Sandy Larsen Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 I don't understand why the nick has to be in the location Ashton put it. The pattern repeats, so that portion of the tie could be moved either direction and it would still fit. Though if moving it covers up the nick, then that wouldn't be right... that part of the tie had to be exposed in order to get nicked. There are 6 columns of patterns, which match every other column, allowing 3 possible 'rotations' of the cloth that match. Per the FBI memo that I posted earlier, the location of the "nick" is on the anatomical left side of the tie. Sorry... I missed that post somehow. When you say the location of the "nick" is on the anatomical left side of the tie, do you mean when it is completely untied and laying flat, with the wide end down, as it would normally hang? Or do you mean the left side of the knot? If the latter, is it on the side of the knot, or the left half of the front of the knot? Harold Weisberg states that he requested photos be taken of the tie that would reveal the location of the nick when the tie was worn. He states that per his discussions with Nara personnel it was obvious that the tie had been untied and re-tied so as to move the nick toward the front center. In my opinion the nick, as shown in the photo above, is lower than the holes in the shirt. I agree. Tom, after Ashton showed that the nick almost exactly matches the holes in the shirt, I decided to do an even more accurate measurement. I did so carefully and was surprised not only to find Ashton was right, but that the the nick matches the holes dead on. Either I made a mistake (I don't believe I did), or there is an optical illusion. Sandy, In your comments regarding the vertical slit, you mention that due to the 'weave', the shirt will tear along a vertical line. Isn't it equally likely to tear along a horizontal line if the force was applied in that direction? Yes, you're right. I believe that a sharp object cutting fabric will tend to straighten up if it is close enough to the vertical or horizontal running threads. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Opinions please as to the location of the "nick" as determined using this photo alone: TIA for any comments... Tom All I can say is, if that is a knot, somebody needs to be given a tie-knot tying lesson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Opinions please as to the location of the "nick" as determined using this photo alone: TIA for any comments... Tom Well, if it is not a hole completely through the tie, the nicked area had to be on the side of the knot. I just wonder why Aston's photo shows the tie knot displaced so far to the anatomical right. Is there historical evidence showing JFK's tie knot off to his right? Not only is the knot displace to the anatomical left, so is the collar. Maybe that happens when you turn your head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Is this a close up view of JFK wearing this shirt and tie? If it is, there is something I would like to point out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) "When you say the location of the "nick" is on the anatomical left side of the tie, do you mean when it is completely untied and laying flat, with the wide end down, as it would normally hang? Or do you mean the left side of the knot? If the latter, is it on the side of the knot, or the left half of the front of the knot?" I meant the left side of the knot, Sandy. I think it would have to be on the extreme side of the knot, or there would be a hole completely through the tie. Edited January 29, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Opinions please as to the location of the "nick" as determined using this photo alone: TIA for any comments... Tom Well, if it is not a hole completely through the tie, the nicked area had to be on the side of the knot. I just wonder why Aston's photo shows the tie knot displaced so far to the anatomical right. Is there historical evidence showing JFK's tie knot off to his right? Not only is the knot displace to the anatomical left, so is the collar. Maybe that happens when you turn your head? I don't think so. Try placing your fingers on your throat about where the tie knot goes and turn your head. Not only would the tie knot not turn, your trachea (windpipe) remains in place as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 Is this a close up view of JFK wearing this shirt and tie? If it is, there is something I would like to point out. Yes, it is. It's right here: Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 I think it would have to be on the extreme side of the knot, or there would be a hole completely through the tie. Not if someone accidentally nicked it with a sharp instrument that then punctured the shirt and throat beneath the tie knot, in which case the nick would be pretty much exactly where it appears. Of course the hole in the throat conveniently was in the most likely place for a tracheotomy, therefore the hole in the throat was sliced through in mere minutes after arrival, compromising effective forensic analysis. Darn shame, that. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Neal Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Bob, The scissors you described used by EMTs for rapid clothing removal - have you ever removed a necktie with them? The cut in JFK's tie appears too ragged to have been cut by scissors, and also appears it took a minimum of two strokes to cut through it. Any thoughts? Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Is this a close up view of JFK wearing this shirt and tie? If it is, there is something I would like to point out. Yes, it is. It's right here: Ashton He's got his head turned and body tilted somewhat. Maybe that explains the tilted collar. The tie is tilted even more. Of course that can happen to anybody wearing a tie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) "When you say the location of the "nick" is on the anatomical left side of the tie, do you mean when it is completely untied and laying flat, with the wide end down, as it would normally hang? Or do you mean the left side of the knot? If the latter, is it on the side of the knot, or the left half of the front of the knot?" I meant the left side of the knot, Sandy. I think it would have to be on the extreme side of the knot, or there would be a hole completely through the tie. We know the nick wasn't on the side because the tie's (repetitive) pattern doesn't allow moving the nick just a little bit. If a back-to-front projectile stopped before penetrating the tie backing, that could explain a nick on the back side of the tie. The nick being where it is now favors Ashton's theory. I wonder if it would be exposed on the back side of the knot if it were moved left or right, which would have to be done to match the pattern of course. If not, the nick must have been where Ashton has it. Edited January 29, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Gray Posted January 29, 2016 Author Share Posted January 29, 2016 If a back-to-front projectile stopped before penetrating the tie backing, that could explain a nick on the back side of the tie. ... I wonder if it would be exposed on the back side of the knot if it were moved left or right, which would have to be done to match the pattern of course. If not, the nick must have been where Ashton has it. I recommend that you tie a four-in-hand knot, then slip it off without untying it and look at the back of it. The nick being where it is now favors Ashton's theory. (Sigh). There is no "Ashton's theory." I answered a question about what possibly could have caused such a wound as was observed in JFK's throat by several medical personnel. What I have stated unequivocally is that no bullet fired from the front made the hole in JFK's throat, and I stand by it. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 My response in green. If a back-to-front projectile stopped before penetrating the tie backing, that could explain a nick on the back side of the tie. ... I wonder if it would be exposed on the back side of the knot if it were moved left or right, which would have to be done to match the pattern of course. If not, the nick must have been where Ashton has it. I recommend that you tie a four-in-hand knot, then slip it off without untying it and look at the back of it. I did as you suggested and found it was easier to determine the answer than I had anticipated. Assuming JFK tied his knots the way I do -- and judging by the tilt of his knot's front fabric, he did -- then moving the nick to the anatopical right would place the nick on the back, exposed, and a bit lower than where it is in the front. About an 1/8th inch lower. Maybe a bit less, like 0.1 inch. The nick being where it is now favors Ashton's theory. (Sigh). There is no "Ashton's theory." I answered a question about what possibly could have caused such a wound as was observed in JFK's throat by several medical personnel. I was referring to your idea that a Parkland doctor could have injected poison. As you said, the nick in the front could have been caused by accidentally touching it with something sharp, by which I thought you meant that needle, or whatever it is called. (I think it is fair to call that your theory.) What I have stated unequivocally is that no bullet fired from the front made the hole in JFK's throat, and I stand by it. Ashton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) I'm not sure if this is what is being pointed out but, when we look at the front of the tie knot, we are looking at the length of the tie on its side. Although it appears we can only see 5 of the 6 pattern emblems on the knot, this is not actually the case. Look closely, and you will see the knot extends above the border of the super imposed knot face. Simply adjusting the slack in the knot will place the nick on the left side of the knot (or on the right side or middle, if you so desire). In other words, there is absolutely nothing to prove the nick in the tie was away from the left side, and near the middle of the tie. This, of course, still leaves open the possibly this nick was made by an exiting bullet, bullet fragment, bone fragment or 1/4" x 10" drill bit inserted through the rear of the skull. I asked before if the above photo was of JFK, and I found out it is. Here is the problem. If I am correct, and the nick was on the anatomical left side of the tie, the SBT is completely sunk. Look again at this gif: On the button hole side of the collar, note the horizontally striped pattern of the material the button hole passes through. Note also that, when the shirt collar is done up, the point where vertical stripes meets horizontal stripes, on the buttonhole side, is about halfway down the right collar tab, and the horizontal stripes, on the buttonhole side, actually run down on an angle to JFK's right side. Now, look at the close up of the shirt and tie on JFK above, and you can see that, once the shirt and tie is actually on JFK, the boundary made by the horizontal stripes on the button hole side of the collar and the vertically striped material of the shirt is much higher in relationship to the right collar tab. What is happening is that, once the shirt and collar is actually on JFK, he fills out the collar and shirt and straightens the collar band out; making the collar band stripes truly horizontal again. Now, think about what this does to the hole seen in the button hole side of the shirt. By raising the collar band, out past the button hole, and pivoting on the button hole as you do so, you are moving the hole on the button hole side to JFK's anatomical right.While it appears the projectile hole would be lined up with the nick in the tie, it would actually be to JFK's right of the nick in the tie. If the hole is moved to JFK's anatomical right, and if the nick was on the anatomical left of JFK's tie, the projectile was definitely travelling a right to left path through JFK's neck, and could NOT have been on its way to Connally's right armpit, unless he was sitting in Nellie's lap. Edited January 29, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 30, 2016 Share Posted January 30, 2016 (edited) My response in green. If a back-to-front projectile stopped before penetrating the tie backing, that could explain a nick on the back side of the tie. ... I wonder if it would be exposed on the back side of the knot if it were moved left or right, which would have to be done to match the pattern of course. If not, the nick must have been where Ashton has it. I recommend that you tie a four-in-hand knot, then slip it off without untying it and look at the back of it. I did as you suggested and found it was easier to determine the answer than I had anticipated. Assuming JFK tied his knots the way I do -- and judging by the tilt of his knot's front fabric, he did -- then moving the nick to the anatopical right would place the nick on the back, exposed, and a bit lower than where it is in the front. About an 1/8th inch lower. Maybe a bit less, like 0.1 inch. I need to revise this a little. First, I took a closer look and realize that I was influence by Ashton's photoshopped addition of the nicked area over the knot. Without that, it is difficult for me to determine the direction in which JFK tied his knots. If he did it the same way I do, then what I said holds. If he did it reversed, then what I said doesn't hold because the nick is too high (~ 3/8"). Second, I changed my tie to make it tighter, afterwhich it looked more like JFK's. Upon doing so, I found that the nick doesn't drop by much at all when moving it to the back. Maybe by 1/16 inch. I'm right handed. Was JFK right-handed, and do most right-hander's tie their ties the same direction (as I do)? Those are pertinent questions. The way I do it is as follows: I place the tie over my neck so the wide end is on my right side, and the narrow end of my left. Then I cross the wide end over the top of the other end. Then I finish up. (I assume there is only one way to make a knot that looks like JFK's and mine.) I tried doing it the opposite way and found it to be a little awkward, but certainly doable and not difficult. HOWEVER, once finish I had a hard time adjusting it. Very hard. For some reason it would bind up when I tried loosening it. I started over and the same happened again. Apparently the fine motor skills are important. EDIT: Oops. I need to check and see how Ashton "tied" the knot with Photoshop. Since that affects the vertical location of the nick.. Edited January 30, 2016 by Sandy Larsen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now