Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'back wound'.
Just for drill I decided I'd map JFK's shirt onto the back of a model of a man in 3d. I think this is the best way to eliminate any arguments about bunched clothing and wound location. The reasons why are: By mapping the shirt onto his back I'm basically eliminating 90-95% of any errors introduced by adding additional models of a shirt and jacket. Under his jacket, his dress shirt would conform to his body very close to his skin and so by replacing the model's skin with the shirt the wound location should be within fractions of an inch of the actual location. The "control" portions of the shirt are the outer seams and base of the yoke and the collar (to a lesser degree). The yoke is the least distorted section of the image of the shirt I used. I don't think the collar is fully extended in the image so don't be deceived by that. I rendered 3 different images - placement 1 is what I think is the most accurate but I moved the shirt both up and down for 2 other placements. The numbers and the white and red areas are registration images used to align the original shirt. Let me know what you think - I'll probably mess around with it some more unless there's no interest in the effort haha.
I've seen a couple of estimates on what the speed of the bullet hitting Kennedy's back must have been to make such a shallow wound. Using those figures I calculated how far the bullet would have dropped had it been fired from the TSBD at such low speeds and was surprised at the result. The bullet would have dropped over 20 feet! In other words, a sniper would have had to aim 20 feet high in order to hit the president. Not believing that figure, I did the same calculation for a high-speed bullet, and found it would have dropped around 3 inches. Now that seemed reasonable, and it gave me confidence that my calculation for the low speed bullet was correct. (The reason for the huge difference between a high-speed and low-speed bullet is that the calculation has a square in it. So a bullet that is a that is, say, a fourth the speed will drop sixteen times as far.) Since then I've been trying to figure out how to explain the back wound. I can't. Are there any prevailing theories on how the back wound came to be? After having read several of the posts on this relevant thread: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=22173&hl=%20back%20%20wound&page=1 I'm left with the feeling there are no prevailing theories. Which is odd, if true, given that researchers have had fifty years to think about it.
I've seen a lot of sources quoting Custer's allegedly accurate accounts of the autopsy, but William Matson Law's In The Eye Of History, published in 2004, has a bit where Custer claims to have seen a whole bullet fall out of the back wound. This is the first time he ever made this claim, right? http://www.krusch.com/books/kennedy/In_The_Eye_Of_History.pdf On page 132 (156 of the pdf) Palamara: Were you aware of the allegations of—I don't know if it was Admiral or Captain David Osborne—about the bullet falling out of the body? During the autopsy? Did you see a whole bullet or a fragment fall out of President Kennedy? Custer: Well, I wouldn't call it a fragment, I'd say it was a pretty good sized bullet. Because it created such a fuss. They ran over with a set of forceps—and they grabbed it, picked it up and put it in a little basin of water. Law: Now is this the bullet—when you were doing the X-rays, and you had him on the table and moving him around, didn't you tell me at some point in an earlier conversation that a bullet fragment fell out of the president? Custer: This was the time that they found that. Law: Okay. And what happened? What was their demeanor? What happened when that bullet fragment fell out? Custer: I called one of the pathologists over and said, "Hey, we have a bullet here." Soon as they heard that, they came down off the raised platform and they ran over and they picked it up. Then Sibert and O'Neill also came over and said, "Well, we want that, that's—"" Palamara: Yes, they wrote out a receipt for a missile so people think it's seman- tics—was it a fragment? So you're saying it wasn't a whole bullet? It was a sizable fragment of a bullet? Custer: It was about—see, you're getting in semantics here about the size. It was distinguishable enough to know it was a bullet. It wasn't complete because there was some fragmentation. Some area of destruction on the bullet. Law: Just for clarification, what area of the body did it fall out of? Law: Just for clarification, what area of the body did it fall out of? Custer: That was the upper thorax. The upper back. Law: It literally fell out of the back wound. Custer: Right.