Ray Mitcham

Trouble is the autopsy photos show the exit wound to be at the middle of the top his head. Your version would be the front part of the top of the head. The blow out shown in the Zap film is to the right of his head a shown in Cory's photo above. How could the entrance and the exit be there?

Keyvan, in frame 312, JFK is looking slightly down and to his left. You say the bullet hit him in front of his right ear and his right temple. The shot was downwards into his head, how could it then exit the top of his head, without doing a compete turn? If, as you believe the shot came from the pergola, then it's direction would have been down into his brain not upwards out of the top of his head.

So the bullet entered his head above his ear, between the temple and the top of his ear, and exited through the top of his head.I'd love to know that could happen, and you talk about my theory needing a 90˚ turn to work. Not a "slightly upward angle."😁 Wikipedia?😏

You mean you can't point out where you think the extra shadows have been added?

So you can't answer my question about the background being unaltered. If you say it has had shadows added, please show me where these additions are..

"1.) First off, the background shadows of the scene are natural and real. The shadows of the steps ascending along side the house are real. They move from picture left to picture right. This means there is only one background used and that background has artificial shadows introduced into it" Nothing about Oswald's figure in that statement. As I said show where they have introduced artificial shadows to the background. Yes I disagree and look forward to you helping me by answering my question.

You are quite right, John. I don't understand what you are on about. Either the backgrounds are untouched i.e."natural and real" as you put it, or they are touched up with "artificial shadows." They can't be both. Which is it?

Kevyan, the autopsy photos have no provenance. If as you say the bullet exited JFK;s head at the top of the head, where do you think it entered?

I assume what you meant to write was the original background had artificial shadows added to it. If so please show where you believe the artificial shadows are.

Keyvan, please explain how a shot, or shots, from the pergola, travelling downwards towards the car, could exit the top of the President's head. As far as the autopsy photo are concerned can you tell me how the blacked out area in this photo came about?

1. IMO he was hit through the right temple, but not through the windshield 2. Agreed, but prove it is genuine. 3. Agreed but the area where you would have seen brain matter exiting is covered with a black block. 4. I believe you can see a cavity, yellow arrowed here. You will need to enlarge to photo.

"The Zapruder film nor the Mary Moreman photo or the X-rays or the autopsy pictures are not fake, in my opinion." There fixed for you Keyvan. p.s. I never said the Moorman photo was a fake. "Tom Wilson did not find a hole in the back of JFK's head in the Mary Moreman photo." Can you not see the cavity in the back of JFK's head in her photo? I can. (Try enlarging the photo)

Post by Rick. "John, To me, it looks like passenger aircraft are in the reflection on the limo - if so, this clip is while they are still at Love Field. I could seriously be mistaken as well. Do you have confirmation of the location of this clip?" Oops.

Because there was no hole shown in the Zapruder film doesn't mean there wasn't one there,(alteration of the film- what is the pitch black insert over where the hole would be in the President's head.) Tom Wilson found a hole in the back of JFK's head as shown here. As far as the autopsy photos and the X-rays are concerned, there are extreme doubts about whether they are kosher. Considering we are talking about the possibilities of fakery in the Zap film and the autopsy and x ray photos, I would rather go with the original testimony of the doctors at Parkland, who had no reason to lie.

Perhaps you can explain how a thing can be "natural and real" and yet have "artificial shadows introduced to it."

His head wouldn't have touched the back rest. he fell to his left, therefore the blood would pour out of the back of his head on to the back seat and Jackie. How do you work out there was no hole in the back of his head?

Interesting article, Douglas. Thanks for posting it. The story told sounds logical.

Bullets don't make slits in material. They make holes. The shirts had cuts just below the buttons, not holes.

Tom, you say "Ray, in your photo above, if you tilted the right pole to the left about 6 degrees, one could extend the shadows and they would in fact meet, they would in reality converge, and they would do so rather quickly. " Of course they would, but then the poles wouldn't both be vertical and parallel, which is what we are talking about. The shadows of the poles in my yard, obviously only appear to be converging, due to perspective. This is normal physics, which some of our posters do not appear to understand. "If we could re-shoot this picture at the same date and time in the Oswald back yard, with the Oswald figure teetering several degrees to his right (our left), the post shadow and the Oswald figure shadow would “actually” converge, and do so rather quickly. " You don't have to reshoot the photo as the shadows already appear to be converging very quickly, if you compare Oswald's shadow with the correct shadow of the stairpost. In fact the shadows of both would seem to meet at some point just behind the picket fence, which is why I think the photos are bogus.

For once you are correct. The copy of Altgens 7 I have on my computer is cropped which I failed to realise. My mistake. However you are still wrong with your shadow arguments. The shadows do not go three ways in the backyard photos. I do agree however that there is discrepancy in the three different shadows in all three of them. That is not my argument and that is why I have always considered the photos to be fake. The only shadow which I consider to be wrong in them is the shadow of Oswald, which appears to go different ways in each photo. I consider all the other photos kosher.

Here is a copy of Altgens 7. I would be interested to see how many railroad workers you see on the overpass.

I'd be mighty interested to know just what my problem is, John. But before that maybe you would answer a question which you have avoided answering in another subject. You said the following 'Whoever scripted the editing of Bell made mistakes. I am pointing out two in these posts. The first was the difference in the number of railroad workers on the overpass in Bell vs. Altgens 7." I asked you how many railroad workers you can see in Altgens7. Perhaps you could answer my question.

Thanks Chris, I'm glad to see somebody else understands suns shadows and perspective.

Tom, unfortunately you, like David and Butler, are wrong, See the above photo, I posted in reply to Michael. The sun wasn't low in the sky. it was produced early afternoon at a similar time that the BYPs were supposedly taken.