Robert Prudhomme
-
Posts
4,105 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Robert Prudhomme
-
-
It looks to me like Greg downplays the ridges that apparently should be on occipital bone (by hypothesizing that osteoporosis could have remodeled the skull), and Pat does the opposite (by posting a drawing that emphasizes the ridges).
(I don't believe Pat chose the drawing in order to trick people, but rather because the ridges can be hard to see in a photo.)
As one who had sided with Greg on this issue, I find it it disconcerting that he (or one of his doctor friends) has had to go into apology mode to keep his theory afloat. I think it is a stretch to add to it the hypothetical element of osteoporotic remodeling.
However, my position on this is far from being flipped. Because just as I see Greg in apology mode on the occipital ridge issue, Pat has long been in apology mode on the numerous medical personnel who saw the back-of-head blowout.
I've wondered if the Harper fragment was planted, in front of the limo, in order to support the single shooter theory. If anything, what I've witnessed here makes me consider that possibility more seriously.
That's my opinion, FWIW.
Hi Sandy
The location the Harper fragment was found has always been the fly in the ointment that Lone Nut supporters have used to deny its possibility of being occipital bone. It just makes sense; how could a bone from the back of the head be found in front of the limo's position at z313?
Want to read something REALLY interesting? It's known as Warren Commission Document 298. Here is a link to it:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10699
It seems the FBI believed Connally was shot in the back at about the z313 position, and the fatal head shot occurred when the limo was almost at the steps of the pergola, approximately 45 feet further down Elm St. than the z313 position (see visual aid on Page 26).
-
"I'm not sure why folks on this thread think that a bullet entered his back and terminated with no more than a half finger's worth of depth as stated by the autopsy doctors and somehow hit either a piece of bone (where?) or (alas!) broke up and had enough energy to travel through dense tissue, muscle, and clothes to pop out of his throat."
I believe you have misunderstood what I am saying. I, too, have long held that the "shallow" back wound was an impossibility. I believe the bullet that struck JFK's back entered the top of his right lung and stayed there, after disintegrating into minute particles. The throat wound was, according to information garnered from Lt. Richard Lipsey's HSCA testimony, related to a bullet that struck JFK low in the back of his skull, near the hair line.
-
Robert - I was asking if you thought it was between Z-225 and Z-313. I only had a minute to ask, as I was PAW (Posting At Work), so not the best questions were available. I couldn't wait to read more, though.
I still believe there is a lot to the witnesses that claimed to hear the last two shots fired right on top of each other, with possibly less than a second between the shots. This would open the possibility to two shots impacting JFK's head; one from behind and up high and one from the front.
To me, the most interesting source for medical information regarding these head wounds, as well as the back wound, comes from a lieutenant who had nothing to do with the medical profession. Lt. Richard Lipsey was a junior aide to Maj. General Philip C. Wehle, the commander of the military district of Washington, D.C. Although never having witnessed an autopsy, and having no medical training at all, Lipsey was assigned by Wehle to stay with JFK's corpse at Bethesda and to not allow unauthorized persons to enter the theatre the autopsy was performed in. From the students' gallery above, Lipsey watched the entirety of the autopsy, and, though perhaps not understanding everything he saw and heard, was privy to every detail of the autopsy he witnessed.
According to Lipsey's HSCA interview of 1978, the majority of the autopsy was spent in attempting to find the bullet that entered JFK's back. The chest and abdominal organs were dissected in a fruitless attempt to find this bullet, or fragments of it. Their very inability to locate anything more of this bullet than a few particles, or an exit wound for this bullet, is a strong indication of a frangible bullet that breaks apart and disintegrates as it travels through soft tissue.
Lipsey also reported, presumably after hearing it from the autopsy doctors, that the throat wound was believed to have been caused by a bullet, fired from high up at a steep downward angle, either entering low on the back of the skull, or simply grazing the base of the skull. This bullet supposedly impacted the vertebrae, and either a particle of that bullet, or a particle of vertebra bone broken off by that bullet, went on to pass through the right side of JFK's trachea and exit his throat.
This may sound farfetched, until we look at the HSCA interview of x-ray technician Jerrol Custer; also present at the autopsy. He claimed the x-ray of JFK's neck he was shown by the HSCA was not the one he recalled taking that night, and that the one he recalled showed "many" fragments in the vicinity of cervical vertebrae C3/C4.
While it is true that an FMJ bullet would have done serious damage to JFK's vertebrae, the same cannot be said of a frangible bullet, especially the very early and potentially crude and unreliable frangible bullets that might have been available in 1963.
-
I personally believe a bullet struck quite low on the base of the rear of JFK's skull, after being fired from an upper floor of the TSBD or the Dal-Tex Building, and that this bullet was a frangible bullet; designed to fragment and disintegrate while travelling through flesh or organs. This bullet either grazed the base of JFK's skull or entered the rear of his skull and passed through the floor of the skull before contacting the vertebrae at about C3/C4, where it broke up. The exit wound in the throat would have been caused by a small particle of bone that likely broke off of one of the vertebrae.
This bone particle travelled through the so called "slits" in the collar and nicked the left side of JFK's tie as it passed through.
In my next post, I will put forth the evidence that supports this belief.
Robert - Can you pick an approximate Zapruder frame where this bullet strike occurred? I ask because JFK seems rather conscious and mobile (despite the "paralyzed" arms) for a head wound victim in most of the frames between Z-225 and Z-313.
After some consideration, it is my understanding that you are saying JFK must have experienced the throat wound by z225, simply because his hands are up near his throat at that point. Am I correct?
The answer is quite obvious. There is no proof whatsoever that JFK had a throat wound prior to z313. In fact, there is evidence to support this. Nellie Connally was looking directly at JFK following z225, saw his hands up near his throat and yet claimed there was no blood. Wouldn't a bullet passing through the neck have a tendency to bleed, and wouldn't that blood be very obvious on a light coloured shirt?
Just the way JFK's arms were raised is quite odd. Below is a photo of a choking patient displaying what is known as the Universal Choking Signal. While some choking victims will consciously assume this position, as a bid for help, many choking victims will automatically assume this position, without realizing they have done so.
Does this bear any resemblance to JFK post-z225? JFK was not clutching his throat. Rather, his hands appeared to be balled into fists. Also, JFK's arms were not resting against his chest but were, instead, held almost horizontally out from his body.
There is a distinct possibility that JFK's leaned forward, arms raised position had nothing to do with a throat wound, and actually had to do with pain and respiratory distress brought on by a disintegrating bullet having just entered the top of his right lung. Not only would the raised arms be a response to the sudden and unexpected pain of being shot in the back, the raised arms and lean forward stance would also be a natural response to reduced lung capacity, similar to the "tripod stance" seen in chronic emphysema patients, only greatly exaggerated. See photos of emphysema patients in "tripod" position below:
There are additional photos but for some reason I cannot post them. Here are the links to them
http://images.slideplayer.com/24/7392382/slides/slide_28.jpg
https://www.netterimages.com/images/vpv/000/000/013/13539-0550x0475.jpg
-
I do not understand your question, David. Why would it have to occur between z225 and z313?
-
I am the other person Sandy is referring to. However, in respect to Greg Burnham, let us continue this at the appropriate forum; namely, the one begun by Ashton Grey titled " There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat "
-
When Ashton Grey began this thread, he made each of us take a much harder look at the evidence surrounding the throat wound than I believe we (at least myself, anyways) had ever done before. For this I thank him. While I may not agree with him on every single point, we need independent thinkers like him to make us look at "accepted" facts and begin to question them.
I am now convinced there was no bullet entrance wound in JFK's throat, although there is still no way of ruling out a non-metallic projectile. The main reason I am convinced of this is that the holes in JFK's shirt (one on the back 5.75" below the collar line and the "slits" in the collar beneath the tie knot) were tested for traces of metal (ie. copper and lead). While traces of metal were found in the hole in the back of the shirt, no traces of metal were found in the slits in the collar.
Some of you might be quick to say that the metal test results on the collar slits were falsified but, here is a very difficult question for you. If you were trying to promote the Single Bullet Theory, wouldn't you want there to be traces of metal on the only possible place that bullet could have gone through JFK's shirt, as it exited his throat?
I personally believe a bullet struck quite low on the base of the rear of JFK's skull, after being fired from an upper floor of the TSBD or the Dal-Tex Building, and that this bullet was a frangible bullet; designed to fragment and disintegrate while travelling through flesh or organs. This bullet either grazed the base of JFK's skull or entered the rear of his skull and passed through the floor of the skull before contacting the vertebrae at about C3/C4, where it broke up. The exit wound in the throat would have been caused by a small particle of bone that likely broke off of one of the vertebrae.
This bone particle travelled through the so called "slits" in the collar and nicked the left side of JFK's tie as it passed through.
In my next post, I will put forth the evidence that supports this belief.
-
Using literary devices to sucker punch a highly respected JFK researcher at the website he helps moderates is, in my humble opinion, as counter-productive as it gets. There's a lot of people globally that admire you & your work & are standing behind you, Pat.
Brad
Speak for yourself, Brad. I think Pat is out to lunch.
-
I don't believe a lot of JFK researchers have ever hunted game animals much. While the majority of them see JFK, in the Zapruder film, as being slammed violently back and to the left by a gunshot wound to the head, I see something quite different when I view the film.
What I see, at the moment of impact, is a brief and sharp recoil of JFK's head that moves it no more than an inch. I then see JFK's limp body falling to the left, not because the bullet "drove" it in that direction, but because that is the direction JFK was leaning before the bullet hit his head.
-
David and Sandy
What Wesley did NOT see, immediately after the assassination, has puzzled me greatly since it first occurred to me that Baker's immediate rush into the TSBD, alongside Truly, might have been a fabrication.
It is also very difficult to coordinate Shelley and Lovelady into this scene, as Shelley's first day statement has them crossing the street, meeting Gloria Calvery and discussing the assassination with her, and then proceeding down the Elm St. extension twenty-five steps before looking back to see Baker and Truly entering the TSBD. Quite a feat, considering Baker was supposed to be in the building within twenty seconds of the last shot.
I am very interested to see what proof Sandy Larsen has found that shows a later entrance into the TSBD by Baker.
-
As lay people, it might be difficult for us to understand just how complex and multi-leveled a conspiracy by the intelligence community to assassinate JFK actually was. The plan likely included several scenarios, from a multi-shooter action sponsored by a Communist state to a lone nut firing from from an upper window, with many versions in between that; and all interchangeable at the last minute. For all we know, there were many patsies in several locations around Dealey Plaza that day, each with a file containing Back Yard Photos and a history just as interesting as that of LHO.
Controlling a patsy is another question, and not as easy as it might appear. The fact that LHO kept no close companions made him an ideal candidate but, still, controlling his movements, and keeping him out of sight until the shooting was over would be next to impossible. Think of it, how would you keep Oswald on the 6th floor with a Presidential motorcade passing by, without arousing suspicions in him? If not killed out right during arrest, might he not say something in a press conference about the "strange men" that asked him to go to the 6th floor at 12:23?
The Mauser may have been placed on the 6th floor because the selection of a patsy might have been made at the last minute, and LHO was not the first choice. However, something might have happened (Victoria Adams?) to reverse this decision, and the conspirators might have decided to go with LHO at the last second. The Mauser could have been the weapon "belonging" to the other patsy (Dougherty?) and the sudden rush into the TSBD of police could have prevented the conspirators from swapping the Mauser for the Carcano.
-
The relative timing of these four events should be able to tell us something about the Mouser-to-Carcano transformation:
1) The shells that were found: 6.5 (When was this first reported to the press?)
2) Initial witnesses to the gun: 7.65 Mauser (11/22 news reports.)
3) Later witnesses to the gun: 6.5 Carcano (11/23 news reports.)
4) Backyard photos: Carcano (When was this first shown to the press?)
Of course, I've added only the back yard photo to what has already been discussed. I'm wondering if its timing will help in understanding the Mouser-Carcano transition better.
Can a Carcano (and NOT a Mouser with a protruding box magazine) definitely be identified in the early-released BY photos? What about the caliber?
We know that Oswald was allegedly shown a backyard photo during interrogation. But do we know for sure that he was?
Or was a BYP shown to the press on the 22nd or 23rd?
The answer to this is key. Because fabricating a photo isn't something that could have been done quickly, without any forethought. So if a BYP existed on the 22nd or 23rd, it would likely have been made in advance of the assassination. In which case it would mean that a Carcano was the rifle that plotters were originally going to use to frame Oswald. And that would make one wonder why a Mauser was initially found instead.
Yes, it does not make a lot of sense, unless the plotters wanted everyone to think it was a conspiracy. Remember, the conspiracy was separate from the cover up, and likely was not being run by the same people.
-
The relative timing of these four events should be able to tell us something about the Mouser-to-Carcano transformation:
1) The shells that were found: 6.5 (When was this first reported to the press?)
2) Initial witnesses to the gun: 7.65 Mauser (11/22 news reports.)
3) Later witnesses to the gun: 6.5 Carcano (11/23 news reports.)
4) Backyard photos: Carcano (When was this first shown to the press?)
Of course, I've added only the back yard photo to what has already been discussed. I'm wondering if its timing will help in understanding the Mouser-Carcano transition better.
Can a Carcano (and NOT a Mouser with a protruding box magazine) definitely be identified in the early-released BY photos? What about the caliber?
There is no doubt, at least to me anyways, that the rifle in the BYP's was a Carcano short rifle. Whether it was a 6.5 x 52mm M91/38 or a 7.35 x 51mm M38 is impossible to tell, as the two rifles are virtually identical except for calibre.
-
Ha ha. If I could just remember his name.
-
I don't know. While I believe Roger Craig may have been telling the truth about a good number of things, he certainly could never have read "7.65 Mauser" stamped on the barrel of an Argentine Mauser; at least, not one direct from the factory anyways. It is possible someone acquired an Argentine Mauser and stamped "7.65 Mauser" on the barrel themselves.
Did you post this Robert?
Wow, how did I miss this one? I searched high and low and only found Argentine Mausers with the model on them and nothing with the calibre on it.
Did you actually find this in an old post of mine, Dave? That worries me.
It should be pointed out that the Germans never manufactured a 7.65mm Mauser for themselves, and that the 7.65mm Mauser was always known as the "Belgian" or "Argentine" Mauser.
Well, that makes it a whole new ball game, and Craig might actually have read "7.65" on the barrel. Good find, Dave.
-
Bob:
We are not talking about Roger Craig and I don't think that Steve mentioned him.
From Post #1:
"The first three people who were on the scene when the rifle was found, Weitzman, Boone and Craig were all Sheriff's Deputies. In one way or another, they all identified it as a German make."
However, this is beside the point. What I am trying to stress is that anyone who claims to have read the calibre stamped on a Mauser rifle is full of beans.
How many times does one person have to be wrong before you begin to seriously question his work?
I don't know. While I believe Roger Craig may have been telling the truth about a good number of things, he certainly could never have read "7.65 Mauser" stamped on the barrel of an Argentine Mauser; at least, not one direct from the factory anyways. It is possible someone acquired an Argentine Mauser and stamped "7.65 Mauser" on the barrel themselves.
One theory I have is that Weitzman, at a glance, ID'ed the rifle as an Argentine Mauser Model 1891, simply because the protruding magazines on this Mauser and the Carcano are so similar. Why no one simply looked closely at the Carcano to read the "6,5 CAL MADE ITALY" stamped behind the rear sight is beyond me. Craig probably heard Weitzman and later embellished the story with the calibre stamping tale. I have often wondered if he was even on the 6th floor at the time the rifle was being examined.
-
Bob:
We are not talking about Roger Craig and I don't think that Steve mentioned him.
From Post #1:
"The first three people who were on the scene when the rifle was found, Weitzman, Boone and Craig were all Sheriff's Deputies. In one way or another, they all identified it as a German make."
However, this is beside the point. What I am trying to stress is that anyone who claims to have read the calibre stamped on a Mauser rifle is full of beans.
-
It should be noted that any witness, such as Roger Craig, who ID'ed the rifle by supposedly reading the calibre of the rifle on the base of the barrel, is likely not being truthful.
Mauser did not stamp the calibre anywhere on their rifles. In the case of the Argentine Mauser, there were several models and they were ID'ed by the year they were introduced.
The 7.65mm Argentine Mauser that most closely resembles the 6.5mm Carcano had its stampings on the side of the receiver, not the barrel.
Seen below is a 7.65mm Argentine Mauser Model 1891 with protruding box magazine, similar to the 6.5mm Carcano.
-
The late 19th Century saw many advances in firearms and, in particular, military rifles. Before this, soldiers were equipped with large bore rifles that used black powder to propel their projectiles, although, by this point, the muzzle loading rifle had pretty much been replaced by breech loading rifles that accepted a cartridge loaded with gunpowder and a bullet. Muzzle velocities were quite low, due to the slow burning black powder, and most combat took place with combatants within 100 yards of each other. As I said, the bores of these rifles were quite large, and the bullets they fired were great lumps of lead. While they were slow moving, their large mass made them capable of inflicting horrendous wounds when they struck a bone, often necessitating amputation of the limb they struck.
The black powder rifles with their large bore barrels did not shoot a jacketed bullet, and the idea of encasing a lead bullet with a copper alloy or other harder metal jacket did not come about until bores and bullets became smaller and muzzle velocities began increasing with the new smokeless gunpowders. It was found that a smaller bullet could do the same damage as a large bullet, if propelled at a high enough velocity, and it was also found these smaller faster bullets could do this damage at far greater ranges, and with accuracies undreamed of with black powder rifles.
However, as accuracy at distance became possible, it was also discovered that unjacketed lead bullets could easily destroy this accuracy. The problem was that the lead was so soft, each bullet would deposit a certain amount of lead in the barrel's rifling grooves. Within a few shots, the rifling grooves would be filled with lead, and unable to impart a good gyroscopic spin to the bullet, so necessary for the accuracy of the bullet. The solution was to totally encase the lead bullet in a copper alloy jacket, as the harder alloy tended to not leave anywhere near as much metal in the rifling grooves.
The copper jacket solved the fouling problem but, it soon became apparent to troops in combat that the smaller copper jacketed bullets did not perform nearly the same as the much larger unjacketed lead bullets. With the unjacketed bullets, soldiers had been accustomed to seeing great grievous wounds, and, often, one well placed shot usually stopped an enemy combatant in his tracks. The jacketed bullets, however, being cased in a much harder metal, had a tendency to pass straight through an enemy combatant, without deforming, expanding or causing a significant amount of damage. Because of this, the British Indian Army was close to mutiny in India, and a solution had to be found. Stories abounded about indigenous combatants being shot six times by .303 Mk. II bullets and walking away from the battle.
In 1896, at the Dum Dum Arsenal in Dum Dum, India, an enterprising young British officer by the name of Captain Bertie Clay came up with a simple but ingenious solution to this problem, and created the "dum dum" bullet.
.303 British Mk. II full metal jacket cartridge. Note the round nose, popular before it was realized how much better pointed bullets tumble in a wound.
Taking the .303 Mk. II cartridge seen above, a full metal jacket bullet with a round nose, Capt. Clay simply removed 1 mm of the nose of the jacket, exposing the soft lead core beneath.
.303 Mk. II "dum dum" bullet seen on left.
What Capt. Clay had done was to create the world's first soft point jacketed bullet. These bullets, unlike the FMJ Mk. II, expanded very well in a wound, causng horrific wounds.
At almost the same time as Capt. Clay developed the dum dum bullet, research was going on at the British Army's Woolwich Arsenal in Great Britain. A slightly different approach was taken to the problem. Not only did they remove the nose of the jacket, they also opened up a cavity in the nose of the bullet, creating the world's first "hollow point" bullet.
.303 British Mk. V hollow point seen on right.
The hollow point bullet was introduced as the Mk. III cartridge, and quickly evolved into the Mk. IV and finally the Mk. V cartridge. These hollow point bullets were as superior in stopping power to the dum dum as the dum dum was to the FMJ Mk. II, and were used with great success in combat from 1897-99, and would have continued in use if not for the Hague Peace Conference of 1899.
The attending nations of the Hague Peace Conference determined that expanding bullets, such as the dum dum and the hollow point, were far too inhumane, and that the use of expanding bullets in combat, by civilized nations, should be outlawed. The British were back at square one with their inefficient round nosed full metal jacket bullets. Luckily, for the British, the attendees of the conference lacked imagination, and only banned bullets that were not fully jacketed. The British went back to the drawing board, coming up with a brilliant solution that stayed within the rules, although this design was not introduced until 1910.
In the years between the outlawing of the expanding bullets and the introduction of the ultimate British design, an attempt was made to increase he stopping power of the original round nosed FMJ Mk. II bullet, simply by making the copper jacket thinner in the hope it would facilitate easier deformation of the bullet in a wound. It was introduced in 1904 and designated the Mk. VI cartridge, but did not perform as designed.
.303 British Mk. VII cartridge
Following the development in France in 1898 of the pointed "spitzer" bullet, the British followed suit and incorporated this idea into their new bullet. As you will recall, it was found that pointed bullets can be induced to tumble in a wound much easier than round nosed bullets, and that the difference in mass between the two ends of the bullet added to this phenomenon. With this weight imbalance in mind, the British researchers went one step further, creating the Mk. VII bullet seen below:
Drawing of the original 160 grain Mk. VII bullet, replaced soon after introduction by the improved 174 gr. Mk. VII bullet.
As seen above, the Mk. VII is a full metal jacket bullet with a spitzer nose. Inside the jacket, though, is the secret to this bullet's success. While the rear half of the bullet core is a 98/2 mixture of lead and antimony, the forward section of the bullet core is made from aluminum, a metal with only 1/4 the density of lead. Needless to say, there was a much greater imbalance in weight distribution between the front and rear of this bullet than seen in a standard spitzer point bullet, causing the Mk. VII bullet to tumble in wounds and do far more damage.
The design was so successful, the British kept it through two world wars, and only abandoned it following the discontinuation of the .303 in the late 1950's.
Up next: "Imitation is the Sincerest Form of Flattery" or "The 7.35 x 51mm Carcano - Better Late than Never"
-
This next part deals almost exclusively with the evolution of the cartridge for the .303 Lee Enfield rifle, the backbone of the British Army and British Commonwealth nations until the late 1950's. Chief in this discussion is the British attempt to increase the stopping power of this cartridge, and how their attempts ran afoul of the 1899 Hague Peace Conference. It might seem odd to discuss this rifle on this forum but, its history best shows the frustrations of using full metal jacket bullets when trying to kill people, and the ingenious methods dreamed up to overcome this obstacle.
This discussion is also relevant to the Carcano, as the Italians, in desperation, briefly came up with what was almost a carbon copy of the final product in the evolution of the .303 cartridge.
Next: Dum dums and hollow points
-
One of the more discussed features of the 6.5 Carcano is its ability, or lack of, to effectively kill. Its nickname, "The Humanitarian Rifle", would lead a person to think that all Carcanos were poorly made, inaccurate rifles. However, the opposite is true in the majority of Carcanos, with a few ill conceived exceptions to the rule. The 6.5mm Carcano M91 long rifle, standard issue to Italian troops in the early part of the 20th Century, was no better or worse, accuracy-wise, than any of the other long barrelled rifles issued to troops of other European countries at that time. So, if it was not an inaccurate rifle, why was the Carcano unable to kill enemy soldiers?
If the majority of Carcano rifles were not inaccurate, their lack of lethality had to lie with the bullet the rifles fired. The M91 long rifle fired the same cartridge as all other Carcanos, including carbines and short rifles. Shot from the M91, this cartridge propelled a 162 grain bullet that achieved a muzzle velocity of just over 2400 fps (feet per second); well within the velocities of other military rifles at the time. While the Carcano bullet, with its calibre of 6.5 mm, was slightly smaller than, say, the 7.92mm Mauser or the .303 (7.7mm) Lee Enfield bullet, its longer length gave it a bullet weight or "mass" equal to other military bullets of that time. Example: Lee Enfield .303 Mark VII cartridge with a 174 grain bullet and a muzzle velocity of 2440 fps.
So, once again, if the 6.5mm Carcano bullet had roughly the same mass and muzzle velocity as other military cartridges, why did it not have the same stopping power?
Modern 6.5mm bullet manufactured as precise copy of 6.5mm Carcano bullet
.303 Mk. VII cartridge, cutaway showing bullet design
7.92 x 57mm Mauser cartridge, cutaway showing bullet design
The above photos show three bullets in very common usage during the First World War. At a glance, one very important difference is obvious; the Carcano has a blunt rounded nose while the Mk. VII and the 7.92mm Mauser have a pointed "spitzer" nose or "spire point". While not only making these pointed bullets more aerodynamic (note the boat tail on the Mauser bullet - way ahead of its time), thus extending their range plus higher velocities at further ranges (thereby extending their killing power at these ranges), this design also encouraged these bullets to tumble in a wound. As you may or may not know, once a bullet begins tumbling in a wound, it tends to tear up a great deal more flesh and cause much more grievous wounds than a bullet that simply passes straight through. The pointed tip encourages tumbling in two ways. When it encounters bone, the small pointed tip is very easily turned by the bone it encounters, as opposed to a round blunt tip which tends to "punch" its way through smaller bones without deviation. Second, there is a distinct difference in mass between the smaller pointed end and the larger base end of the bullet. Anyone who has ever towed a heavy trailer with a small vehicle will understand what happens here. When the pointed bullet strikes a small bone, the pointed tip may only turn the bullet slightly. However, the higher mass in the rear of the bullet tends to exaggerate this deviation, making the bullet tumble.
As I said earlier, the 6.5mm Carcano bullet was smaller in diameter than other military bullets of the same period, but almost equal in mass. It achieved this through its unusually great length. This combination of long length and narrow diameter, plus its round nose which distributed its mass evenly over the entire length of the bullet, made the Carcano a very stable bullet in flight and in a wound.
To sum up, the 6.5mm Carcano bullet was the very epitomization of the humane principles and lofty ideals set out in the Hague Peace Conference of 1899, which basically wanted soldiers to wound each other with through and through wounds, thus humanely taking each other "out of the fight" without killing or grievously wounding each other. While it may have seemed like a good idea at the time, the realities of war soon showed that it was much better to have a rifle that stopped an opponent with one shot.
Next, I will demonstrate one nation's solution that gave their bullet more stopping power while staying within the rules, and how the Italians, in desperation, briefly tried to emulate this cartridge in the design of a new Carcano bullet.
-
A fellow member asked me in a PM the other day if the alleged assassination rifle, a 6.5 x 52mm Carcano M91/38 short rifle with the serial number C2766, had been re-chambered at some point in its life. I replied that it hadn't, as the Carcano was only ever manufactured in two calibres, and the other calibre, the 7.35 x 51mm, was obviously shooting a larger bullet; making re-boring of the barrel an impossibility.
I still see a great deal of mistaken information about C2766, and Carcanos in general, some of it honest mistakes and some of it outright and intentional disinformation. I would like to have another go at trying to explain this fascinating and often misunderstood rifle, and how its history might have affected the outcome of events in Dealey Plaza, should C2766 have actually fired any shots that day.
-
Old Chinese curse: May you live in interesting times.
-
"Tippit was buried right away, the next day, and his family was not allowed to view his remains."
Hi Kathleen
I had never heard this before, and it is quite intriguing. Would you mind if I asked if there was some way to verify this?
There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Hi Tom
In all fairness, the 1/4 inch wound in JFK's throat was described by some Parkland doctors as having ragged edges. Although many of them might not have seen it prior to the tracheotomy, I believe it is a myth that the tracheotomy incision would have "obliterated" this wound, as some believe. Scalpel blades are quite thin, and the two halves of the circular wound were still visible, as some of the autopsy photos clearly demonstrate.
From Lipsey's HSCA interview, it is not possible to determine if the autopsy doctors believed the bullet entered the back of the skull and exited the base, or, rather, grazed the bottom of the skull as it passed underneath the skull. All Lipsey was able to relate is that he understood the bullet to have penetrated at the hair line at the rear of the head. Such an impact point would allow a projectile to pass under the skull, possibly deflecting off of the skull, on its way to the cervical vertebrae.
Would a projectile lose an appreciable amount of velocity doing what I just described? It might, it might not. It all depends on how much resistance it encountered. However, even losing half of its likely velocity of 2000 fps would still have it travelling at 1000 fps; a more than adequate velocity to still do some serious damage. Many pistol rounds have a muzzle velocity of 1000 fps, and I most certainly wouldn't want to be shot by one of these at point blank range. Just ask LHO about that.
While it is true that modern frangible bullets are composed entirely of compressed metal powder, and the cloud of disintegrated powder does decelerate rapidly once the bullet disintegrates in soft tissue, we must remember that such modern bullets were not available in 1963. What was available in 1963 (coincidentally made for the 6.5mm Carcano since the 1930's) was the M37 Magistri 6.5mm Carcano frangible range bullet. This bullet was designed as a "safe" bullet that could be used in the Carcano at indoor ranges, without fear of ricochets. It literally could be fired at a concrete wall, where it would disintegrate harmlessly into a bit of bullet jacket and some powdered lead.
As I've written in several other threads (possibly even this one?) the construction of this bullet was quite interesting. The jacket was composed of two sections as seen below:
I have been unable to find out if the two jacket sections were soldered or compressed together. Inside the nose of this jacket was a tiny lead or "maillechort" pellet. Behind this nose pellet was powdered lead. Whether it was loose or compressed into a solid is also unclear. Finally, the rear portion of the jacket was filled with sand.
The most interesting thing about this bullet can be seen in the nose, where it appears there is an opening in the jacket nose that allows us to see the lead/maillechort pellet. It clearly is not deep enough to make this a hollow point bullet, and the exact purpose of this opening is unclear. I can only assume it served to facilitate the rapid disintegration of this bullet when it struck a concrete surface.
The reason I find this opening so interesting is because this is very close to how a modern frangible bullet, designed not for the range but, rather, as an extremely lethal hunting bullet, is designed. However, instead of just a small nose opening as seen in the M37, the opening goes much deeper into the bullet and makes a true hollow point; the essential ingredient in a lethal frangible bullet that will make that bullet disintegrate while travelling through soft tissue.
So, if frangible bullets were used on JFK, what did they look like? Did they use some variation of the M37 with a solid nose pellet, but with a hollow point drilled into this nose pellet? Could the M37 have been used, its lethality increased by drilling a hollow point into its nose? It is hard to say. If they did, though, we must try to imagine what would happen to this bullet when it struck JFK's vertebrae. As this bullet would have to travel through a couple of inches of soft tissue, as it grazed its way under his skull, there is a possibility this bullet was in the process of breaking up before it reached C3/C4, and the fragments seen by Jerrol Custer were merely where the cloud of powdered metal came to rest. However, if there was a solid nose pellet inside the jacket, would it (or a fragment of it) still contain enough mass to continue on through the vertebrae, and exit JFK's throat? Remember, one Parkland doctor conceded, in his WC testimony, that if the throat wound was a wound of exit, he felt the projectile that caused it had to be nearly spent when it exited JFK's throat.
Now back to the shirt collar, and the test for metals conducted on the slits in the collar that came back as showing no traces of metal. What if, the jacket of this exotic frangible bullet was made of copper or another metal, but the lead/maillechort nose pellet was replaced with hard plastic, ceramic or some other material that would leave no trace of metal, and would also disintegrate if it hit a hard surface, leaving nothing solid to be found? Could this have been what went through JFK's collar, nicking the edge of the tie knot on the way through?