Robert Prudhomme

As LHO would not have had access to frangible bullets, it was necessary to cover up the true nature of the back wound. Should the nature of the back wound, and the bullet that caused it become known, the investigation into the source of these frangible bullets would lead directly to either the Army or the CIA.

Why would the conspirators want to inflict upon JFK a back wound the nature of which it would be necessary to cover up? Why not just shoot him in the back with a FMJ bullet?

A FMJ bullet likely would have gone straight through JFK's chest and caused little damage. The same bullet also stood a good chance of going through his skull and making a lot less damage than the bullet(s) that actually hit his skull.

Frankly, I don't really believe anyone intended to shoot JFK in the back in the first place. I believe all shots were aimed at his head, and the one that entered his back missed.

Okay, let's have it out right here and now. The "shallow" entrance wound on JFK's back has been a "fact" of the JFK murder case since Commander Humes tried to probe this wound with his little finger during the autopsy.

I say the wound could not be only an inch deep, if it was made by a rifle with a muzzle velocity of 2000 fps or greater. It would have to be, if made by a rifle, from a bullet travelling 400 fps or slower.

Such a slow bullet simply would not have made it to the target, or even anywhere close to it.

Anyone care to prove me wrong?

As the T1 vertebra is below the level of JFK's throat wound, it may seem to be a small matter to most readers whether the bullet entered JFK's back at the level of T1 vertebra or T3 vertebra. In fact, it makes a great deal of difference.

At the level of T1, a bullet entering JFK's back 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal midline has a very good chance of just missing the top of JFK's right lung.

At the level of T3, a bullet entering JFK's back 1.5-2 inches to the right of the spinal midline has nowhere to go but into the top of JFK's right lung.

As there was no exit wound on the front of JFK's chest, and as I believe the myth of the shallow entrance wound on JFK's back to be a physical impossibility, the only logical conclusion to be drawn from this is the bullet that entered JFK's back was a frangible bullet that completely disintegrated to metal powder a couple of inches into JFK's right lung, coming to a complete halt at this point and not exiting the front of his chest.

The same type of bullet(s) entered JFK's skull, and their disintegration explains the trail of dust like metal particles seen on x-rays of JFK's skull.

While the public might believe a full metal jacket bullet could disintegrate into dust inside of JFK's skull (another physical impossibility) there is no way even the most gullible member of the public would accept such disintegration of a FMJ bullet in a lung.

As LHO would not have had access to frangible bullets, it was necessary to cover up the true nature of the back wound. Should the nature of the back wound, and the bullet that caused it become known, the investigation into the source of these frangible bullets would lead directly to either the Army or the CIA.

Maybe Ruby got cold feet, and had to be "persuaded" to carry out his task.

Or....

Maybe Jack Ruby's movements were just exactly what they appeared to be --- the movements of a man who did not wake up on Sunday morning, November 24, 1963, with the thought in his mind of murdering Lee Harvey Oswald, but due to ordinary non-conspiratorial circumstances found himself downtown near the City Hall building (with a gun in his possession, which he was known to carry, even on days when accused Presidential assassins were NOT being housed at Dallas Police Headquarters) at precisely the right moment to encounter Lee Harvey Oswald in the police basement.

Is the above scenario even remotely possible in a conspiracy theorist's world?

Yes it is. Is my scenario even remotely possible in a lone nutter's world?

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the perspective this photo is taken from is actually quite misleading? JFK's head is tilted back quite severely, and this has the effect of shortening the neck; making the entrance wound appear much closer to the scalp line and, hence, higher on the neck (the area of C7/T1).

However, in the photo, we can make out the outline of the scapula (shoulder blade) adjacent to the entrance wound, and even the crested top of the scapula, which appears to be slightly higher than the entrance wound.

If we look at this anatomical diagram, this location actually puts the level of the entrance wound at thoracic vertebra T3; exactly where the death certificate said it was.

The thoracic vertebrae are distinguishable from the cervical (neck) vertebrae by the fact you can see the ends of the ribs attached to the thoracic vertebrae. Vertebra T3 is the 3rd one down from the neck with ribs attached to it.

Looks like about T 8 to me. it's below the bottom point of the scapula. the scapula extends from T2 to T7 and it's slightly below that.

You're joking, right?

Ruby knew he had to show up...

Then why wasn't Ruby already downtown prior to 10:00 AM, which is when Oswald was supposed to originally be transferred?

Maybe Ruby got cold feet, and had to be "persuaded" to carry out his task.

Has it ever occurred to anyone that the perspective this photo is taken from is actually quite misleading? JFK's head is tilted back quite severely, and this has the effect of shortening the neck; making the entrance wound appear much closer to the scalp line and, hence, higher on the neck (the area of C7/T1).

However, in the photo, we can make out the outline of the scapula (shoulder blade) adjacent to the entrance wound, and even the crested top of the scapula, which appears to be slightly higher than the entrance wound.

If we look at this anatomical diagram, this location actually puts the level of the entrance wound at thoracic vertebra T3; exactly where the death certificate said it was.

The thoracic vertebrae are distinguishable from the cervical (neck) vertebrae by the fact you can see the ends of the ribs attached to the thoracic vertebrae. Vertebra T3 is the 3rd one down from the neck with ribs attached to it.

If the bullet entered at the level of T3, the only place it could go is into the top of JFK's right lung.

The posterior view shows the relationship between vertebra T3 and the lungs best. "RUL" stands for "right upper lung".

Okay, I thought it over real hard, and it occurred to me we are only trying to prove one thing; whether or not a card with a vowel on it has an even number on the reverse side.

Therefore, only the "E" has to be turned over.

I thought at first the "4" would have to be turned over as well, to ascertain whether or not there was a vowel on the other side, but it also occurred to me there could be even numbers on cards outside of the vowel/ even number matchings.

Good trick, Glenn. One card.

P.S.

My wife looked at it for two seconds and had the answer. Beginner's luck?

Robert, the word "only" is not found in the statement we are dealing with.

The statement does not say that ONLY vowels will have even numbers on the reverse. The statement does not say that even numbers will ONLY have vowels on the reverse.

Those are ASSUMPTIONS that are not based upon our statement. They MAY or MAY NOT be true.

So turning over ANY card beyond the E would only tend to prove or disprove those ASSUMPTIONS, and not necessarily affect the statement we were given.

Now...have I said anything that is incorrect?

However, saying that "if a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side" is the same as saying "if a card has an even number on one side, then it has a vowel on the other side". This establishes a rule for vowels and even numbers.

Finding an even number opposite of the "K" or a vowel opposite of the "7" will make the rule about vowels and even numbers untrue.

I don't mean to annoy anyone - i do feel that this is an appropriate (and fun) topic in each of us understanding more what's involved in the conclusion forming process which can either lead to errors in deduction or to progress in our pursuit of accuracy and truth in the solution.

one of the real reasons i'm into this thing so much is my passion for 'problem solving,' and i'm sure that's the case for many of ya'll. so these kinds of things are fun, and good for our brains (which we need to solve this thing!)

i'm just pasting in this little bit of text and this quick test i found (that I failed) without the answer. if any of you have seen it already, which is very likely, please don't publish the answer, or cheat.

so, check it out:

If...then...

Conditional reasoning is based on an 'if A then B' construct that posits B to be true if A is true.

Note that this leaves open the question of what happens when A is false, which means that in this case, B can logically be either true or false.

Conditional traps

A couple of definitions: In the statement 'If A then B', A is the antecedent and B is the consequent.

You can affirm or deny either the antecedent or consequent, which may lead to error.

Denying the consequent

Denying the consequent means going backwards, saying 'If B is false, then A must also be false.' Thus if you say 'If it is raining, I will get wet', then the trap is to assume that if I am not getting wet then it is not raining.

Denying the antecedent

Denying the antecedent is making assumptions about what will happen if A is false. Thus if you say 'If it is raining, I will get wet' and is not raining, I might assume that I will not get wet. But then I could fall in the lake.

Affirming the consequent

This is making assumptions about A if B is shown to be true. Thus if I make the statement 'If it is raining, I will get wet', then if I am getting wet it does not mean that it is raining.

The card trap

A classic trap was created some years ago;

Four cards are laid out as below:

The condition is now established (true): 'If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side.'

The problem is to decide which are the minimum cards that need to be turned over to prove that the conditional statement is true. How many and which card(s)?

Discuss it among yourselves...

All four cards have to be turned over. The "K" could have an even number on the other side, and the "7" could have a vowel on the other side. To only turn over the "E" and the "4" would be to make an assumption about the other two cards.

Edit:

I changed my answer from four cards to two, the "E" and the "4", after looking more closely at the conditions. Our statement is only establishing a relationship between vowels and even numbers, and says nothing about consonants and odd numbers. In other words, consonants and odd numbers can have anything they want on the reverse side, and it will not affect the stated condition.

Edit:

On the other hand, if the "K" had an even number on the reverse, or the "7" had a vowel on the reverse, that would tend to invalidate the statement. I think I will go with four again.

PAT: This is consistent with a shot from above's hitting the back at shallower angle than the forward slope of the shoulder plus the forward lean of the body.

How far over, Pat, are you claiming that JFK was leaning when he was shot in the back?

From Pat Speer:

"P.S. If you think it ridiculous that a rifle bullet would not transit beyond the outer layers of the skin, perhaps you should consider the alternative. In your scenario, if I'm not mistaken, you believe that three doctors inspected the body of the most famous patient they would ever see, and found the entrance of a high-velocity bullet on his back flesh, but couldn't find any entrance beyond the flesh. Now, do you know how ridiculous this is? I've read dozens and dozens of books and articles on gunshot wounds, and this just does not happen. I mean, I've yet to find a single case study in which doctors valiantly tried to probe a high-velocity torso wound, but couldn't find any entrance into the body. Have you?"

I'll go one better than that, Pat. Not only did those three doctors hide the true nature of the back wound with the "short shot" and "shallow back wound" fairy tale, they also lied about a large gaping wound in the right rear of JFK's head.

P.S.

I've also read many medical papers, and the majority of doctors will not try to probe bullet tracks for two reasons.

1. Tissue has a tendency to swell and close behind a bullet track, closing off the track.

2. Probes tend to make their own track if used too aggressively.

P.P.S.

Don't you dare get snarky with me and start making cracks about me being a self-appointed ballistics expert. I have likely forgotten more about ballistics than you will ever know. The reality of this situation is that a bullet travelling slowly enough to only penetrate an inch in flesh never would have found its target in the first place, for the reasons I have already outlined.

Uhh, sorry, Robert. Dead tissue doesn't bruise or swell, and pathologists do indeed insert metal probes from entrance to exit, and take pictures of the these probes within the body. Here is what the HSCA FPP had to say about Humes' inability to probe the back wound:

"The panel believes that the difficulty which Drs. Humes, Finck, and Boswell experienced in trying to place a soft probe through the bullet pathway in President Kennedy’s neck probably resulted from their failure or inability to manipulate this portion of the body into the same position it was in when the missile penetrated. Rigor mortis may have hindered this manipulation. Such placement would have enabled reconstruction of the relationships of the neck and shoulder when the missile struck. It is customary, however, to dissect missile tracks to determine damage and pathway. Probing a track blindly may produce false tracks and misinformation."

Note that they don't criticize them for trying to probe the wound, or offer up any silliness about the track being closed off. No, they propose that the president's corpse stiffened up in such a way that the path through his body was twisted, and was not easily probed. They make it clear, moreover, that they believe they could have successfully probed the body, if only they'd manipulated his body into the position he was in when shot.

Uhh, sorry, Pat, JFK did not die instantly, as evidenced by the fact a pulse was detected at Parkland Hospital, and that he was expereiencing agonal breathing when he entered Parkland. There was plenty of time for swelling to take place in the wound.

And you are quoting the HSCA forensic panel? These are the folks that told us the SBT would work, aren't they? Sure, all they had to do was get JFK sitting just right, and they could have pushed a probe from the back wound right out the throat wound.

However, look at the last sentence of the quote:

"It is customary, however, to dissect missile tracks to determine damage and pathway. Probing a track blindly may produce false tracks and misinformation."

Is that not the reason I gave that most autopsy doctors do not probe wounds? Is there any other way to probe a wound than doing it blindly? The only reason the HSCA FPP came up with the story about it being possible to manipulate JFK just so to get a probe through the SBT wound is because these lowlife were still trying to sell the SBT to the public.

Honestly, Pat, I really wonder sometimes which team you play for.

From Pat Speer:

"P.S. If you think it ridiculous that a rifle bullet would not transit beyond the outer layers of the skin, perhaps you should consider the alternative. In your scenario, if I'm not mistaken, you believe that three doctors inspected the body of the most famous patient they would ever see, and found the entrance of a high-velocity bullet on his back flesh, but couldn't find any entrance beyond the flesh. Now, do you know how ridiculous this is? I've read dozens and dozens of books and articles on gunshot wounds, and this just does not happen. I mean, I've yet to find a single case study in which doctors valiantly tried to probe a high-velocity torso wound, but couldn't find any entrance into the body. Have you?"

I'll go one better than that, Pat. Not only did those three doctors hide the true nature of the back wound with the "short shot" and "shallow back wound" fairy tale, they also lied about a large gaping wound in the right rear of JFK's head.

P.S.

I've also read many medical papers, and the majority of doctors will not try to probe bullet tracks for two reasons.

1. Tissue has a tendency to swell and close behind a bullet track, closing off the track.

2. Probes tend to make their own track if used too aggressively.

P.P.S.

Don't you dare get snarky with me and start making cracks about me being a self-appointed ballistics expert. I have likely forgotten more about ballistics than you will ever know. The reality of this situation is that a bullet travelling slowly enough to only penetrate an inch in flesh never would have found its target in the first place, for the reasons I have already outlined.

Hi Ron

If a FMJ bullet travelling at 2000 fps (1367 mph) has the ability to pass right through a man's chest and out the other side, and still retain enough velocity to do some serious damage on the other side, what velocity would a so called "bad round" be travelling at to only penetrate the flesh of JFK's back a mere inch or so?

I have no idea.

Well, I can tell you, the bullet would be moving at little more than a crawl.

For comparison, the .38 Special "Colt Cobra" revolver that Jack Ruby used to shoot LHO had a muzzle velocity of between 800 and 900 fps, depending on the weight of the bullets. This bullet entered the left side of LHO's abdomen and almost managed to exit the right side before it came to a halt, passing through several organs and blood vessels on the way through. With this in mind, we know 800 fps would not be the velocity of the bullet that struck JFK's back, as this bullet would likely have been found in the forward part of JFK's chest cavity.

Realistically, I believe a bullet would have to be travelling around 300 fps (204 mph) in order to only penetrate the flesh of JFK's back a mere inch.

While this might be feasible if the rifle muzzle was a few inches from JFK's back, a whole new set of problems arises when we try to get the bullet from the 6th floor to JFK's back as he is behind the Stemmons sign.

1. Bullet drop. If the rifle is sighted in to hit a target at 100 yards (or whatever range you choose) firing bullets with a muzzle velocity of 2200 fps, the shooter will have no idea he has chambered a "bad round" and will aim as if he is shooting a normal cartridge. At such a reduced velocity, the bullet will not have enough energy to reach its target or, for that matter, anywhere close to it. In fact, at such a low velocity, the bullet will have dropped so much, it is more likely to hit the back end of the limo than anything else.

2. Bullet stability. The spiral riflings inside a rifle barrel impart a high speed spin to a bullet that gyroscopically stabilizes the bullet in flight. Without this spin, the bullet will tumble in flight, end over end. Not only will this prevent the bullet from making a neat entrance wound as seen on JFK's back, the tumbling bullet presents an un-aerodynamic surface that will quickly rob the bullet of velocity; making it go even slower and causing it to impact even further back from the limo.

3. Barrel blockage. Will a bullet travelling this slow have enough energy to even make it out of the barrel?

In summation, I believe the "shallow" back wound caused by a "bad round" to be a fabrication, and further evidence of a well contrived conspiracy that involved the autopsy doctors at Bethesda. Unfortunately, JFK researchers were taken in by this ruse, for the sole reason it served the purpose of discrediting the Single Bullet Theory. I believe there is ample evidence the bullet that entered JFK's back also entered the top of his right lung and disintegrated there.

I believe the reason for the fabrication of the shallow back wound story was the need to conceal the type of bullets that were fired at JFK that day. These were such exotic bullets that, if their existence became known, it would immediately disqualify LHO as the shooter, unless he had close ties to the CIA or other agencies with the technical know how to make these bullets.

a whole new set of problems arises when we try to get the bullet from the 6th floor to JFK's back as he is behind the Stemmons sign. When did it get established that the shot was fired from the 6th floor?

Excuse me, princess. It should read ".......from the 6th floor, or wherever the h*ll the shot came from, although I'm pretty sure it was from behind the limo, and as no one is visible with a rifle directly behind the limo in the Zapruder film, we can likely assume the rifle was at least 50 yards away or more."

Better?

Dr. Finck told the HSCA that he tried to use a metal probe to determine the bullet path, but was unsuccessful.

So then he had the X-rays made when, according to the X-Ray techs, the lungs and internal organs had already been removed.

Hmmmmm. So what were they EXPECTING to find, if the internal cavity was already empty?

My OPINION is that they were simply taking the x-rays to be able to say...they took x-rays but didn't find a bullet.

Sounds like a basic CYA move, when the autopsy report and the x-rays were meant to never be disclosed.

this deserves emphasis.

hmmm > "So then he had the X-rays made when, according to the X-Ray techs, the lungs and internal organs had already been removed."

new to me. is this at all verifiable? I've read the testimony of the organs being removed, and of Finck partially probing the wound; if the time of these events are documented, that's quite a hard thing to defend, even though the WC can defend anything and get away with it, it's still some pretty good ammunition.

and this, too: just how established is it that the report and the x-rays were not meant to be published?

Not only did Jerrol Custer testify to the ARRB that the organs of the chest were removed prior to chest x-rays being taken, he also testified that the x-rays he took of JFK's neck showed many minute fragments in the vicinity of cervical vertebrae C3/C4.

Anyone notice several similarities in my last three posts?

The bullet that entered JFK's back disintegrated to powder in the top of JFK's right lung, inflicting a pneumothorax in that lung (this was observed by Dr. Marion Jenkins and was the reason a chest tube was placed in JFK's right lung).

This is the same metal powder that was observed as hundreds of dust like particles in the x-rays of JFK's skull. This metal dust was also observed on the inside of the Harper Fragment when it was examined at Methodist Hospital. The bullet(s) that entered JFK's skull were also frangible bullets, explaining their disintegration into dust like particles.

Bullets, even hollow points, do not disintegrate into dust. Lead is malleable, not brittle.

I imagine he did feel like a fool x-raying an empty chest cavity, as any evidence of a bullet would have been removed with the lung.

" I think the bottom line is that the back wound is something of a mystery, whatever the explanation may be, and that its only real value to researchers is its location and not how it got there or where the bullet went. Its location is evidence of conspiracy. "

I cannot state strongly enough the incorrectness of this thinking, and that this line of thought is precisely what those feeding us this disinformation wanted to produce in our minds.

Think of it for a second. JFK was shot in the back with a 162 grain full metal jacket bullet, travelling roughly 2000 fps (1363 mph) when it struck him. The only things that stood between this bullet and the space in front of JFK were two fragile ribs (assuming the bullet did not pass between ribs) and the top of a lung. With the weight of this bullet, and its velocity, it had enough energy to pass through Connally, as well, and still injure Kellerman.

This back wound is indeed a mystery, a bullet entering but not exiting. But, when one considers that the exact same bullet that entered JFK's right lung also caused the damage to JFK's head, the mystery begins to clear up a little.

Frangible bullets are made from powdered lead (or other metals) that is compressed or glued together into the shape of a bullet. They will disintegrate into dust if they come into contact with steel or concrete, but will easily penetrate brittle skull bone. If of the proper hollow point design, these bullets will disintegrate in a wound as they pass through soft, wet tissue, such as brain or lung. This disintegration into dust makes frangible bullets the most lethal bullets on the market today.

It was necessary to mask the nature of the back wound in order to maintain the myth that JFK was shot in the head with a FMJ bullet.

Geez, Robert. The bullet or fragment creating the back wound did not enter the body. This was not a story made up after the autopsy. This was confirmed by the FBI agents watching the autopsy, and by autopsy assistant James Curtis Jenkins, in numerous interviews. The doctors' failure to find an entrance into the body, moreover, was considered so problematic for the single-assassin conclusion that Arlen Specter chose to lie about it, and made up a story (that the bullet slid between some imaginary strap muscles on the back of the neck) that he told in the Warren Report and continued to tell until his death. So, yes, a story was created to hide what happened. But you're looking in the wrong direction.

You are lost, Pat, along with the majority of researchers who also have a complete lack of understanding of ballistics.

Ever since Tom Purvis fed you all that whopper about the "short shot", you've all gladly accepted the bullet that only penetrated an inch into JFK's back, only because it negated the Single Bullet Theory.

Do you have any concept at all how ridiculous that is?

P.S.

Confirmation by two FBI agents is hardly what one would call consultation with medical professionals.

Oswald's Russian made Cuera-2 camera.

I imagine he did feel like a fool x-raying an empty chest cavity, as any evidence of a bullet would have been removed with the lung.

" I think the bottom line is that the back wound is something of a mystery, whatever the explanation may be, and that its only real value to researchers is its location and not how it got there or where the bullet went. Its location is evidence of conspiracy. "

I cannot state strongly enough the incorrectness of this thinking, and that this line of thought is precisely what those feeding us this disinformation wanted to produce in our minds.

Think of it for a second. JFK was shot in the back with a 162 grain full metal jacket bullet, travelling roughly 2000 fps (1363 mph) when it struck him. The only things that stood between this bullet and the space in front of JFK were two fragile ribs (assuming the bullet did not pass between ribs) and the top of a lung. With the weight of this bullet, and its velocity, it had enough energy to pass through Connally, as well, and still injure Kellerman.

This back wound is indeed a mystery, a bullet entering but not exiting. But, when one considers that the exact same bullet that entered JFK's right lung also caused the damage to JFK's head, the mystery begins to clear up a little.

Frangible bullets are made from powdered lead (or other metals) that is compressed or glued together into the shape of a bullet. They will disintegrate into dust if they come into contact with steel or concrete, but will easily penetrate brittle skull bone. If of the proper hollow point design, these bullets will disintegrate in a wound as they pass through soft, wet tissue, such as brain or lung. This disintegration into dust makes frangible bullets the most lethal bullets on the market today.

It was necessary to mask the nature of the back wound in order to maintain the myth that JFK was shot in the head with a FMJ bullet.

I believe the reason for the fabrication of the shallow back wound story was the need to conceal the type of bullets that were fired at JFK that day. These were such exotic bullets that, if their existence became known, it would immediately disqualify LHO as the shooter, unless he had close ties to the CIA or other agencies with the technical know how to make these bullets.

If it was a fabrication, then Humes certainly fabricated early on, by probing the wound with his finger and claiming it didn't go anywhere. This would make Humes much more of a conspirator than he is generally given credit for, as he would have known virtually from the outset to conceal the use of exotic bullets.

I'm not saying that's not the case. I think the bottom line is that the back wound is something of a mystery, whatever the explanation may be, and that its only real value to researchers is its location and not how it got there or where the bullet went. Its location is evidence of conspiracy.

Two things to consider.

1. A 6.5mm bullet is just a shade over 1/4" in diameter. My baby finger is almost 3/4" wide at the first knuckle. Unless Humes had fingers like a four year old girl, did he really think he could probe a bullet wound with a finger? Skin has a little eleasticity, but not that much.

2. Jerrol Custer, the x-ray technician at the autopsy, testified to the ARRB that JFK's chest organs (lungs, heart) were removed prior to the taking of x-rays of JFK's chest.

Hi Ron

If a FMJ bullet travelling at 2000 fps (1367 mph) has the ability to pass right through a man's chest and out the other side, and still retain enough velocity to do some serious damage on the other side, what velocity would a so called "bad round" be travelling at to only penetrate the flesh of JFK's back a mere inch or so?

I have no idea.

Well, I can tell you, the bullet would be moving at little more than a crawl.

For comparison, the .38 Special "Colt Cobra" revolver that Jack Ruby used to shoot LHO had a muzzle velocity of between 800 and 900 fps, depending on the weight of the bullets. This bullet entered the left side of LHO's abdomen and almost managed to exit the right side before it came to a halt, passing through several organs and blood vessels on the way through. With this in mind, we know 800 fps would not be the velocity of the bullet that struck JFK's back, as this bullet would likely have been found in the forward part of JFK's chest cavity.

Realistically, I believe a bullet would have to be travelling around 300 fps (204 mph) in order to only penetrate the flesh of JFK's back a mere inch.

While this might be feasible if the rifle muzzle was a few inches from JFK's back, a whole new set of problems arises when we try to get the bullet from the 6th floor to JFK's back as he is behind the Stemmons sign.

1. Bullet drop. If the rifle is sighted in to hit a target at 100 yards (or whatever range you choose) firing bullets with a muzzle velocity of 2200 fps, the shooter will have no idea he has chambered a "bad round" and will aim as if he is shooting a normal cartridge. At such a reduced velocity, the bullet will not have enough energy to reach its target or, for that matter, anywhere close to it. In fact, at such a low velocity, the bullet will have dropped so much, it is more likely to hit the back end of the limo than anything else.

2. Bullet stability. The spiral riflings inside a rifle barrel impart a high speed spin to a bullet that gyroscopically stabilizes the bullet in flight. Without this spin, the bullet will tumble in flight, end over end. Not only will this prevent the bullet from making a neat entrance wound as seen on JFK's back, the tumbling bullet presents an un-aerodynamic surface that will quickly rob the bullet of velocity; making it go even slower and causing it to impact even further back from the limo.

3. Barrel blockage. Will a bullet travelling this slow have enough energy to even make it out of the barrel?

In summation, I believe the "shallow" back wound caused by a "bad round" to be a fabrication, and further evidence of a well contrived conspiracy that involved the autopsy doctors at Bethesda. Unfortunately, JFK researchers were taken in by this ruse, for the sole reason it served the purpose of discrediting the Single Bullet Theory. I believe there is ample evidence the bullet that entered JFK's back also entered the top of his right lung and disintegrated there.

I believe the reason for the fabrication of the shallow back wound story was the need to conceal the type of bullets that were fired at JFK that day. These were such exotic bullets that, if their existence became known, it would immediately disqualify LHO as the shooter, unless he had close ties to the CIA or other agencies with the technical know how to make these bullets.

Hi Ron

If a FMJ bullet travelling at 2000 fps (1367 mph) has the ability to pass right through a man's chest and out the other side, and still retain enough velocity to do some serious damage on the other side, what velocity would a so called "bad round" be travelling at to only penetrate the flesh of JFK's back a mere inch or so?

Robert, I've bounced all over the place on what - if anything he is holding. I have always had some doubt he ever owned the IR. Camera doesn't have to be an IR - if it is a camera at all.

Agreed, Greg. Nowhere has it been shown that Oswald possessed an Imperial reflex.

For somebody like Oswald, allegedly interested in photography, he wouldn't have chosen such a cheap camera, anyway.

Agreed, Ray. One has only to look at one of the other cameras he owned, or at least were found in his possessions at the Paine residence, to grasp the full meaning of your statement.

Pictured above is a Stereo Realist camera, manufactured by the David White Company from 1947 to 1971.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereo_Realist

This camera exposed two images on 35 mm film, from slightly different angles, and allowed a person to view his photos in three dimensions through a stereoscopic viewer. Wouldn't Oswald have much preferred to view himself in the BYP's in 3D?

Of course, then there is the expensive Minolta "spy" camera found at the Paine's by the DPD, with the serial number that made it only available in Europe at the time of the assassination. It magically morphed into a Minolta light meter when it got into the hands of the FBI.

Dumb question but, why would someone with a cheap Imperial Reflex camera be in need of a Minolta light meter?

Colonel Prouty sent me this photograph of the flechette dart. It is placed next to a dime for size comparison purposes.

I wonder how long it took the blood of the victim to dissolve this dart. As I recall, it was a pretty quick ride from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Memorial Hospital.