Jump to content
The Education Forum

NAA and Acoustic Evidence


Tim Gratz
 Share

Recommended Posts

As we all know, there is a debate raging (well, that may be overstating it) about the validity of two tests performed on behalf of the HSCA and accepted by it, to-wit:

(1) The Neutron Activation Analysis; and

(2) The acoustic evidence.

I would appreciate comments on the effect of the conspiracy case if either the NAA or the acoustic evidence is proven or discredited.

Also, does the validity of either test exclude the other?

For instance, if the acoustic evidence is correct and there was indeed a shot from the grassy knoll, the NAA could be correct in its implication that only two bullets hit JFK and JC both fired from the Manlicher-Carcano. One can simply adopt the HSCA finding that the shot from the grassy knoll "missed" (a proposition somewhat hard to accept).

Next question: is it possible to select an expert or experts re both issues, whose findings would likely be accepted by both sides of the conspiracy debate? For example, would a Lone Nutter ever accept anyone's determination that the acoustic evidence is solid and ergo there was a conspiracy?

I think any new investigation ought to try to resolve these issues once and for all, if that is possible.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

u]1. NAA[/u]

Unlike fingerprint identification which must (according to variable state law) have a given number of "exact" matches, and unlike DNA which is of course an exact match to an infinitesmal probability, NAA must rely upon empirical studies of comparative data.

Therefore, the NAA will always be open to criticism, as even within a given single bullet, the homogeneous

and "exact" distribution of multiple elements throughout all aspects of the single lead core is impossible to achieve.

This happens to be true of all melted/smelted products, to include steel; gold; silver; platinum; or whatever.

In order to fully grasp these problems, one must fully understand the initial refining process and/or source of the metal, and then take into consideration the smelting process by which the lead/metal is produced.

And, with ALL such operations, there is a "leeway" (+/or -) tolerance which is allowed in all such refining and subsequent smeltering processes.

This tolerance will apply to a wide variety of other non-base (lead) metals, etc; which may be allowed to be included within the acceptable limits of the production criteria.

Thereafter, the actual, what we refer to as "pure" lead, is then mixed through additional smeltering/refining to include a given amount (again, +/or -) of additional metals and/or substances, which are designed to impart some particular physical characteristic to the base metal.

And, in so doing, the addition of these additional substances, absolutely can not be homogeneously distributed throughout the base metal during the final smeltering and refining process.

This is primarily why we assign "Lot#'s" to items such as production of the actual bullet, the powder, and frequently, even the primer cap in the base of the cartridge.

In this manner, all bullets, such as those produced in Lot#6003,

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wound3.txt

I was finally able to

procure samples from lots 6000, 6001, 6002, and 6003, and

the FBI obtained samples from lots 6000 and 6003, all of

----------------------------------------------------------------

were constructed from the exact same smelt/pouring of lead for the bullet core, as well as the exact same production of powder.

If one assumes that the reported production number of rounds produced per "Lot#" is correct, then, there were some One Million bullets produced from each lot#/smelt of lead.

Thus, some approximately 1-million bullet lead cores were produced from a single and final refinement of lead, which by all known laws of metalurgy, can not be produced with an absolute homogeneous distribution of other elements (other than lead).

Thusly, even were I to take a single bullet and take three random samples of it's lead core; (#1 from the base of the bullet (which must exclude that area subjected to the burning gas of the propellant which in fact alters the metalurgy) )(#2 from the center of the lead core) & (#3 from the nose of the lead core ), with a full undersTanding of the metalurgical process, I would expect different NAA results from the DESTRUCTIVE TESTING of these samples.

All that NAA can do is provide empirical data, which must be fully correlated with other empirical data, in order to derive a "best hypothesis".

It can not stand as absollute fact, as there are far too many variables involved.

Thus, all that the NAA demonstrated was, that based upon the testing conducted, the lead fragments demonstrated ONLY two separate shots/bullets were involved in the actual testing.

Big Deal!----Since that is all that was ever turned over to the FBI, exactly who would expect anything other than this???

The NAA further demonstrated that to a relatively high degree of probability (to whatever degree one believes or disbelieves), that/those lead fragments reportedly tested as being the lead removed from the wrist of JBC, statistically matched CE399, moreso than they did the other lead fragments recovered from within the Presidential Limo and from the brain of JFK.

Now! I might add, that the NAA did not, and can not prove that those fragments of lead which were tested, and which purportedly was the lead fragments removed from the wrist of JFK, are in fact the same lead fragments.

And in that regards, I would remind all of the 0.9 grain weight, flat-based, cone-shaped lead core fragment which was found in the right rear floorboard of the Presidential Limo, and which FBI Agent Robert Frazier initially identified as ("Poss Q1) aka Possibly from CE399, and which subsequently was removed from the FBI Ballistics laboratory by none other than William Sullivan, has never been accounted for since it's disappearance from the FBI Ballistics Lab.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/index2.html

CE840

photo of 2 fragments found from underneath the left jump seat. Note: The FBI originally recovered three particles. In 1970, an independent researcher brought to the attention of the National Archives that one of the three fragments was missing.

The Archives has been unable to locate it.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/index.html

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/ce840.jpg

3. CE 840 (3 fragments found from underneath the left jump seat. \ One is now missing from NARA.)

Note: The Missing 0.9 grain fragment never made it to NARA!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Conclusion (finally):

One can contest the NAA data from now untill hell freezes over, and, among scientist who deal ONLY with empirical data, the NAA will hold as the factual evaluation of two separate bullets.

And, most will, in all probability, even agree that even this data does not provide an "absolute", provided of course that they understand the smelting/refining process in which absolutes can not be achieved.

So, by all means, lets get another investigation going, and without even confirming exactly how many shots struck JFK, and from what directions these shots were fired, lets waste at least 49% of the allocated funds chasing something which the results of will only continue to be debated for the next 40+ years.

Or, might I merely recommend that the next investigation actually follow through on the 0.9 grain lead core fragment which was once a part of CE840, how it disappeared from the FBI Laboratory (at last accounting, FBI Robert Frazier was still living and can most probably still recall that William Sullivan removed this lead fragment from the FBI Ballistics lab), and then follow through on exactly how this missing lead fragment turned up in the hands of Dr. Guinn as reportedly being that lead which was removed from the wrist of JBC.

So, rest assured that what Dr. Guinn actually tested, actually came from the base of CE399.

But, it most certainly did not come from the wrist of JBC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

u]1. NAA[/u]

Unlike fingerprint identification which must (according to variable state law) have a given number of "exact" matches, and unlike DNA which is of course an exact match to an infinitesmal probability, NAA must rely upon empirical studies of comparative data.

Therefore, the NAA will always be open to criticism, as even within a given single bullet, the homogeneous

and "exact" distribution of multiple elements throughout all aspects of the single lead core is impossible to achieve.

This happens to be true of all melted/smelted products, to include steel; gold; silver; platinum; or whatever.

In order to fully grasp these problems, one must fully understand the initial refining process and/or source of the metal, and then take into consideration the smelting process by which the lead/metal is produced.

And, with ALL such operations, there is a "leeway" (+/or -) tolerance which is allowed in all such refining and subsequent smeltering processes.

This tolerance will apply to a wide variety of other non-base (lead) metals, etc; which may be allowed to be included within the acceptable limits of the production criteria.

Thereafter, the actual, what we refer to as "pure" lead, is then mixed through additional smeltering/refining to include a given amount (again, +/or -) of additional metals and/or substances, which are designed to impart some particular physical characteristic to the base metal.

And, in so doing, the addition of these additional substances, absolutely can not be homogeneously distributed throughout the base metal during the final smeltering and refining process.

This is primarily why we assign "Lot#'s" to items such as production of the actual bullet, the powder, and frequently, even the primer cap in the base of the cartridge.

In this manner, all bullets, such as those produced in Lot#6003,

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wound3.txt

I was finally able to

procure samples from lots 6000, 6001, 6002, and 6003, and

the FBI obtained samples from lots 6000 and 6003, all of

----------------------------------------------------------------

were constructed from the exact same smelt/pouring of lead for the bullet core, as well as the exact same production of powder.

If one assumes that the reported production number of rounds produced per "Lot#" is correct, then, there were some One Million bullets produced from each lot#/smelt of lead.

Thus, some approximately 1-million bullet lead cores were produced from a single and final refinement of lead, which by all known laws of metalurgy, can not be produced with an absolute homogeneous distribution of other elements (other than lead).

Thusly, even were I to take a single bullet and take three random samples of it's lead core; (#1 from the base of the bullet (which must exclude that area subjected to the burning gas of the propellant which in fact alters the metalurgy) )(#2 from the center of the lead core) & (#3 from the nose of the lead core ), with a full undersTanding of the metalurgical process, I would expect different NAA results from the DESTRUCTIVE TESTING of these samples.

All that NAA can do is provide empirical data, which must be fully correlated with other empirical data, in order to derive a "best hypothesis".

It can not stand as absollute fact, as there are far too many variables involved.

Thus, all that the NAA demonstrated was, that based upon the testing conducted, the lead fragments demonstrated ONLY two separate shots/bullets were involved in the actual testing.

Big Deal!----Since that is all that was ever turned over to the FBI, exactly who would expect anything other than this???

The NAA further demonstrated that to a relatively high degree of probability (to whatever degree one believes or disbelieves), that/those lead fragments reportedly tested as being the lead removed from the wrist of JBC, statistically matched CE399, moreso than they did the other lead fragments recovered from within the Presidential Limo and from the brain of JFK.

Now! I might add, that the NAA did not, and can not prove that those fragments of lead which were tested, and which purportedly was the lead fragments removed from the wrist of JFK, are in fact the same lead fragments.

And in that regards, I would remind all of the 0.9 grain weight, flat-based, cone-shaped lead core fragment which was found in the right rear floorboard of the Presidential Limo, and which FBI Agent Robert Frazier initially identified as ("Poss Q1) aka Possibly from CE399, and which subsequently was removed from the FBI Ballistics laboratory by none other than William Sullivan, has never been accounted for since it's disappearance from the FBI Ballistics Lab.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/index2.html

CE840

photo of 2 fragments found from underneath the left jump seat. Note: The FBI originally recovered three particles. In 1970, an independent researcher brought to the attention of the National Archives that one of the three fragments was missing.

The Archives has been unable to locate it.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/index.html

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/ce840.jpg

3. CE 840 (3 fragments found from underneath the left jump seat. \ One is now missing from NARA.)

Note: The Missing 0.9 grain fragment never made it to NARA!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Conclusion (finally):

One can contest the NAA data from now untill hell freezes over, and, among scientist who deal ONLY with empirical data, the NAA will hold as the factual evaluation of two separate bullets.

And, most will, in all probability, even agree that even this data does not provide an "absolute", provided of course that they understand the smelting/refining process in which absolutes can not be achieved.

So, by all means, lets get another investigation going, and without even confirming exactly how many shots struck JFK, and from what directions these shots were fired, lets waste at least 49% of the allocated funds chasing something which the results of will only continue to be debated for the next 40+ years.

Or, might I merely recommend that the next investigation actually follow through on the 0.9 grain lead core fragment which was once a part of CE840, how it disappeared from the FBI Laboratory (at last accounting, FBI Robert Frazier was still living and can most probably still recall that William Sullivan removed this lead fragment from the FBI Ballistics lab), and then follow through on exactly how this missing lead fragment turned up in the hands of Dr. Guinn as reportedly being that lead which was removed from the wrist of JBC.

So, rest assured that what Dr. Guinn actually tested, actually came from the base of CE399.

But, it most certainly did not come from the wrist of JBC!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

u]1. NAA[/u]

Unlike fingerprint identification which must (according to variable state law) have a given number of "exact" matches, and unlike DNA which is of course an exact match to an infinitesmal probability, NAA must rely upon empirical studies of comparative data.

Therefore, the NAA will always be open to criticism, as even within a given single bullet, the homogeneous

and "exact" distribution of multiple elements throughout all aspects of the single lead core is impossible to achieve.

This happens to be true of all melted/smelted products, to include steel; gold; silver; platinum; or whatever.

In order to fully grasp these problems, one must fully understand the initial refining process and/or source of the metal, and then take into consideration the smelting process by which the lead/metal is produced.

And, with ALL such operations, there is a "leeway" (+/or -) tolerance which is allowed in all such refining and subsequent smeltering processes.

This tolerance will apply to a wide variety of other non-base (lead) metals, etc; which may be allowed to be included within the acceptable limits of the production criteria.

Thereafter, the actual, what we refer to as "pure" lead, is then mixed through additional smeltering/refining to include a given amount (again, +/or -) of additional metals and/or substances, which are designed to impart some particular physical characteristic to the base metal.

And, in so doing, the addition of these additional substances, absolutely can not be homogeneously distributed throughout the base metal during the final smeltering and refining process.

This is primarily why we assign "Lot#'s" to items such as production of the actual bullet, the powder, and frequently, even the primer cap in the base of the cartridge.

In this manner, all bullets, such as those produced in Lot#6003,

-------------------------------------------------------------

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wound3.txt

I was finally able to

procure samples from lots 6000, 6001, 6002, and 6003, and

the FBI obtained samples from lots 6000 and 6003, all of

----------------------------------------------------------------

were constructed from the exact same smelt/pouring of lead for the bullet core, as well as the exact same production of powder.

If one assumes that the reported production number of rounds produced per "Lot#" is correct, then, there were some One Million bullets produced from each lot#/smelt of lead.

Thus, some approximately 1-million bullet lead cores were produced from a single and final refinement of lead, which by all known laws of metalurgy, can not be produced with an absolute homogeneous distribution of other elements (other than lead).

Thusly, even were I to take a single bullet and take three random samples of it's lead core; (#1 from the base of the bullet (which must exclude that area subjected to the burning gas of the propellant which in fact alters the metalurgy) )(#2 from the center of the lead core) & (#3 from the nose of the lead core ), with a full undersTanding of the metalurgical process, I would expect different NAA results from the DESTRUCTIVE TESTING of these samples.

All that NAA can do is provide empirical data, which must be fully correlated with other empirical data, in order to derive a "best hypothesis".

It can not stand as absollute fact, as there are far too many variables involved.

Thus, all that the NAA demonstrated was, that based upon the testing conducted, the lead fragments demonstrated ONLY two separate shots/bullets were involved in the actual testing.

Big Deal!----Since that is all that was ever turned over to the FBI, exactly who would expect anything other than this???

The NAA further demonstrated that to a relatively high degree of probability (to whatever degree one believes or disbelieves), that/those lead fragments reportedly tested as being the lead removed from the wrist of JBC, statistically matched CE399, moreso than they did the other lead fragments recovered from within the Presidential Limo and from the brain of JFK.

Now! I might add, that the NAA did not, and can not prove that those fragments of lead which were tested, and which purportedly was the lead fragments removed from the wrist of JFK, are in fact the same lead fragments.

And in that regards, I would remind all of the 0.9 grain weight, flat-based, cone-shaped lead core fragment which was found in the right rear floorboard of the Presidential Limo, and which FBI Agent Robert Frazier initially identified as ("Poss Q1) aka Possibly from CE399, and which subsequently was removed from the FBI Ballistics laboratory by none other than William Sullivan, has never been accounted for since it's disappearance from the FBI Ballistics Lab.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/index2.html

CE840

photo of 2 fragments found from underneath the left jump seat. Note: The FBI originally recovered three particles. In 1970, an independent researcher brought to the attention of the National Archives that one of the three fragments was missing.

The Archives has been unable to locate it.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/index.html

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Rifle_Bullets/ce840.jpg

3. CE 840 (3 fragments found from underneath the left jump seat. \ One is now missing from NARA.)

Note: The Missing 0.9 grain fragment never made it to NARA!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In Conclusion (finally):

One can contest the NAA data from now untill hell freezes over, and, among scientist who deal ONLY with empirical data, the NAA will hold as the factual evaluation of two separate bullets.

And, most will, in all probability, even agree that even this data does not provide an "absolute", provided of course that they understand the smelting/refining process in which absolutes can not be achieved.

So, by all means, lets get another investigation going, and without even confirming exactly how many shots struck JFK, and from what directions these shots were fired, lets waste at least 49% of the allocated funds chasing something which the results of will only continue to be debated for the next 40+ years.

Or, might I merely recommend that the next investigation actually follow through on the 0.9 grain lead core fragment which was once a part of CE840, how it disappeared from the FBI Laboratory (at last accounting, FBI Robert Frazier was still living and can most probably still recall that William Sullivan removed this lead fragment from the FBI Ballistics lab), and then follow through on exactly how this missing lead fragment turned up in the hands of Dr. Guinn as reportedly being that lead which was removed from the wrist of JBC.

So, rest assured that what Dr. Guinn actually tested, actually came from the base of CE399.

But, it most certainly did not come from the wrist of JBC!

2. ACOUSTICS:

OK! So now, we have our investigative budget!

However, we also expended some 49% of that budget conducting NAA examination, which will still continue to demonstrate only two separate bullets, and of which results can not and will not prove anything.

In moving on, we will now do as did the HSCA.

And, for those who are not aware of it, a great deal of the HSCA budget was spent chasing the acoustics evidence, which is an even more speculative and worthless pursuit than is the NAA.

Basically, the acoustics study conducted by the HSCA was the item which ultimately bankrupted the available funds for examination/investigation.

And, the acoustics evidence happens to be an absolutely worthless pursuit of nothing!

So, by all means, lets get another investigation going, expend 49% of the funds on the NAA re-evaluation, and 49% of the funds on the worthless acoustics re-study, and that would leave about 2% of the remaining funds for administrative overhead expenses.

Then, we can all go home again and continue to argue the worth of the NAA and Acoustics "re-run" for the next 40 or so years, while no one knows absolutely exactly how JFK was actually assassinated.

There is absolutely only one single way to end all of this!

Exhumation of the remains of JFK and a re-study of the wounds to the skull as well as to the vertabrae bone of the neck.

One can argue NAA & acoustics all day long for the next 100 years and still have only bickering.

One can argue what, for all practical purposes is absolutely forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical evidence, all day long for the next 100 years also, but the pond is now so muddied that no one is likely to believe anything on the subject matter.

There is no answer other than exhumation, which will end the speculation as to the wounds incurred, and even this will not cease the speculations as regards multiple assassins.

And just in case no one was watching, for the most part, most americans could give a rats behind about the subject matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thomas wrote:

There is no answer other than exhumation, which will end the speculation as to the wounds incurred, and even this will not cease the speculations as regards multiple assassins.

I agree that exhumation might provide definitive answers.

As I understand, the FBI wanted to extract fragments from JC after he died but his family refused.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if I was in charge of an investigation I would create two panels, one for the NAA and one for the acoustic evidence, each panel to consist of three scientists with experience in the respective area, and instruct them to do what was necessary to resolve the conflicts. I'd try to find experts not previously involved in the case and, if possible, without a strong opinion on the conspiracy issue.

There ought to be a way for independent experts to resolve these two very important issues to the satisfaction of most people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thomas wrote:

There is no answer other than exhumation, which will end the speculation as to the wounds incurred, and even this will not cease the speculations as regards multiple assassins.

I agree that exhumation might provide definitive answers.

As I understand, the FBI wanted to extract fragments from JC after he died but his family refused.

I agree that exhumation might provide definitive answers.

Under the assumption that the body & bones have not deteriorated beyond the ability to examine them, exhumation WILL provide definitive answers.

1. Exactly which cervical bone of the spine was the right transverse process fractured and fragmented?

2. Were any of those opaque shadows of the neck X-ray of JFK created by metallic fragments/residue?

3. If "yes: to #2 above, was the metallic residue lead or copper?

4. Is there a bullet entrance into the rear of the skull of JFK which is located in the upper "cowlick" vicinity of the skull, and which entrance is clearly shown and defined in the anterior/posterior autopsy X-rays?

5. Is there a bullet entrance into the rear of the skull approximately 4-inches below the cowlick entry, as clearly defined and described by the autopsy surgeons, and as partially indicated in the lateral X-ray of the skull?

6. Is there a clearly defined bullet exit point through the frontal area of the skull which is indicative of a fully intact bullet having exited?

7. And lastly, under the assumption that the remaining portion of the brain of JFK was buried with the body, and this organ is still in a "fixed" and contained situation, can the clearly defined, single bullet pathway through the mid-brain, from the tip of the occipital lobe in the rear, to it's forward exit in the frontal lobe, be clearly separated from that damage to the uper lobe of the brain as created by the cowlick impact bullet.

None of which can or will rule out the possibility of "multiple assassins" shooting from the rear, but once we can eliminate all of those mythological creatures in the front of JFK, then perhaps one can narrow this down and only have to deal with only a limited number of such fantasyland entities located to the rear.

P.S. Personally, I would recommend a specific panel to investigate the WC and it's intentional obfuscation of the simple facts.

How JFK was assassinated/shot is actually quite simple.

How the WC has created a scenario which has lead many into "The Land of the Lost", is quite complex, as well as being a masterpiece of political deception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read other Forums, in particular alt.assassination.jfk (a McAdams forum) you will recognize the name David Von Pein. He is an intelligent, articulate and tireless proponent of the LDIA thesis.

In a post today he made this interesting admission:

The more-recent NAA tests suggest that Guinn's analysis might not be

as definitive or exacting as originally thought. I certainly cannot

deny that fact.

He also said:

But that's ALL that the newer NAA tests suggest. Those newer tests

certainly do not completely destroy the "Lone Assassin" scenario in

any way OTHER THAN TO AN UNKNOWN DEGREE OF PROBABILITY

WHEN IT COMES TO THE SPECIFICS OF THE NAA ANALYSIS.

However, the NAA was really the ONLY evidence to rebut Darrell Tomlinson's statement that he found CE399 on a stretcher not related to the assassination. If Tomlinson is right (and there is no reason to doubt him but for the NAA) the presumed "planting" of CE399 is rather strong evidence of a conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you read other Forums, in particular alt.assassination.jfk (a McAdams forum) you will recognize the name David Von Pein. He is an intelligent, articulate and tireless proponent of the LDIA thesis.

In a post today he made this interesting admission:

The more-recent NAA tests suggest that Guinn's analysis might not be

as definitive or exacting as originally thought. I certainly cannot

deny that fact.

He also said:

But that's ALL that the newer NAA tests suggest. Those newer tests

certainly do not completely destroy the "Lone Assassin" scenario in

any way OTHER THAN TO AN UNKNOWN DEGREE OF PROBABILITY

WHEN IT COMES TO THE SPECIFICS OF THE NAA ANALYSIS.

However, the NAA was really the ONLY evidence to rebut Darrell Tomlinson's statement that he found CE399 on a stretcher not related to the assassination. If Tomlinson is right (and there is no reason to doubt him but for the NAA) the presumed "planting" of CE399 is rather strong evidence of a conspiracy.

the presumed "planting" of CE399

Continues to remain an asinine theory!

In the event that you mistakenly take this as a granted fact, then why not climb out on that limb and send that asinine concept to a few public officials in hopes of securing a new investigation.

Better yet, why not openly attack VB's book which this highly stupid theory and see exactly how far along it gets one.

It certainly has not moved the investigation into any new domains since it first came out of the mouths of those who have never even taken the time to evaluate CE399 and of whom many still refer to it as being "pristine". Which by the way also demonstrates their lack of knowledge and research of the subject matter.

Lastly, based on the number of "rabbit holes" to which you have been pointing too lately, it would appear that you have some agenda to continue to "misdirect".

And, although there is little need here to continue to misdirect the completely lost, there are in fact a few who have come out of the forest and are now looking back to examine exactly how they got there in the first place, as well as exactly who it was that was responsible for having directed them into the woods to begin with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From an article by Lisa Pease re a 11-22-2005 assassination conference:

Blakey had originally used the Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA), a method for testing metal composition in bullets, as the basis for saying that - despite the acoustical evidence of conspiracy - Oswald had fired the fatal shots. Now, in light of the exposes about the inaccuracies of NAA, Blakey called that "junk science."

Interesting that Blakey was disenchanted with the NAA even before the Grant/Ranlich report came out in the summer of 2006. The article must be inartfully written, however, because although the NAA purported to identify the bullets and bullet fragments, there is no way the NAA could confirm that Oswald was the shooter.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

During the HSCA testimony of Dr Vincent Guinn, HSCA assistant counsel Jim Wolf remarked that Guinn's report was submitted to an independent consultant for review and evaluation and the consultant agreed with Dr. Guinn.

Anyone know the name of the independent expert?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...