Mike Williams

That's not the point. You said the single bullet theory is possible. How is it possible if you accept that the bullet did not transit through JFK? After all, the basis for the SBT is that it transited through JFK. You just said that you don't believe that it transited through JFK. So why did you say the SBT is possible? Wim Wim, Because it was possible. Probable no, possible yes. Just because it did not happen, does not mean it could not have happened. Not to difficult to understand really. Mike

Duke, Oh come on man! Yanking Wims chain has become a great pleasure! You would not deny a man his minor amusements would you? Besides he makes such a vast target, how could one resist??? Mike

Duncan! Thanks for a much needed chuckle this morning! That was a great laugh to begin a Friday! Charles, I never miss. I dont take the shot unless I make the shot. Nathaniel, Sorry pal no trumpeter here, Im not musically inclined! Mike

I must admit some befuddlement about this also and would like to know more. I don't think I've ever seen or heard of this list before. What is the source for this? Is it in the Warren Commision record? Are the other items referred to in this list in evidence? [EDIT On second look I see that the other two cards DO refer to items actually in evidence] If the items referred to in this list [card] are not in evidence, how and where was this list discovered? Do we know where the "two boxes" were found? One odd thing about this is that the ammo found in the Sixth Floor was not Italian but was manufactured by Western Cartridge Co. no? I imagine that a Western Cartridge Co. ammo box would not say "Italian" anywhere on the box, so at first blush this does not sound like the same brand of ammo found in the TSBD. The card reads TWO EMPTY BOXES MARKED "6.5 ITALIAN AMMUNITION" which sounds like whoever made this card is referring to two empty boxes on which someone had ADDED the "mark" or notation "6.5 Italian ammunition" for identification purposes. It is not clear that the mark "6.5 Italian ammunition" is actually from the original manufacturers label. I am sure some of the early critics pointed out that the Warren Commission could find no evidence that Lee Oswald EVER bought or possessed ammo for the Carcano, so this item is indeed a curiosity. I came across that in the Commission Documents. I will try to find the exact location for you. I also found the "Italian" to be a bit curious, but have not found one dog gone word about that either! It would seem that the ammo boxes were found at the Paines home. Given the number sequence and the other items on the list, this would seem to make sense. Ruth Paine lives not far from me perhaps I can give her a call and see if she recalls anything about this. Ill keep you up on whatever I find. Mike

So this means you accept that the bullet penetrated Kennedy, entered in his high back and exited through his throat? It means you don't accept the evidence that the back wound was probed during the autopsy and found to be a shallow wound with no exit, right? You know, I have other things to do as well than following and commenting on your popshots. I believe I have refuted everything you said about Files, but if you're unsatisfied, you're welcome to restate the specific points you are desiring answers for. Have you inflated yourself to the "big people" now? Based on what? Maybe you should start with updating your biography information accordingly? "I am very new to the study of the assassination of John Kennedy, and find all areas of study interesting. " Wim Wim, Just because I do not believe the back wound transited JFK does not mean that it could not have. Do try and keep up. You have not resolved any of the issues I presented to you, you simply brush them off with some nonsensical crap. Pretty much what I expected of you. My bio as well as my knowledge of the case will stand, thanks. Mike

While there was not extra ammo found there is evidence that two empty shell boxes were found, they were not submitted into evidence which befuddles me, but it should be considered none the less.

Pamela, If the shooters were trained snipers, this would have been a one shot event. Oswald would have been fatally framed(if not actually guilty), and we would not even be discussing it. What IS the correct amount of time? Yes it has been done by a man named Donahue during the CBS recreation, but that is beside the point. I suspect the reason more have not completed this event in the official time, is because the official time is flawed. The official timing of the shots was built from necessity, and not evidence.

Which wound are you writing about? The Thigh? Gary Murr and John Hunt have posted about this over at Lancer. They have both handled the x-rays, and both confirm that the fragment was just under the skin. The HSCA concluded the same thing. Dr. Shires is simply in error here, as he was about the fragments remaining in Connallys chest. Mike

Jim, And yet the second projectile (human) can not exceed the speed of the initial impact of the first projectile (auto). Now to compare apples to apples, lets look at some wound ballistics, in particular the head of JFK. While the mass of the projectile made a complete pass through the matter, and exited, fragments did not. They remained in the head. These fragments were traveling at the same speed as the projectile, but lacked the penetration capacity because their weight failed to maintain velocity. There are even projectile that are made to fragment and not penetrate. Glaser safety rounds would be one example but not the best example. Pre fragmented bullets are designed to come apart and yet remain in the body, they are effective because they fragment and open many wound channels to facilitate bleeding. If we had 2 bullets that were the same weight at the same velocity, and one was a full metal jacket, and one was prefragmented, the FMJ would far out penetrated the PF simply because it retains mass. The pre fragmented bullet would likely not exit, but would open many more wound channels and facilitate exsanguination. Now the interesting part is that because all the parts of the pf stay inside the body, their sum total of kinetic energy is transfered to the target, where as the passing FMJ imparts far less energy transfered. The same rules apply to our fragment, its smallish size and lack of mass is likened to the parts of a prefragmented bullet which lack depth of penetration due to their loss of mass and compromised inertia. Mike

Jim, I would of course have to agree with that. However since our needle is much lighter it requires more velocity to achieve that energy. The Carcano bullet weighing in at 161 grains, at the tested velocity of 2182 feet per second imparts 1701 ft lbs of energy. It is this combination of mass and speed that give it its penetrating quality. (having a good sectional density and a fair ballistic coefficent helps too!). We also know that the fragment of .1 grains, can not possibly be traveling at more than 2182 feet per second, and in fact since it is being cast off of a slowed projectile it has to be traveling slower. Now its smallish shape would give it the advantage in penetrating ability, but its lack of mass is its downfall. The lack of mass would not allow the smallish projectile to retain velocity and energy would be depleted very very quickly. Here would be a prime example, and an easy lab test. Take a roast and place it on the ground. Then take two darts, one that weights .1 grains, and one that weighs 161 grains. Dropping them from the same height at the same time would replicate identical velocities, as with our fragment and our bullet. Our dart with the 161 grain weight will penetrate much further. Now I can almost hear you saying that this is an unfair test because our projectile and fragment are not tipped darts. However the mass penetration ability of the projectiles is defined by their mass and velocity. This could be refined to a much better analogy if we knew the size and surface area of the fragment in question, but over all it is mass that sustains penetration ability perpetuated by velocity. The darts ability to maintain velocity due to mass is what causes the lowered depletion rate of the energy, keeps the projectile moving and penetrating deeper. Mike

Mike While no expert by any means I do belive the physics would work the opposite of what you suggest. Imagine if you will a dart and a softball. The softball obviously has a greater mass but when both are tossed at the same speed the dart will penetrate a dart board while the softball will bounce off. It seems logical that the smaller fragment moving at the same speed would, in fact, be more likely to penetrate further than the larger object traveling at the same speed. If this is the case the doctors words seem to make sense leaving us with a missing bullet. Once again, if CE399 were to be planted by the conspirators they would have had to have known in advance that Connally would have a thigh wound that would explain where that bullet had come from. I find that fact very difficult to accept! And if the whole SBT were to be the crux of the case against Oswald, then once again the conspirators would have had to have known in advance that Connally would have a thigh wound that would explain where the "pristine" bullet came from. The planning would have been extrodinary.....get the rifle, fire and recover a bullet that would exactly match a bullet fired from the rifle "planted" on the 6th floor and make sure that Gov. Connally would have a penetration that would match a wound created by a bullet that had not been mutilated, that would only leave a shallow wound in the skin, not penetrating into the soft tissue and would, in the doctors opinion, have easily fallen out only to be recovered by someone other than the doctor who arrived on the scene to late to have recovered the bullet before the one was found on the gurney that was so necessary to the conspirators. I would appreciate it if someone could explain Connally's "magic" wound! Jim Root Jim, Actually since we have the weight of the fragment, and we have the max velocity that the fragment could be traveling at, we can arrive at the impact energy of said fragment. Which does work out to just over 1 ft lb. Its a matter of weight vs velocity. Since the fragment has little weight it would require much velocity to penetrate to any significant depth. Now in the matter of the bullet in whole, it required about 30 ft lbs of energy to penetrate 1" into human tissue. Since our fragment is much lighter it has to make up for mass with velocity, thus it would have to travel much faster than the bullet to penetrate to an equal depth. I believe the analogy you make is a bit askew. But take this example. To test the characteristics of a fragments flight go out on your front porch and see how far you can throw a Dorito, or better yet imagine the velocity required to make said Dorito stick in your dartboard! Mike

Yours, too, huh? You guys get bonus checks? I should have driven a harder bargin in my contract!

Thomas: Only going from the testimony of the doctor that treated Connally. If he were dishonest in his testimony he should be considered another of the conspirators. If he were honest in his testimony then the bullet only penetrated to a shallow depth: Warren Commission Hearings: Vol. VI Testimony of Dr. T. Shires George The testimony of Dr. George T. Shires was taken at 4:35 p.m., on March 23, 1964, at Parkland Memorial Hospital, Dallas, Tex. by Mr. Arlen Specter, assistant counsel of the President's Commission. Mr. Specter. And what did you observe as to the wound on the thigh ? Dr. SHIRES. The wound on the thigh was a peculiar one. There was a 1 cm. punctate missile wound over the junction of the middle and lower third of the leg and the medial aspect of the, thigh. The peculiarity came in that the X-rays of the left leg showed only a very small 1 mm. bullet fragment imbedded in the femur of' the left leg. Upon exploration of this wound, the other peculiarity was that there was very little soft tissue damage, less than one would expect from an entrance wound of a centimeter in diameter, which was seen on the skin. So, it appeared, therefore, that the skin wound was either a tangential wound or that a larger fragment had penetrated or stopped in the skin and had subsequently fallen out of the entrance wound. Mr. SPECTER. What size fragment was there in the Governor's leg at that time? Dr. SHIRES. We recovered none. The small one that was seen was on X-ray and it was still in the femur and being that small, with no tissue damage after the debridement, it was thought inadvisable to remove this small fragment. Mr. Specter. Is that fragment in the bone itself at the present time? Dr. SHIRES. Yes. Mr. Specter. What would your best estimate be as to the size of that fragment? Dr. SHIRES. One millimeter in diameter---one to two. Mr. SPECTER. Would you have any estimate as to how much that might weigh in grains? Dr. SHIRES. In grains---a fraction of a grain, maybe, a tenth of a grain---very small. Mr. Specter. A tenth of one grain? Dr. SHIRES. Yes. Thomas: From the testimony of the doctor it seems that a 1/10th grain fragment (rather small) penetrated the femur but that the actual bullet barely "penetrated or stopped in the skin and had subsequently fallen out of the entrance wound." If Dr. Shires lied I suppose you could add another name to the total group of conspirators needed to pull the SBT "story" off. Interesting to note that Shires was not "pre-placed" at the hospital prepared for this emergency but had to be called in to deal with the thigh wound. Jim Root Jim, In the x-rays it does appear that the fragment is near the bone. This is rather deceiving because of the perspective of the x-ray. This was discussed on one of the forums a short time ago, and I believe John Hunt said that he had looked at the original x-rays and it was apparent that the fragment was just under the skin. Of course that is Johns opinion, however, in light of other evidence I would have to give that some serious weight. Heres why. If that projectile were traveling at such diminished velocity that it barely penetrated the skin, then it would be an impossibility for it to have "cast off" a fragment that was traveling at a higher velocity than the projectile itself. Now consider this fragment weighted less than a grain and would therefore lack penetrating mass, it would have to make up for this mass with velocity, thus requiring it to be traveling much faster than the projectile. Now taking the .1 grain fragment, and the average velocity of 2182 feet per second, we can assess that the energy of this fragment was 1.057 ftlbs. In other words, it had just enough energy to bury in the skin. Mike

Tom, That is some good food for thought! The only issue I have with this is the tree deflection, I would surely think that any interference by the tree would deflect in such a manner as to avoid hitting the target. But this is really a random event pattern, which means that it certainly COULD have happened. There is, as you well know, no predictability in a ricochet, or a deflection. As I said this is some serious food for thought on this scenario. One item that seems to be consistent in our ideas is that SOMETHING diminished the velocity of that bullet. Either tree limb, or it was just a short round to begin with. I thought that I had read somewhere in the past, where you actually fired the MC through some limbs. What was the dispo of those tests? Primarily did you have a high instance of the copper jackets being separated from the core? One thing is sure. That projectile struck JFK at about 400 fps, and 60 ft lbs of energy. I wonder how many folks realize that would have been far more painful than a full velocity impact, which would have given only a tiny fraction of that energy. Mike

A small caliber bullet entering the throat would certainly have left metalic residue on the tie and collar, would certainly have done far more damage to the neck than is related, would certainly have had an exit point, and would certainly have led JFK to grab his throat, something he never does in the Z film. Those are the wound ballistics issues, we wont even approach the external ballistic issues present in the forms of trajectory and target acquisition. Wim you better stick to an area of research you understand. Ballistics is obviously not your cup of tea. Unfortunately for you you did not think about this before writing that check! Mike

Tom, Following right on along here, absorbing....One question that comes to mind. There were no traces of metalic residue on the shirt nor the tie. A lead fragment passing these areas rubbing against abrasive cloth should have left trace elements. Now having said that, there does seem to be a constant that entry wounds show metalic residue and exit wounds have on very few occasions not shown such. The reason I have determined is that the projectile, or fragment there of would be "lubricated" by blood and tissue so as to not leave metalic residue. Do you believe that this is the case in this instance? I know this is all stuff that you have gone over many times, and I do appreciate your repeating information so as to catch me up on your thoughts regarding the shooting. Mike

Pamela, Great question! Why has there not been a demonstration of the shooting event within the time frame replicating no limo damage? Simple, because the time frame is the issue. The rifle tests try to jam the shots into an impossible 5.6 seconds. Not to difficult to figure that one out. Now what happens when one extends the shooting to 8-12 seconds? The very basic concepts of marksmanship are sight alignment (knowing how to line up the sights) Sight picture (knowing how to reference your quarry in those sights) and then the simple Concept of B.R.A.S.S. Breath relax aim stop and squeeze. For shots of this nature, less than 100 yards, constant practice would hardly be required. Mike

What is your frame of reference? Have you attempted to duplicate these shots yourself? What are the details? Not difficult for whom? A sniper? LHO was never seen shooting the M/C, much less practicing with it. LHO was never seen shooting the M/C, much less practicing with it. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/wood_s.htm Mr. LIEBELER. Now I want to show you another photograph which has not yet been marked, and ask you to look at it very carefully and tell me if any of the people in that picture look like the boy at the rifle range? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. Which one? Mr. WOOD. That one with the paper in his hand. Mr. LIEBELER. Now I want to show you another picture that has been marked as Pizzo Exhibit 453-B, and ask you, that is the same picture, isn't it? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. You pointed out that he has a green line over his head and you say that is the fellow you saw at the rifle range? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture that I want you to look at and see if you see anybody that looks like the fellow you saw at the rifle range? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. Which one is that? Mr. WOOD. That man right here. Mr. LIEBELER. This one right here? Mr. WOOD. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Here is another picture just the same one as the one I showed you. Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. The man that you pointed out as being the individual that you saw at the rifle range has a green mark over his head..There are two different marks. It looks like an "X," but it is two marks as opposed to one mark over here. Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. And you say that is the man you saw at the rifle range? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. I want to show you a picture that has been marked "Pizzo Exhibit 453-C," and ask you if that looks like the fellow you saw at the rifle range? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. Have you seen that picture before? Mr. WOOD. No, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. One like it? Mr. WOOD. No, sir; not unless it's been in the paper. I think there has been one like that in the paper. Mr. LIEBELER. Did the FBI show you a picture of Oswald? Mr. WOOD. They showed me a picture with his gun in his backyard. Mr. LIEBELER. And you recognized that picture as being the man you saw at the rifle range? Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir. Mr. WOOD. Well, I remember we went down to look at our target, and he left after I did. Because I went down there real quick and I remember looking at his, and as I was leaving, he came down to look at his target and was looking at how accurate it was, and that is about all I have to tell you. Mr. LIEBELER. He was a pretty good shot? Mr. WOOD. He was the most accurate of all the targets that I noticed. ============================ http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/wood_h.htm Mr. LIEBELER. After you saw this man, you left the rifle range. Then later on the next Friday the President was assassinated, and at sometime subsequent to that time, did you connect up Lee Harvey Oswald with this man that you saw at the rifle range? Dr. WOOD. I did. Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me when and how you did that? Dr. WOOD. I saw him flashed on the television screen at home several times. They would interrogate him and bring him down the hall and bring him back to his cell. This particular time I mentioned to my wife, I said to her, "Honey, that looks exactly like the fellow that was sitting next to Sterling at the rifle range. But I am not going to say anything to Sterling because I want to see if he recognizes him and if he thinks it was." Well, I would say within 30 minutes or an hour he was flashed back on the screen and he said to me, "Daddy, that is the fellow that was sitting next to me out on the rifle range." Mr. LIEBELER. So that you, independently of your son, first noticed the resemblance between Oswald. Dr. WOOD. And mentioned it to my wife. Mr. LIEBELER. And Sterling was not in your presence at that time? Dr. WOOD. No, sir; he was not in the room. Mr. LIEBELER. Then later he came into the room, saw Oswald's picture on the television, and said to you that that was the guy that was out at the rifle range that previous Saturday, is that correct? Dr. WOOD. Yes. ===================================================================== Now! One might need to take a few shots in order to sight the scope, but anyone who has been through and completed the USMC basic rifle marksmanship course does not require just a whole lot of practice to hit man-sized targets at ranges of less than 100 yards. (62 yards/81 yards/& 98 yard shots) Which gives rise to exactly WHY? anyone actually fell for and believed "THE SHOT THAT MISSED" http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...eport_0068a.htm Save Ammo----Chunk Rocks, sticks, and empty brass.* (Used to include empty "C"-Ration Cans but this ammo was taken away with the advent of the new rations. Although the new box of rice could be a quite deadly missile if properly flung) USMC Motto for all targets at less than 100 yards range. Along with the demise of the C rats and invention of the MRE, we lost any hope of flavor. The five fingers of death, commonly called hot dogs by the funny guys who developed the MRE, could be considered a lethal weapon at less than 100 yards. Then again at less than 100 yards you could simply used the enclosed chicklet gum and fling them with the spork. Mike

_________________________ bump Oswald may not have had a dilemma, as in Russia the custom is to wear the wedding ring on the right ring finger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_finger I will look through some photos and see what I can find about Oswald observing this Russian custom. Mike

So Mr. Purvis attributes a superiority to himself to determine what and who is stupid, even if the majority disagrees with him. Who is stupid? Wim Wim, If you believe that the majority believes Files the con, then the question answers itself. Mike

____________________________________ I know that this is probably a stupid question, but what the hell... Which firing location would have been 45 degrees above the lower-head (entrance) and throat (exit) wound, and would have been possible from the left-to-right angle as well? Thanks, --Thomas ____________________________________ Thomas, The answer is none. If the bullet transited at 45 degrees then the distance to the target has to be equal to the height of the shooter. If the target were 200 feet from the shooter then the shooter would have to be 200 feet in the air to replicate a 45 degree downward trajectory. Mike

What is your frame of reference? Have you attempted to duplicate these shots yourself? What are the details? Not difficult for whom? A sniper? LHO was never seen shooting the M/C, much less practicing with it. Pamela, My frame of reference is experience. Not in the capacity of a sniper, but in the capacity of a PMI or primary marksmanship instructor. I have worked with scores of Marines teaching them the rifle basics and getting them up to speed to qualify at 200 300 and 500 yards. Just because Oswald was never seen practicing, does not mean that he did not do so. Given his personality traits, I would say it is likely that if he desired to practice he would find a remote local. Mike

Pamela, The short answer is that there were no misses inside the limo. These shots were not difficult at all. Mike Mike, I hear this mantra all the time now about the shots not being difficult. If they were so easy, why has no one ever been able to duplicate them? The government tried, CBS tried, and each time they used better shooters, as well as making the conditions easier for them. Still, they could never match the feat of this "rather poor shot," as Oswald was grudgingly described by a Marine Corps spokesman to the Warren Commission. So, apparently they weren't that easy. Don, You would be guessing wrong. The shots themselves are not difficult at all, the time frame they insist on squeezing these shots into is. Timing is what creates the difficulty. Mike

And then again, when one considers the overwhelming evidence that the bullet did not traverse the body, one can then realize that the SBT is a snipe hunt one should not waste their time on. Mike

Pamela, The short answer is that there were no misses inside the limo. These shots were not difficult at all. Mike