For the "Cognitively Impaired"

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Failure to understand the evidence has no bearing on the validity of that evidence.

As a general rule, it merely means that one does not understand the evidence.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

According to the correlation of that data from the Time/Life survey, with the SS as well as the WC survey plats, the first shot was in the Z204/206 location.

This should come as no suprise considering:

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

April 22, 1964

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

FROM: Melvin A. Eisenberg

Subject: Conference of April 14, 1964, to determine which

frames in the Zapruder movies show the impact of

the first and second bullets

On April 14, 1964, a conference was held to determine which

frames in the Zapruder film portray the instants at which the first

and second bullets struck.

Present were: Commander James J. Humes, Director of

Laboratories of the Naval Medical School, Bethesda, Maryland;

Commander J. Thorton Boswell, Chief Pathologist, Naval Medical School,

Bethesda; Lt. Col. Pierre A. Finck, Chief of Wound Ballistics

Pathology Branch, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology; Dr. F.W. Light,

Jr. Deputy Chief of the Biophysics Division at Edgewood Arsenal,

Maryland, and Chief of the Wound Assessment Branch of the Biophysics

Division; Dr. Oliver, Chief of the Wound Ballistics Branch of the

Biophysics Division at Edgewood Arsenal; Messrs. Malley, Gauthier,

Shaneyfelt, and two other unidentified agents of the FBI; Messrs.

Kelley and Howlett of the Secret Service; and Messrs. Redlich, Specter

and Eisenberg of the Commission staff.

A screening was held of the Zapruder film and of slides

prepared by LIFE from the film. Each slide corresponded with a

separate frame of film, beginning with frame 171. The consensus of

the meeting was as follows:

(a) The President had been definitely hit by frames 224-225,

when he emerges from behind a sign with his hands clutching his

throat.

( The reaction shown in frames 224-225 may have started at

an earlier point - possibly as early as frame 199 (when there appears

to be some jerkiness in his movement) or, with a higher degree of

possibility, at frames 204-206 (where his right elbow appears to be

raised to an artificially high position).

© If the reaction did not begin at 199 or 204-206, it

probably began during the range of frames during which the President

is hidden from Zapruder's camera by a sign, namely, frames 215-24.

cc: Mr. Rankin Mr Belin

Mr. Willens Mr. Specter

Mr. Redlich Mr. Eisenberg

Mr. Ball

[Thomas H. Purvis]

One never knows exactly what may show up next!

Or for that matter, even if it will show up at all!

Perhaps the third time is actually the "charm"!

Edited February 28, 2008 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Are we having fun yet Ms. Beckett?

The attached is a portion of the FBI Survey Plat of 2/7/64 in which the FBI had Mr. West delete the Z313 impact and move it (shot#2) back up the street some 24.5 feet.

This is from a copy that Mr. West had in his office in which he also had marked the surveyed elevation of the concrete pedestal on which Zapruder stood, as well as the surveyed elevation for the impact point of shot#1 in Elm St. (the 423.7 elevation)

Items of note are:

1. One can see the "yellow curb" mark down at the bottom. This is that mark as seen in Z298 and definitively locates the positions of Mary Moorman and Jean Hill.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z298.jpg

2. Out in the center of Elm St., and slightly past the yellow curb mark, one will see and "X" which has nothing marked at it.

This is the marked position for the Z313 impact as determined by the US Secret Service during their 12/5/63 work.

3. One can see the "24.5" feet distance back up Elm St. which the FBI had Mr. West measure back to the now "relocated" second shot impact which the FBI was going to "sell" to us. Which in fact would place the second shot impact well prior to JFK having passed the position of Jean Hill/Mary Moorman.

4. The postition of Shot#1 has remained the same at the street elevation of 423.7.

5. I have taken the liberty of drawing in those lines which represent Z202 and the street elevation there.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z202.jpg

As well as Z225:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z225.jpg

Does it look as if I have "witheld' anything that you are aware of Ms. Beckett??????

[Thomas H. Purvis]

In struggling along to the end, one would be remiss if they did not bring up the subject of the "Abrasion Collar.

The attached photo is from NARA and is the HSCA JFK Exhibit F-24 which demonstrates how a bullet fired on a downward angle striking the skin, leaves an elongated VERTICALLY wound of entry.

In this type angle of penetration (downward angle of fire), the bullet leaves an area at the TOP of the wound of entry which demonstrates "abrasion" as the bulet rubs against the skin upon entry.

(Item "B" of the photo)

Two things about this forensic/ballistic/pathological fact are of note.

1. The wound of entry will have it's long axis VERTICAL.

(JFK's back entry wound has it's long axis horizontal)

2. The "Abrasion Collar" is located at the top of the entry wound.

Now, for those who are unaware, the HSCA Medical Panel determined that the wound of entry into the back of JFK had it's abrasion collar located at the BOTTOM EDGE of the entry point.

Completely opposite of what it should be!

This purported claim has merely continued to confuse and misdirect those who have failed to grasp exactly how a bullet fired on a downward angle could enter the back on an UPWARD ANGLE, which would be required to create a wound of entry with the abrasion collar located at the bottom of the entry wound.

For the benefit of those who may "reap rewards" from such information!

It was certainly nice of the HSCA to fully demonstrate how a bullet fired on a downward angle, striking the human skin/body, creates a wound of entry which is elongated VERTICALLY, due to the abrasion collar.

Now!

1. Too bad that someone did not take the time and effort to discuss with JBC's ER Doctors if there appeared to be any abrasion collar on the "elongated" wound of entry which they saw in his rear shoulder.

2. Yes, a "tumbling" bullet can create a wound that is somewhat "horizontal" in nature, however!

3. A "tumbling" bullet will also tear out considerable cloth from any clothing present and carry it down into the wound of entry.

4. Lastly, "Elongated Horizontally" is applicable ONLY if one is sitting erect. Otherwise, it could be the same as "Elongated Vertically"!

Hope that helps!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

92.77K of attachment space left!

May as well utilize it as well!

The SS (12/5/63) as well as the FBI (2/7/64) & (6/25/64) impact location for the first show fired.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Bottom Item: "Base of copper jacket missing"

Happens to be an item of critical importance as it demonstrates the continued attempt on the part of some persons to manipulate the evidence, even while this evidence is in possession of the National Archives.

New Orleans trial of Clay Shaw:

Mr. Oser: In Commission Exhibit 399, you found the copper jacketing intact, I believe you said?

Mr. Frazier: Yes.

In fact, the copper jacket was fully intact on the bullet when it was turned over to the National Archives, as those photographs which were released as a result of the JFK Records Act now clearly demonstrate.

However, when the HSCA panel went to get the bullet for examination, the copper jacket at the base of the bullet was no longer present on the bullet.

And, in addition to discussion of this subject with FBI Agent Frazier, it was also discussed with FBI Agent John Gallagher who took a small sample of lead from the center of the bullet in the lead core area, and he too claimed that there was no part of the copper jacket at the base of the bullet missing when he took the lead sample for the FBI NAA work.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

This should about wrap this up for the final time!