There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat

[Robert Prudhomme]

I've used FBI photo of JFK's post-assassination shirt, and have applied basic image enhancement to it to bring out details. In doing so, I've concluded to my satisfaction that the slits are almost exactly the same size and shape, contrary to other conclusions. Here is the enhanced image, enlarged and cropped:

A thread running upward from the hole on the anatomical left (image right) creates an illusion of a longer slit/hole, but it seems clear in the enhanced image that it is a thread, not a further slit.

In this animated gif below, I have done the best I can to move the two sides of the shirt together in an APPROXIMATION of the way the two sides would be placed when worn with a tie. It is utterly impossible to "mold" the rigid photo of the fabric the way it would have fallen or bunched with a man lying in a trauma room, and I make no apologies for not trying, but I have marked the location of the holes/slits in the shirt for these purposes:

I believe that even with the limitations of this photo, it proves beyond any reasonable doubt by any reasonably prudent person that some item made both holes in the shirt, and whatever that item was also made the hole in the throat. The location of the holes/slits in the shirt, and the hole in the throat, were directly behind the knot in the tie at the exact level where the nick in the tie is. Count the "stripes" on the shirt collar.

Ashton

Thanks for doing this, Ashton. A lot of us here do not possess anywhere near the necessary computer skills for this, and we always appreciate it when someone more talented is able to test out our ideas.

Now that you have highlighted the damage to the shirt, the holes are very obvious, and do not (at least to me) look anything like slits at all. In fact, they look so different now, I even went back and looked at the original photo, on the off chance you had Photoshopped it. (sorry about that, we're just not an overly trusting bunch here)

You certainly seem to have blown the lid off this subject, and provided us with enough proof to completely discard the scalpel-blade-through-the-shirt-collar theory. That leaves us with a projectile, as I believe, or a large bore needle, as you have proposed.

One thing I have observed, though. If it was a projectile, it seems that projectile was following a course that would have taken it far to the left of Connally's right armpit. A right to left course is suggested by the damage to the right side of JFK's trachea, the exit wound in the centre of the throat and the nick on the left side of the tie; unless the tie and collar were somehow skewed far to the left at the moment the projectile passed through.

P.S.

By "projectile" I am not necessarily limiting the candidates to a bullet or bullet fragment.

Edited January 28, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[Ashton Gray]

Photoshop for the wrap?

Yes. It has the tools, but it still was quite a challenge to get the pattern aligned. I did the best I could.

Could they possibly have made it more difficult to determine the location of the nick? Whether this is before it was unknotted and reknotted they don't say.

That's why I opted to use the flat tie and map it to the photo of his tie exactly as it was tied when he was wearing it.

Ashton

[Ashton Gray]

At last someone besides me sees this loose thread! As I posted earlier it may even be two threads on top of the collar flap...

Tom

I never disagreed with the "loose thread" observations, but the original photo had such poor exposure that it was difficult to tell with any clarity. That's why I set out to enhance it and see what it showed.

I agree that there is probably more than one actual strand from the woof and warp of the fabric involved. I was using "thread" in the broad sense of "twisted filaments or fibers of any kind."

Ashton

[Ashton Gray]

Thanks for doing this, Ashton. A lot of us here do not possess anywhere near the necessary computer skills for this, and we always appreciate it when someone more talented is able to test out our ideas.

You're welcome. I'm always happy to make any contribution I can to aid in impartial analysis.

Now that you have highlighted the damage to the shirt, the holes are very obvious, and do not (at least to me) look anything like slits at all. In fact, they look so different now, I even went back and looked at the original photo, on the off chance you had Photoshopped it. (sorry about that, we're just not an overly trusting bunch here)

I know. Don't blame you. And I did "Photoshop" the image, but only in the sense of using its enhancement tools—which are the best I know of available to the public. I emphatically did not "Photoshop" it in the sense of altering the fundamental information available in the image. I only attempted to bring out details that were lost in the muddy, low-contrast exposure of the original.

As for what caused any of it: I don't have a dawg in the fight. I have nothing whatsoever to benefit or lose from any responsible conclusion drawn from the evidence. It goes where it goes.

This has brought up one interesting point, though. Well, it's interesting to me, at least, so I'm going to mention it:

Of course we're all aware of the "lone nut" camp on the JFK assassination, but this is a controversial topic specifically because of all the evidence uncovered by many diligent and intelligent people pointing to a conspiracy to assassinate the President of the United States.

IF (I have to keep making my "ifs" bigger and more prominent because some people seem to overlook them) there were such a conspiracy, and IF it involved the Central Intelligence Agency, I find it curious that there seems to be such rigid resistance to the idea that any medical personnel possibly could have been involved.

At the time of the assassination, the CIA had been engaged for over a decade in some of the most heinous and repulsive human experiments in man's history, every bit of which had been masterminded and conducted by men with medical degrees, much of it in collusion with well known educational institutions, medical institutions, and medical organizations.

The CIA also had been engaged in concocting various methods of surreptitiously assassinating world leaders.

To me, the greatest surprise would be if it were proven that the CIA organized the assassination of JFK without some medical component in the planning, at least as insurance for a failure of the shooting.

Any such insurance would have had to be at Parkland Hospital.

With that, I'll try to answer any questions I can, but I'm afraid that I've contributed all I can to this topic, and other demands are dragging me away. I stand by my original premise: it is impossible that any bullet shot from the front penetrated the throat of John F. Kennedy.

Ashton

Edited January 29, 2016 by Ashton Gray

[Robert Prudhomme]

"To me, the greatest surprise would be if it were proven that the CIA organized the assassination of JFK without some medical component in the planning, at least as insurance for a failure of the shooting."

Interesting. I hadn't thought about the assassination quite from that perspective before.

[Sandy Larsen]

[now-irrelevant post deleted]

Edited January 29, 2016 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

I've used the FBI post-assassination photo of JFK's shirt, and have applied basic image enhancement to it to bring out details. In doing so, I've concluded to my satisfaction that the slits/holes in the shirt are almost exactly the same size and shape, contrary to other conclusions. Here is the enhanced image, enlarged and cropped:

A thread running upward from the hole on the anatomical left (image right) creates an illusion of a longer slit/hole, but it seems clear in the enhanced image that it is a thread, not a further slit.

In this animated gif below, I have done the best I can to move the two sides of the shirt together in an APPROXIMATION of the way the two sides would be placed when worn with a tie. It is utterly impossible to "mold" the rigid photo of the fabric the way it would have fallen or bunched with a man lying in a trauma room, and I make no apologies for not trying, but I have marked the location of the holes/slits in the shirt for these purposes:

I believe that even with the limitations of this photo, it proves beyond any reasonable doubt by any reasonably prudent person that some item made both holes in the shirt, and whatever that item was also made the hole in the throat. The location of the holes/slits in the shirt, and the hole in the throat, were directly behind the knot in the tie at the exact level where the nick in the tie is. Count the "stripes" on the shirt collar.

Ashton

Great job Ashton!

[Sandy Larsen]

FWIW, the nick is on the side of the necktie knot - not on the back. After it was untied and retied the nick has moved away from the side and toward the front of the knot.

I have used this image from the National Archives, which I have rotated 90 degrees clockwise:

I have done a painstaking job of "wrapping" it to the best of my ability on the knot of the tie in the large image taken on 22 November 1963 of JFK at Love Field in Dallas. Based on the pattern, I have wrapped it in the only available logical placement on the knot—unless the nick is around behind the visible knot on the anatomical left side (image's right side). I have made an animated gif of it so everyone can see how I aligned the pattern in my best good-faith attempt to show the location of the nick and the stain:

Personally, I consider it impossible for a projectile of any description to have made that nick, and then also to have made the slits in the shirt and the hole in the throat—all of which are directly behind the tie. (I hope I don't need to also say that I consider it impossible going the other way: throat hole—>shirt slits—>tie nick. But I just did anyway.)

I also consider it prima facie that the nick in the tie, and the slits in the shirt—another post to follow—were made by some item with sharp blade-like properties.

Let the nick-picking begin.

Ashton

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.

In my opinion the nick, as shown in the photo above, is lower than the holes in the shirt.

[Sandy Larsen]

Doesn't this alone prove that the SBT could not have happened? Not only because the bullet would have been on a right-to-left trajectory through JFK's body, as Robert points out, but also because there is no hole through the knot?

Or could a bullet have made it past the knot? Like if the knot happened to be off-center at the time.

[Ashton Gray]

I don't understand why the nick has to be in the location Ashton put it.

It doesn't have to be there. I already addressed that specifically in my post.

In my opinion the nick, as shown in the photo above, is lower than the holes in the shirt.

The pendulum swings...

Ashton

Edited January 29, 2016 by Ashton Gray

[Tom Neal]

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.

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.

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?

Tom

[Tom Neal]

Opinions please as to the location of the "nick" as determined using this photo alone:

TIA for any comments...

Tom

[Robert Prudhomme]

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?

[Tom Neal]

if it is not a hole completely through the tie, the nicked area had to be on the side of the knot.

The 'white' that you see through the hole in the outer fabric, is the white inner lining of the tie which was not damaged. Also, the testing of the tie was destructive so a "sample" of unknown size was removed from the 'nick'. Before or after the photos were taken? Who knows... IMO, due to their SOP we are probably looking at the post-removal of fabric condition of the tie. If so, we don't know the original size and shape of the nick...

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?

The photo of the tie he used for his animation is of JFK in Dallas or Ft. Worth on 11-22-1963.

When you say 'the knot is displaced so far to the right' I don't know what you mean. If you mean the lower half of the knot, looking at it after it was cut off the way the knot was tied has pointed the lower half of the knot toward his right.

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

[Sandy Larsen]

In my opinion the nick, as shown in the photo above, is lower than the holes in the shirt.

The pendulum swings...

Ashton

Yes you're right. Optical illusion fooled me..