ever seen a .30/30 round blow a man's head up at 55 to 60 yards, exploding the calvarium up and away from the body proper. Ask any hunter of deer-size game if he's ever seen the same thing at that distance. It happens only at very close range with that ballistic technology. The wound we see happening in frame 313 in the Zapruder film--and see the results of most clearly in frame 337--is simply not consistent with this rifle cartridge, at that distance in living tissue. It is particularly inconsistent with a round-nose full metal-jacket bullet of the type Oswald had in his rifle." Here Ayoob re-stresses the point. Bullets like those fired in Oswald's rifle just don't do what we've been told they do. They just don't send pieces of skull flying across the sky when fired from a distance. This is so clear to Ayoob in fact that, even in the conclusion to his article, where he postulates that Oswald quite possibly acted alone, he does so only under the proviso that the bullet striking Kennedy at frame 313 "for unexplainable reasons did damage out of all proportion to its ballistic capability as most of us would perceive that to be." Massad F. Ayoob (born July 20, 1948) is an internationally known firearms and self-defense instructor. He has taught police techniques and civilian self-defense to both law enforcement officers and private citizens in numerous venues since 1974. He was the director of the Lethal Force Institute (LFI) in Concord, New Hampshire from 1981 to 2009, and he now directs the Massad Ayoob Group (MAG).[1] Ayoob has appeared as an expert witness in several trials. He has served as a part-time police officer in New Hampshire since 1972 and holds the rank of Captain in the Grantham, New Hampshire police department.[2] Ayoob has authored several books and more than 1,000 articles on firearms, combat techniques, self-defense, and legal issues, and has served in an editorial capacity for Guns Magazine, American Handgunner, Gun Week, and Combat Handguns. Since 1995, he has written self-defense- and firearms-related articles for Backwoods Home Magazine. He also has a featured segment on the television show Personal Defense TV, which airs on the Sportsman Channel in the United States. While Ayoob has been in the courtroom as a testifying police officer, expert witness, and police prosecutor, he is not an attorney; he is, however, a former Vice Chairman of the Forensic Evidence Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), and is believed to be the only non-attorney ever to hold this position.[3][4] His published work was cited by the Violence Policy Center in their amicus curiae brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the District of Columbia v. Heller case, and he himself filed a declaration in another amicus brief in this case.[5] His course for attorneys, titled "The Management of the Lethal Force/Deadly Weapons Case", was, according to Jeffrey Weiner (former president of NACDL), "the best course for everything you need to know but are never taught in law school."[4] Ayoob remains an internationally prominent law enforcement officer training instructor. Since 1987, he has served as chairman of the Firearms Committee of the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers (ASLET).[dated info] He also serves on the Advisory Board of the International Law Enforcement Educators’ and Trainers’ Association, and is an instructor at the National Law Enforcement Training Center.[5] Ayoob is of Arab descent.[6][7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massad_Ayoob

Tom, First off why do you call it a "Carcano" bullet... there are 6.5mm FMJ bullets and Carcano rifles... so calling it a Carcano bullet seems to be your way of leading the discussion to your own conclusions. THAT rifle and THOSE bullets from the hulls found on the 6th floor were not fired at 12:30pm on 11-22-63 and there is absolutely no proof that it or they were. I'm sorry I cant recall WHY you believe that the same FMJ bullet that is NOT supposed to fragment, does so in the case of hitting JFK in the back of the head - if he was indeed hit there. And if it did indeed fragment enough to leave that trail of particles in the xray... what opened the flap over his right ear? Oh, I forgot, explaining would be a waste of time.... even though the answer is so simply and fully explainable... that allows us to understand how a FMJ bullet leaves a VAPOR trail of particles so small they couldn't even be picked out... and how that bullet, and only that bullet, behaved that way. A waste... as is discussing with you the value of the ballistic tests that you somehow interpret to mean that someone fired that rifle and those bullets that day and from that window. So either a FMJ bullet behaves completely contrary to how/why it was manufactured (exploding and fragmenting on impact)- because you say so... or it was not a FMJ bullet that hit JFK in the head and therefore not from one of the three hulls found. Either way you have a large opening/avulsion in the back of the head and a hinged opening above the right ear, minute amounts of bullet fragments and only 1 bullet to account for it all... a FMJ 6.5mm hull. and if it hit at the top of the head... how do you explain all the damage to the skull floor? and if the bullet does explode or fragment, why didn't the damage radiate from the entry point as opposed to only being on one side of the head? Finally, is it possible for you to simply answer the questions, given the expert you presentyourself to be? No CT accusations, rhetoric or BS... if you've posted the answer before, a link will do fine Why should we believe that FMJ bullets behaved completely opposite of their intent and if so, how do you account for the damage to the head as reported by those in Dallas within the first 30 minutes. thanks DJ

Bill - It would be interesting to hear what these same doctors think of what is shown on the Z film... Great question. Have/Had they even been shown this evidence? But I would like to understand how this bullet which basically disintegrated, blow out the back of the head. I started a thread asking that same question and concluding that there HAD to be more than one head shot if both front and back get blown out. Is it possible for the avulsion to be caused by a shot from the rear? And one more example of the SIDE OF THE HEAD versus the BACK OF THE HEAD It is amazing the contrast in location between BOH and SOH

In the video he claims this ambulance took JFK from Andrews to the White House... in fact even the news caster repeats that. It gets corrected but... Was there another ambulance, this ambulance maybe, that took him from Bethesda to the White House the next morning?... or is this simply mis-speaking?

That's kind of my point Cliff... don't the ballistics of the bullets and the visual evidence seriously contradict with regards to the headshot(s)? And if the bullets Oswald supposedly used do not do what we saw "One bullet could not do all this damage" then there HAD to be other ammunition involved. If the bullet exploded/was fragible then there HAD to be another shot to cause the other head injury be it the front one or the BOH. By definition these bullets lose their enertia within the target.. that's why a hole is not blown out the other side of a deer when shot with these types of bullets. Both the BOH blowout and frontal "flap" could have been caused by a shot from the front or back - and you're right, unless the actual brain was dissected and analyzed, we may never know. If this xray if real then the vapor trail of particles across the top of the skull is indicative of a frangible bullet, not a FMJ leaving particles as it slices thru the target...