Robert Prudhomme

Good point, Pat.But let's face reality here -- At one time or another, everybody who researches this case picks and chooses the stuff that tends to support their general viewpoint. It's inevitable. But doesn't it bother you (at all) that NO BULLETS were found inside JFK's body? Please tell me--logically--how that's even remotely possible if TWO separate bullets entered JFK's back and throat and yet both bullets failed to exit the other side? Finally, a few questions about the murder of John F. Kennedy! How refreshing. It's rare to have a discussion about the actual murder of JFK. Very good question, David -- what happened to the bullets which created the back and throat wounds? We know from the location of the bullet holes in JFK's clothes (along with a mountain of eye-witness and verified medical evidence) that the back wound was at T3. That location is too low to have been associated with the throat wound. So we have two wounds of entrance, no exits and no bullets recovered during the autopsy. What does the historical record show, David? What plausible explanation did Humes, Boswell and Finck entertain with the body right in front of them? From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's sworn affidavit for the HSCA: From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's sworn affidavit for the HSCA: The doctors speculated that JFK was struck with high tech weaponry -- rounds that did not show up on x-ray. The FBI men took the notion seriously enough to call the FBI Lab. If the FBI had been on the up-and-up its' agents would have been swarming Ft. Detrick, MD within hours. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/html/ChurchV1_0006a.htm Mr. Varnell Would it be stretching the imagination too far to think the throat wound was caused by a bullet or bone fragment from the head wound? I believe Dr. Perry originally described the throat wound as being 3-5 mm and only later changed it to 5-6 mm. As you may know, the 6.5 Carcano is loaded with a bullet that is 6.8 mm (.268") in diameter. Also, the mortician, Thomas Robinson, while describing JFK's face as appearing undamaged, did say in an interview that he believed all of the facial bones to be broken plus he described two minute shrapnel exit wounds in JFK's face that he filled with wax. I think there is a very good chance something was propelled downward from JFK's cranium and exited at the throat.

Not one of these men ever drew a diagram showing how the bullet made it through the neck, past the transverse process, vertebra, and blood vessels. Gee, why was that, David? Do you really think they thought this unimportant? As far as twelve doctors agreeing on something, blah blah blah...I'm sure you're well aware that Big Tobacco had dozens if not hundreds of qualified doctors on their payroll ready and willing to say there was no connection between smoking and lung cancer. Now, why was that? Because the opinions of a few isolated doctors doesn't necessarily mean all that much. And we know this because YOU have told us so... The HSCA FPP unanimously proclaimed that the back wound was BELOW the throat wound. And yet you'll fight that to the death... Mr. Speer Please accept my sincere apologies for having doubted your integrity.

Mr. Von Pein Your remarks are typical of a Lone Nut; all bluster and no substance. You can say what you want about the rest of the case, as, with so little evidence available, everything comes down to supposition but, the fact remains that the anatomy of the human body is a constant and cannot be denied, not even by the great David Von Pein. Look again at the diagram of the human neck at the level of cervical vertebra C7. And then look at the photo of the cervical vertebrae and see how tightly they all sit atop each other and how tightly C7 sits atop T1. There is no denying that the bullet could NOT pass between the transverse process of C7 and the transverse process of T1. Therefore, the only path left open is AROUND the outside tip of the C7 transverse process. Unfortunately, for you, in order for the bullet to then go on to hit the right side of JFK's trachea, it had to follow a very sharp angle that pointed AWAY from Connally's right armpit and towards the centre of the limo. I understand it is your job to convince the reading public, at any cost, that Oswald was a lone assassin but, I am not going to allow you to bluster your way through this one. You are dead wrong. Arlen Specter was not a doctor, and he relied heavily upon the ignorance of the American public to pull this fraud off. The time has come to let the truth out.

I couldn't care less about your diagram. Draw as many of those things as you want. I always ignore them. And that's because those diagrams can never change these words written in JFK's Official Autopsy Report in November 1963: "The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body." The above conclusion was arrived at by Dr. Humes after he talked with Dr. Perry, with Dr. Humes coming to the only logical conclusion he could possibly come to (while also considering the fact there were NO BULLETS in Kennedy's body at all). Yes, Dr. Humes made some mistakes. But should I think he was a totally incompetent boob about all of his bottom-line conclusions relating to his 3-hour-long autopsy on the body of the President? No, I don't think I should. Especially since he was the one who really got the "SBT" rolling with his perfectly logical and accurate determination about the bullet making "its exit through the anterior surface of the neck". I'll always admire Joseph Humes for putting those words in the autopsy report. Which really makes Dr. Humes one of the original authors of the SBT (at least the first half of the SBT, at any rate). And even Dr. Cyril "The SBT Is Impossible" Wecht thinks the bullet went clean through JFK's body. Imagine that. http://Bugliosi-Vs-Wecht.blogspot.com Mr. Von Pein For your information, I did not draw that diagram. If I was that talented, I wouldn't be chatting with the likes of you on an Internet forum. Unfortunately for you, and the Single Bullet Theory, that diagram is quite accurate and presents several problems for you. As the veterbrae in the region of C7/T1 are stacked quite closely together (see diagram), there is no way a 6.5 mm bullet can go beween the right transverse processes of C7 and T1. Rather, it is required to go outside of the transverse process of C7. This presents you with two problems. First, the point of entry in JFK's back, to accomodate this and still allow the bullet to strike the right side of JFK's trachea, becomes much further to the right of JFK's spine than the 1.5-2" generally accepted. Second, the angle of at LEAST 25° has the bullet travelling towards the middle of the limo, not Connally's right armpit. Third, the right carotid artery and jugular vein are directly in the path of a bullet traversing this course. A hit on either one would have instantly produced copious amounts of blood; not seen, of course. Dr. Humes may have hypothesized that the bullet passed from back to front and exited JFK's throat, but I must have missed the part where Humes said it then made a sharp right turn and headed for Connally's right armpit.

You don't have the first clue bobby. Do your research and get back to me when you have. Mr. Lamson Care to get into a discussion about the real reason the SBT won't work? I noticed you and Mr. Von Pein have completely ignored the post I made with the anatomical diagram.

Mr. Lamson Yes, I am familiar with the Croft photo. There is a small wrinkle in the material of his suit coat on the right hand side, likely from his right arm being raised. However, the wrinkle is not seen on the left side, indicating that it is far too small to allow for a bullet entering JFK at the collar line to leave a hole in his jacket and shirt 5-6" below the collar line. However, if the wrinkle is as large as you claim it is, the inside fold of the wrinkle would extend down JFK's back quite a ways. Are you not concerned that the C7/T1 juncture would be somewhat higher than the bottom fold of the wrinkle?

bobby sez: "If you can produce photos showing the folded (bunched) material to be all at the level of or higher than the jacket collar, I would be happy to look at them." Can you even remember what you wrote bobby? Mr. Lamson Please just prove your arguments for us with pictures, if that is possible.

Mr. Lamson I am not surprised you do not have an answer. I have noticed you are long on talk and short of anything substantial, such as proof or evidence. Would you be so good as to show me how Croft proves your argument for you?

It is a strange thing. The second I show how anatomically impossible it is for the SBT to have occurred, the Lone Nuts disappear.

Of course I've considered it and I also did a bit of work that shows that does not have to be the case. Have you? Yes I have. From the experiment I did with a friend of mine, the bunching produced several folded layers of material. A shot through the collar line would have penetrated all of these folds, leaving quite a number of holes through the jacket, once the jacket was laid flat. If JFK's jacket (and shirt) were bunched up as you claim, the collars of both would still be in place at the collar line, unless you believe both collars were riding up on the back of JFK's head somewhere? If the bullet entered at the collar line, why are there no holes through the collars of the jacket and the shirt? Then you simply failed. A hole just below the inner bottom of the fold only produces one hole and moves the wound UP. Simple work, and you failed? Imagine that. Mr. Lamson As usual, your logic is quite assumptive and badly flawed. In your world, was the bullet not supposed to have gone through the collar line? If so, the collar of JFK's shirt was still in place, and was obviously not penetrated by a bullet. If it was not in place, the collar would also have ridden up in the front. If it had, the bullet would have exited well below the tie knot. However, let us assume, for a second, just to help you out a little, that the bullet entered just below the two collars. Where were the folds bunched up to? If they were bunched up just below the collars, the bullet, entering just below the collars, would have penetrated all of the folds, leaving numerous holes. The only way for your theory to work is for all of the bunching, in both jacket and shirt, to have been at or above the level of the collar. Considering that the shirt was buttoned up and there was a tie around his neck, this amount of bunching above the collar line takes quite a bit of imagination to produce. In other words, Mr. Lamson, it is quite likely it did not occur the way you believe it did. If you can produce photos showing the folded (bunched) material to be all at the level of or higher than the jacket collar, I would be happy to look at them.

Of course I've considered it and I also did a bit of work that shows that does not have to be the case. Have you? Yes I have. From the experiment I did with a friend of mine, the bunching produced several folded layers of material. A shot through the collar line would have penetrated all of these folds, leaving quite a number of holes through the jacket, once the jacket was laid flat. If JFK's jacket (and shirt) were bunched up as you claim, the collars of both would still be in place at the collar line, unless you believe both collars were riding up on the back of JFK's head somewhere? If the bullet entered at the collar line, why are there no holes through the collars of the jacket and the shirt?

Mr. Lamson Has it ever occurred to you that, if the back of the jacket (plus the shirt, by necessity) was "folded" or "bunched" (or whatever verb it is you are using this week), there is an excellent chance the bullet would have passed through this bunch (or fold), producing two or possibly three bullet holes in the jacket (and shirt) instead of the single bullet hole seen?

Mr. Hay I noticed that the last frame of your first gif has, by coincidence, stopped at the frame showing the bulge at the lower part of the back of JFK's head. This was believed, by many researchers, to be the second head shot entering from the front of JFK's head. Of course, it can also be argued that we ae merely seeing the tip of Jackie's elbow protruding from behind JFK's head. Mr. Lamson If we follow this film for a few frames past the end of this gif, Nellie Connally's forward hunch does seem to become more pronounced, indicating that she is indeed reacting to the same rapid deceleration as her husband and the two Secret Service agents. However, you are quite right in observing the fact that Jackie and JFK do not react to the same force as the other occupants. JFK, in particular, should be thrown forward easily as much, if not more, than the other occupants, as at this point he lacks the ability to brace himself.

Nothing simple about that, Robert, with all due respect. JFK's back wound was at T3, not C7/T1. The properly prepared medical documents, the clothing defects, and the overwhelming consensus eye-witness testimony puts the back wound at T3. Simply put, the bullet holes in the back of JFK's clothing are too low to have been associated with the throat wound. Period. Mr. Varnell Yes, indeed, that is the other fly in the ointment; one which drives Mr. Lamson insane, in case you haven't noticed. My explanation of why the SBT will not work is directed mainly at the diehards who insist the entry wound was at C7/T1 and cannot accept the reality that most witnesses saw a wound 5-6" below the collarline, placing the wound at thoracic vertebra T3. By placing the entry wound at T3, the impossible becomes even more impossible, if that is possible.

Mr. Josephs Of course, LHO may have been just as surprised as anyone else when he was confronted with shouldering the blame for the assassination. If he was a conspirator, or an intelligence agent who had infiltrated a conspiracy, he may have been told, "Just sit tight, we'll get you out of this mess in a couple of days" or "As soon as the other conspirators are rounded up you'll be exonerated". For the two days LHO lived following the assassination, it did not hurt him or anyone else to repeatedly profess his innocence. However, to go further and reveal a conspiracy, possibly orchestrated by the government, would have placed LHO in serious jeopardy. Knowing this, LHO chose the safest option, kept his mouth shut and waited things out.

Here is a simple explanation of why the Single Bullet Theory does not work. Please look at the following photos and diagrams. The first diagram shows a cross section of the human neck at cervical vertebra C7. The back of the neck is at the bottom of the diagram. C7 can be seen in the lower pat of the diagram with the transverse processes projecting out to each side. The trachea (windpipe) can be seen in the upper part of the diagram with the vertical black opening in the centre of it. As we all know, it is held that JFK was shot, from behind, at the level of the C7 - T1 vertebrae; T1 being the first thoracic vertebra directly below C7, and that the bullet passed through JFK's neck and travelled through the right side of his trachea before exiting. It is not possible for the bullet to have travelled BETWEEN C7 and T1, as the two posterior skeletal photos clearly show. The vertebrae are tightly packed in this region of the spine, and a bullet, especially one travelling at a downward angle from the 6th floor of the TSBD, would have to pass on the outside of the extreme tip of the right transverse process on its way to JFK's trachea. If it had passed between C7 and T1, it would have done a great amount of damage, none of which is visible on the x-rays of JFK. So, referring again to the cross-sectional diagram, place a straight edge or protractor outside of the tip of the right transverse process and also in contact with the right side of the trachea. The last time I tried this, I came up with an angle of 26°. John Connally would have had to have been sitting in the middle of the limousine in order to be hit under the right armpit by the SBT. P.S. When you laid your straight edge on the diagram, did you notice the red circle about halfway from the tip of the right transverse process to the right side of the trachea? That is one of the two carotid arteries that are the main blood supply to the brain. The SBT could not have traversed the claimed route without damaging the right carotid artery. There would have been an unmistakable spurting of blood from this wound that would have been quite noticeable in the Zapruder film.

From the FBI report written after the interview with Charles F. Brehm, close eyewitness to the assassination. Strangely, Mr. Brehm was never called to testify before the Warren Commission. "BREHM expressed his opinion that between the first and third shots, the President's car only seemed to move 10 or 12 feet. It seemed to him that the automobile almost came to a halt after the first shot, but of this he is not certain. After the third shot, the car in which the President was riding increased its speed and went under the freeway overpass and out of his sight." It must be remembered that this was an FBI report and not a statement. Not only did Mr. Brehm not sign this report, it is likely he never read it either. The words "but of this he is not certain" could have been added at any time.

How do you sleep at night? Are you not concerned for your mortal soul, come your Judgement Day? You know you're a shill, we know you're a shill, that makes it unanimous, wouldn't you say?

I have no idea and I'm not the least bit interested in guessing. You on the other hand can guess ( and that's all it will be) as much as you like. Knock yourself out. But, Craig, you're such an expert, you can tell us the head is moving forward because of an impact by a bullet from the rear. Surely you can explain to us why the head then moves backwards in the next frame.

It's merely a logical extension of what you are saying, Craig. As you explained, JFK's head moved forward between z312 and z313 and then was seen to recoil backwards. What else could make JFK's head move backwards following z313, if it was not a bullet from the front?

Did the forty-four back of head wound witnesses from Bethesda, whose HSCA interviews were suppressed by the government until the 1990's, ever come to accept they were mistaken and change their stories?

You silly little boy.....Is there sufficient detail available in the Z film to see the blood spray that has fallen on the interior? Of course not. How about that Parkland shot? Nope again. Just gotta love the infantile logic of davie jo. I can't see it therefore it CANNOT exist. What a joke. But hey, davie jo has never let reality stand in the way of his fantasy. Never will. And the forward movement...ROFLMAO! Just a few posts ago you said... "No... JFK's head does not move forward in the Zfilm we get to look at." Make up your mind you silly little boy. Can't have it both ways. Oh wait I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind. But hey, davie jo has never let reality stand in the way of his fantasy. Never will. If a bullet hitting JFK from the back could make his head go forward, could a bullet hitting the front of his head make JFK go backwards? Why not? That being said, could we be seeing JFK struck in the head by a bullet from behind, followed by a bullet to the front of his head?

You silly little boy..... Is there sufficient detail available in the Z film to see the blood spray that has fallen on the interior? Of course not. How about that Parkland shot? Nope again. Just gotta love the infantile logic of davie jo. I can't see it therefore it CANNOT exist. What a joke. But hey, davie jo has never let reality stand in the way of his fantasy. Never will. And the forward movement...ROFLMAO! Just a few posts ago you said... "No... JFK's head does not move forward in the Zfilm we get to look at." Make up your mind you silly little boy. Can't have it both ways. Oh wait I forgot who I was talking to. Never mind. But hey, davie jo has never let reality stand in the way of his fantasy. Never will. If a bullet hitting JFK from the back could make his head go forward, could a bullet hitting the front of his head make JFK go backwards?

No, Robert, there is no handbook that LNs work from. Although I am not a LN, I have discussed the case with enough of them to feel quite sure they are lone nut theorists, much as many of us here are conspiracy theorists. They are assassination buffs who have come to a different conclusion than us, that is all. Many of them come to this conclusion for reasons other than the evidence, much as many CTs come to be CTs for reasons other than the evidence. As far as Hill's original statements being vague, that is not spin, but simple fact. What does "right rear" mean? While one might be tempted to assume this means "right rear quadrant" you know what happens when you assume. Hill continues to say "right rear," but now sometimes adds "above the ear" or points out a location "above the ear." Do you have any evidence that his opinion on this has changed? Of course not. It's perfectly reasonable, then, to gather from Hill's statements that he considers the area above the ear to be on the "right rear" of the skull. And I sort of see his point. If someone hit me from behind on a location above my right ear, I would almost certainly tell people I was hit on the back of the head. Our minds are face-centric, in that we tend to think of our faces as the front half of our head, and everything else on the back half. Mr. Speer Please do not insult my intelligence. You argue in the identical fashion to all of the dyed-in-the-wool LN's I have ever dealt with. Since this thread has started, you have done nothing but denigrate back of the head wound witnesses and have argued strongly for a wound at the top right of JFK's head. Do you believe JFK was killed by a lone assassin shooting from the 6th floor of the TSBD?