Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Single Bullet Theory Exonerates Oswald


Recommended Posts

In discussing the Single Bullet (SB), the discussion has centred mainly on the medical evidence. The geometrical evidence has largely been ignored. Artistic illustrations exist in abundance, but not scaled drawings*.

A full geometrical analysis would involve angles and distances. However, I have discovered that the Single Bullet theory (SBt) can easily be disproved geometrically simply by concentrating on the LONGITUDINAL component of each of the angles.

I can prove that, given the basic data of the SBt, the bullet must have come into the car from one of two buildings, the Dal-Tex or the Records.

My argument goes as follows:-

(1) The Zapruder film shows Kennedy passing out of view, seemingly unhurt, at Z205, and coming into view, wounded, at Z225. From this fact, on the official view, only one conclusion is possible: that the SB strike must have been in this Zapruder range.

(2) Leading defenders of the SBt (Posner, Myers, Bugliosi) put the SB strike at Z223, when, according to Myers' interpretation of the Zapruder film, Connally's shoulders were turned 37° to the right.**

(3) The LONGITUDINAL path of the bullet through Connally's chest made an angle of 66.5° with his shoulder-line.***

This angle comes from the HSCA, and is supported by Myers on his website (www.jfkfiles.com).

(4) The Single Bullet (CE399) emerged in a near-pristine state, which means that in its passage through Connally it could not have struck any bony substance. Therefore the bullet could not have undergone any deflection: the bullet must, if the SBT is true, have passed through Connally in the same straight path that it went through Kennedy.

(5) Michael Baden, the Chairman of the HSCA medical panel, confirmed this fact (4) in conversation with Gerald Posner. ["Case Closed", ps 334/5 ]****

(6) These facts by themselves (the 37° shoulder turn, the 66.5° chest transit of the bullet, and its straight path) geometrically establish that Oswald could NOT have been the shooter.

Why?.

(7) Because ONE VERY SIMPLE POINT AND LINE DIAGRAM SHOWS that the angles involved necessitate a bullet coming into the car(rear view) from L---> R, that is from a location opposite to the TSBD.

To facilitate quick comprehension of my diagram, I have added two more diagrams. These additional diagrams are far from being a necessity, but some people may find them helpful.

(9) No mathematics is required, other knowing what an angle is, and what parallels and perpendiculars are.

(10) FIRST DIAGRAM

AB is the actual midline of the Presidential car.

The lines either side of AB are imaginary lines drawn parallel to AB.

A bullet enters the car travelling across AB in the direction Y <--- X.

It will be noticed that the bullet crosses all the imaginary lines in the same way (angle and direction) that it crosses AB.

(11) A very important point follows from this. If, on any two-dimensional, point-and-line diagram, we mark where the SB strikes Connally's shoulder, and draw through this point an imaginary line parallel to the actual midline of the car, then we can determine, from this imaginary parallel, the direction of the bullet (L ---> R, or R --- L) with reference to the midline of the car.

(12) DIAGRAM TWO Helicopter, over-head View

E is the centre of the top of Connally's head (helicopter, over-head view); passing through E, is A1B1 an imaginary line parallel to the midline of the car; CD is an imaginary line at right angles to A1B1.

EF is a section of Connally's shoulder-line. When it coincides with CD, Connally is facing the front. According to the SBt, when Connally is struck by the SB, EF makes an angle of 37° with CD.

The SB travels H --- > I, and in doing so it strikes Connally at F, his right armpit, passing through his chest at an angle of 66.5°.[Myers, as I said in (3) on his website accepts this figure from the HSCA]

The dotted line IG is the perpendicular from I to EF. It shows that as the SB travels F ---> I, it moves also from F to G, ie., with reference to Connally's shoulder's-line, it is moving R ---> L.

(13) DIAGRAM THREE

This the diagram that exonerates Oswald

This is exactly the same as Diagram Two, except that at F (where the bullet strikes Connally's right armpit), an imaginary line JK has been drawn. JK is parallel to A1B1, and therefore parallel to AB, the car's actual midline.

The construction of JK shows clearly that H ---> I, the path of the bullet, comes into the car on the left of JK --- ie., the bullet comes into the car from L ---> R.

(12 ) Therefore Oswald cannot be the shooter, because any bullet that he could have fired into the car would travel R ---> L.

QED

ENDNOTES

*The Report, despite its discussions on the bullet's trajectory, and its mention of angles and distances did not produce a single accurate, scaled diagram.

Robert Frazier offered only one diagram to the Commission (CE 556), and that was to illustrate the trajectory of the bullet from its supposed point of fire in the TSBD to Kennedy’s right shoulder/neck; he did not offer any diagrams illustrating the Single Bullet trajectory across the car, even though he made definite statements about Connally's shoulder turns and the trajectory of the SB.(5H,169/74).

He told the Commission:

" ....I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet." (5H,173)

His failure to supply diagrams (so vitally needed where there are important references to significant angles) render his statements purely guesswork. Why the Commission did not insist on getting something better from him is a mystery.

The modern defenders of SBt (Posner,Myers and Bugliosi) disdain diagrams, believing that geometrical issues can be solved by words alone

** See Myers' website " Secrets of A Homicide"( Summary & Conclusions, Section 1, page 1/3, "Zapruder Frames" 223 & 224). Myers (referring to Frame 223) writes: "...he (Connally) is rotated 37° right ......"

*** On his website ("Summary & Conclusions", Section 2, page 2 ) Myers writes: "......the bullet was found to pass through JBC at an angle 24.5° downward and about 23.5° right to left."

[A bullet entering Connally's right armpit and moving longitudinally 23.5° leftwards would make a longitudinal angle of (90 -23.5)° ie., 66.5° with his right shoulder-line. ]

**** The Commission believed --- it was never questioned by them--- that the bullet that passed through Kennedy's back and exited just below his Adam's apple (ie in the region of his tie) passed through his body without deflection, and continued in its straight path through Connally's right armpit and in this straight path exited just below his right nipple.

It must be remembered that the Commission believed that the bullet that entered Kennedy’s neck(shoulder/back), and exited just below his Adam’s apple, did so in a straight path. The principles which underlay such a belief must, out of consistency, be applied to Connally.

The Report (p88), in describing the passage of the shoulder/ neck bullet through Kennedy, pointed out that the bullet struck no bone, and on this basis, by assuming a straight-line passage through Kennedy (at the believed downward angle), concluded that the bullet exited from the just below his Adam's apple.

Arlen Specter put the matter very clearly and simply. by suggesting that the bullet passed directly through Kennedy because it struck "only soft tissue and exiting on his neck"(6H,93).

Later, when hearing testimony from Frazier, Specter described the bullet that went through Kennedy's neck/ shoulder as "hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line"(5H,168). Two years later, in the famous “Life” magazine Assassination article of November 25th,’66 entitled “A Matter of Reasonable Doubt”, Arlen Specter was even more explicit, claiming that the Single Bullet could not have undergone a deflection through Kennedy “since it struck no bone in the President’s neck”

Clearly the assumption was that a high- velocity bullet would proceed through somebody in a straight line unless deflected by a bony substance. The corollary of this is that unless there is some bone matter in its path, a bullet will move through a body in a straight line.

This has a very dark consequence for Myers because he should be asked to explain what bone in Connally caused the deflection he (rather vaguely) writes about.

Arlen Specter took it for granted that the Single Bullet travelled in a straight line until it exited Connally . As did Robert Frazier who believed that for the Single Bullet theory to be credible, there had to be no deflection. (5H,172)

Dr Shaw, who operated on Connally, attending to all parts of Connally's entry and exit wounds, never made any reference to a deflection, except when, on exiting Connally, the Single Bullet took out a portion of rib, but even then, according to Dr. Shaw, there was "probably very little in the way of deflection" (6H,86; see (4H,105) ). When, on 9th November ’77, Dr Shaw was interviewed by HSCA Forensic Panel, he made no reference to any deflection.(HSCA Volume 1,272/5)

A point to be emphasized is that if there had been a deflection it couldn't have passed unnoticed. The reason is that, as Dr Shaw pointed out to the WC,

"When bone is struck by a high-velocity missile it fragments and acts much like bowling pins when they are struck by a bowling ball --- they fly in all directions" (6H,88)

Had there been a deflection --- had some bone matter been struck --- then the shattered bits of bone would have been immediately noticeable.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel, was presumably of this opinion when he told Gerald Posner in a November ’92 interview that Connally’s “ wounds were clearly the result of one bullet passing straight through him" [ Posner, “Case Closed, Chapt. 14 (p335, paper b. edtn.; my emphasis)]. This explains why Posner does not himself accept the deflection theory. On page 477 (Appendix A, pb edtn.), he writes that the trajectory of the Single Bullet was “not significantly altered until the bullet was slightly deflected by Connally’s rib.”

Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

"In order to exit just below JBC's right nipple (based on JBC's position at Zapruder frame 223), the bullet would then have to follow a slightly altered course after entering the Governor's body....." (Section 2, Summary & Conclusions, "Secrets of a Homicide")

Dale Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

The diagram below illustrates what Myers is saying. The legend and the diagram are the same as in the main text, except with one difference: a bullet path H1--->I1 has been added. This is the bullet path that Myers believes in. He has to put his faith in it because he is convinced that Oswald was the shooter, and that therefore the bullet must have come into the car from R --- > L . Dale Myers believes that this R ---> L angle (the bullet path H1--->I1 ) is 10°. [On his website, he has a computer illustration of the bullet coming into the car at 100]

The problem for Dale Myers is that this bullet path only makes an angle of 43° with Connally's shoulder-line. The angle, as we have seen, should be 66.5°. Therefore the bullet, on striking Connally's right armpit must turn through 23.5° right --- Dale Myers' "slightly altered course" --- thereby giving the 'illusion' (as Dale Myers would see it )that the bullet's path has been the L ---> R trajectory H ---> I.

This diagram illustrates Dale Myers’ bullet that that, on striking no bony substance,’ magically’ changes its direction on hitting Connally’s right armpit

Interestingly, on his website, Myers only quotes the opinions of 2 doctors: Dr Charles Petty, who sat on the HSCA Forensic Panel, and the aforementioned Dr. Michael Baden.

DR. Petty was one of the HSCA Forensic Panel who interviewed Dr Shaw . In his summary of the interview to the Forensic Panel, Dr Petty expressed the opinion that Dr Shaw could not establish that all the bone damage done to Connally’s lung came from the shattered rib; and Dr Petty thought that possibly, because of this seeming inadequacy, some other bone might have been struck, with a consequent deflection.(HSCA 8,149/50).

However all the other Panel members rejected Dr Petty’s doubts, and Dr Baden in his testimony to the Committee made no mention of a deflection. (HSCA 1,276?7). Neither did Dr. Petty in his testimony to the HSCA Committee (HSCA Vol 1, 376/81)

The truth is that no medical authority testified either to the Warren Commission or to the HSCA that the bullet that passed through Connally underwent a deflection whilst transiting his body. l

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In discussing the Single Bullet (SB), the discussion has centred mainly on the medical evidence. The geometrical evidence has largely been ignored. Artistic illustrations exist in abundance, but not scaled drawings*.

A full geometrical analysis would involve angles and distances. However, I have discovered that the Single Bullet theory (SBt) can easily be disproved geometrically simply by concentrating on the LONGITUDINAL component of each of the angles.

I can prove that, given the basic data of the SBt, the bullet must have come into the car from one of two buildings, the Dal-Tex or the Records.

My argument goes as follows:-

(1) The Zapruder film shows Kennedy passing out of view, seemingly unhurt, at Z205, and coming into view, wounded, at Z225. From this fact, on the official view, only one conclusion is possible: that the SB strike must have been in this Zapruder range.

(2) Leading defenders of the SBt (Posner, Myers, Bugliosi) put the SB strike at Z223, when, according to Myers' interpretation of the Zapruder film, Connally's shoulders were turned 37° to the right.**

(3) The LONGITUDINAL path of the bullet through Connally's chest made an angle of 66.5° with his shoulder-line.***

This angle comes from the HSCA, and is supported by Myers on his website (www.jfkfiles.com).

(4) The Single Bullet (CE399) emerged in a near-pristine state, which means that in its passage through Connally it could not have struck any bony substance. Therefore the bullet could not have undergone any deflection: the bullet must, if the SBT is true, have passed through Connally in the same straight path that it went through Kennedy.

(5) Michael Baden, the Chairman of the HSCA medical panel, confirmed this fact (4) in conversation with Gerald Posner. ["Case Closed", ps 334/5 ]****

(6) These facts by themselves (the 37° shoulder turn, the 66.5° chest transit of the bullet, and its straight path) geometrically establish that Oswald could NOT have been the shooter.

Why?.

(7) Because ONE VERY SIMPLE POINT AND LINE DIAGRAM SHOWS that the angles involved necessitate a bullet coming into the car(rear view) from L---> R, that is from a location opposite to the TSBD.

To facilitate quick comprehension of my diagram, I have added two more diagrams. These additional diagrams are far from being a necessity, but some people may find them helpful.

(9) No mathematics is required, other knowing what an angle is, and what parallels and perpendiculars are.

(10) FIRST DIAGRAM

AB is the actual midline of the Presidential car.

The lines either side of AB are imaginary lines drawn parallel to AB.

A bullet enters the car travelling across AB in the direction Y <--- X.

It will be noticed that the bullet crosses all the imaginary lines in the same way (angle and direction) that it crosses AB.

(11) A very important point follows from this. If, on any two-dimensional, point-and-line diagram, we mark where the SB strikes Connally's shoulder, and draw through this point an imaginary line parallel to the actual midline of the car, then we can determine, from this imaginary parallel, the direction of the bullet (L ---> R, or R --- L) with reference to the midline of the car.

(12) DIAGRAM TWO Helicopter, over-head View

E is the centre of the top of Connally's head (helicopter, over-head view); passing through E, is A1B1 an imaginary line parallel to the midline of the car; CD is an imaginary line at right angles to A1B1.

EF is a section of Connally's shoulder-line. When it coincides with CD, Connally is facing the front. According to the SBt, when Connally is struck by the SB, EF makes an angle of 37° with CD.

The SB travels H --- > I, and in doing so it strikes Connally at F, his right armpit, passing through his chest at an angle of 66.5°.[Myers, as I said in (3) on his website accepts this figure from the HSCA]

The dotted line IG is the perpendicular from I to EF. It shows that as the SB travels F ---> I, it moves also from F to G, ie., with reference to Connally's shoulder's-line, it is moving R ---> L.

(13) DIAGRAM THREE

This the diagram that exonerates Oswald

This is exactly the same as Diagram Two, except that at F (where the bullet strikes Connally's right armpit), an imaginary line JK has been drawn. JK is parallel to A1B1, and therefore parallel to AB, the car's actual midline.

The construction of JK shows clearly that H ---> I, the path of the bullet, comes into the car on the left of JK --- ie., the bullet comes into the car from L ---> R.

(12 ) Therefore Oswald cannot be the shooter, because any bullet that he could have fired into the car would travel R ---> L.

QED

ENDNOTES

*The Report, despite its discussions on the bullet's trajectory, and its mention of angles and distances did not produce a single accurate, scaled diagram.

Robert Frazier offered only one diagram to the Commission (CE 556), and that was to illustrate the trajectory of the bullet from its supposed point of fire in the TSBD to Kennedy’s right shoulder/neck; he did not offer any diagrams illustrating the Single Bullet trajectory across the car, even though he made definite statements about Connally's shoulder turns and the trajectory of the SB.(5H,169/74).

He told the Commission:

" ....I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet." (5H,173)

His failure to supply diagrams (so vitally needed where there are important references to significant angles) render his statements purely guesswork. Why the Commission did not insist on getting something better from him is a mystery.

The modern defenders of SBt (Posner,Myers and Bugliosi) disdain diagrams, believing that geometrical issues can be solved by words alone

** See Myers' website " Secrets of A Homicide"( Summary & Conclusions, Section 1, page 1/3, "Zapruder Frames" 223 & 224). Myers (referring to Frame 223) writes: "...he (Connally) is rotated 37° right ......"

*** On his website ("Summary & Conclusions", Section 2, page 2 ) Myers writes: "......the bullet was found to pass through JBC at an angle 24.5° downward and about 23.5° right to left."

[A bullet entering Connally's right armpit and moving longitudinally 23.5° leftwards would make a longitudinal angle of (90 -23.5)° ie., 66.5° with his right shoulder-line. ]

**** The Commission believed --- it was never questioned by them--- that the bullet that passed through Kennedy's back and exited just below his Adam's apple (ie in the region of his tie) passed through his body without deflection, and continued in its straight path through Connally's right armpit and in this straight path exited just below his right nipple.

It must be remembered that the Commission believed that the bullet that entered Kennedy’s neck(shoulder/back), and exited just below his Adam’s apple, did so in a straight path. The principles which underlay such a belief must, out of consistency, be applied to Connally.

The Report (p88), in describing the passage of the shoulder/ neck bullet through Kennedy, pointed out that the bullet struck no bone, and on this basis, by assuming a straight-line passage through Kennedy (at the believed downward angle), concluded that the bullet exited from the just below his Adam's apple.

Arlen Specter put the matter very clearly and simply. by suggesting that the bullet passed directly through Kennedy because it struck "only soft tissue and exiting on his neck"(6H,93).

Later, when hearing testimony from Frazier, Specter described the bullet that went through Kennedy's neck/ shoulder as "hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line"(5H,168). Two years later, in the famous “Life” magazine Assassination article of November 25th,’66 entitled “A Matter of Reasonable Doubt”, Arlen Specter was even more explicit, claiming that the Single Bullet could not have undergone a deflection through Kennedy “since it struck no bone in the President’s neck”

Clearly the assumption was that a high- velocity bullet would proceed through somebody in a straight line unless deflected by a bony substance. The corollary of this is that unless there is some bone matter in its path, a bullet will move through a body in a straight line.

This has a very dark consequence for Myers because he should be asked to explain what bone in Connally caused the deflection he (rather vaguely) writes about.

Arlen Specter took it for granted that the Single Bullet travelled in a straight line until it exited Connally . As did Robert Frazier who believed that for the Single Bullet theory to be credible, there had to be no deflection. (5H,172)

Dr Shaw, who operated on Connally, attending to all parts of Connally's entry and exit wounds, never made any reference to a deflection, except when, on exiting Connally, the Single Bullet took out a portion of rib, but even then, according to Dr. Shaw, there was "probably very little in the way of deflection" (6H,86; see (4H,105) ). When, on 9th November ’77, Dr Shaw was interviewed by HSCA Forensic Panel, he made no reference to any deflection.(HSCA Volume 1,272/5)

A point to be emphasized is that if there had been a deflection it couldn't have passed unnoticed. The reason is that, as Dr Shaw pointed out to the WC,

"When bone is struck by a high-velocity missile it fragments and acts much like bowling pins when they are struck by a bowling ball --- they fly in all directions" (6H,88)

Had there been a deflection --- had some bone matter been struck --- then the shattered bits of bone would have been immediately noticeable.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel, was presumably of this opinion when he told Gerald Posner in a November ’92 interview that Connally’s “ wounds were clearly the result of one bullet passing straight through him" [ Posner, “Case Closed, Chapt. 14 (p335, paper b. edtn.; my emphasis)]. This explains why Posner does not himself accept the deflection theory. On page 477 (Appendix A, pb edtn.), he writes that the trajectory of the Single Bullet was “not significantly altered until the bullet was slightly deflected by Connally’s rib.”

Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

"In order to exit just below JBC's right nipple (based on JBC's position at Zapruder frame 223), the bullet would then have to follow a slightly altered course after entering the Governor's body....." (Section 2, Summary & Conclusions, "Secrets of a Homicide")

Dale Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

The diagram below illustrates what Myers is saying. The legend and the diagram are the same as in the main text, except with one difference: a bullet path H1--->I1 has been added. This is the bullet path that Myers believes in. He has to put his faith in it because he is convinced that Oswald was the shooter, and that therefore the bullet must have come into the car from R --- > L . Dale Myers believes that this R ---> L angle (the bullet path H1--->I1 ) is 10°. [On his website, he has a computer illustration of the bullet coming into the car at 100]

The problem for Dale Myers is that this bullet path only makes an angle of 43° with Connally's shoulder-line. The angle, as we have seen, should be 66.5°. Therefore the bullet, on striking Connally's right armpit must turn through 23.5° right --- Dale Myers' "slightly altered course" --- thereby giving the 'illusion' (as Dale Myers would see it )that the bullet's path has been the L ---> R trajectory H ---> I.

This diagram illustrates Dale Myers’ bullet that that, on striking no bony substance,’ magically’ changes its direction on hitting Connally’s right armpit

Interestingly, on his website, Myers only quotes the opinions of 2 doctors: Dr Charles Petty, who sat on the HSCA Forensic Panel, and the aforementioned Dr. Michael Baden.

DR. Petty was one of the HSCA Forensic Panel who interviewed Dr Shaw . In his summary of the interview to the Forensic Panel, Dr Petty expressed the opinion that Dr Shaw could not establish that all the bone damage done to Connally’s lung came from the shattered rib; and Dr Petty thought that possibly, because of this seeming inadequacy, some other bone might have been struck, with a consequent deflection.(HSCA 8,149/50).

However all the other Panel members rejected Dr Petty’s doubts, and Dr Baden in his testimony to the Committee made no mention of a deflection. (HSCA 1,276?7). Neither did Dr. Petty in his testimony to the HSCA Committee (HSCA Vol 1, 376/81)

The truth is that no medical authority testified either to the Warren Commission or to the HSCA that the bullet that passed through Connally underwent a deflection whilst transiting his body. l

Welcome, welcome! I see you joined in '05 and very impressive bio sir! I look forward to many more posts from you.

RE Baden, the fabricator, during the HSCA hearings, while trying to convince the listeners that CE 399 did the deed told them their lying eyes had to see just "how flattened (it) was". I have never trusted a word the man has said since. And am amazed he and Wecht remain friends.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Mr.Rosman for your recent paper......Your research is well appreciated...

If you have not had access previously, you may be interested in the following...

Those in power were well aware that week-end, that there was no SB....

B......

From .."Breach of Trust"

Gerald D.McKnight...2005: University Press of Kansas

( and Harold Weisberg.....).....

"The CIA uncovered critical evidence in the assassination before the government's official version was agreed upon......and before President Johnson appointed the WC.......after the SS turned over a copy of the Zapruder film to the CIA, and the NPIC had completed it's analysis ,it had been discovered that the first shot, according to the film, had come Before Zapruder frame 210.....and a second shot at frame # 242.

Just 1.6 seconds after the first shot....... All the WC experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled gunman would require at least 2.4 seconds..the 1.6 second shot interlude meant there had to be more than one shooter.."

Page: 151.

"(.McKnight’s telephone interview , May 2,2003...with Dino A.Brugioni, the center’s chief analysis who was in charged of the NPICs interpretation of the Zapruder film..( Conclusion that follows are McKnights..not attributed to Brugioni, "When Brugioni turned over to McCone, or Helms the four-photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations interpreting the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the "Official Truth"..of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the weekend..( notes page 406)..."

See also........Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up & Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film"..

The Third Decade no.1 ( November 84).9. Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder Film the day after the assassination"...

Also see CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film..of JFK's assassination .These results were pried loose from the CIA by a FOIA request in 1982 by Harold Weisberg ..or see Wiesberg's "Photographic Whitewash --

Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures"..1967..available at Hood College..pages: 302-303.)

The Warren Report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z..210..Therefore the analysis and results of the FBI and CIA, of the Zapruder film were ignored....

(B......Therefore the Zapruder film also had to comply with the WC and it's findings..).....

"The FBI and Rankin and staff suppressed the findings of the Bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's film. It is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record does show is that the FBI and CIA colluded in the fabrication of a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film..until Dec.1964..

However.....

......After the Commission disbanded Hoover told Rankin that in Dec. 64 the CIA requested a copy of the film for training purposes..pages 151-152.."..

( Hoover to Rankin Dec. 4/64..Copy of letter appears in Wiesberg's , "Photographic Whitewash." page 143..)

B...........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bernice, the NPIC analysis was performed on behalf of the Secret Service, using one of the original Z-film copies. Since the NPIC normally worked with the CIA, they may have shared their info with them as well.

In any event they pretended the second shot came at 242 to give Oswald enough time to fire a second shot after hitting Kennedy at an earlier time. Specter took their lead and tried the same thing during the WC's study of the film. It was the realization that Connally was hit no later than 230 that eventually led to the forced creation of the SBT.

The early Z-film analysis by the SS and FBI was even wackier than Specter's. They, in fact, owe Specter and the WC a thanks, for if their earlier interpretations were allowed to stand, Lane and Co. would have got a re-examination of the evidence long before 1975.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bernice, the NPIC analysis was performed on behalf of the Secret Service, using one of the original Z-film copies. Since the NPIC normally worked with the CIA, they may have shared their info with them as well.

In any event they pretended the second shot came at 242 to give Oswald enough time to fire a second shot after hitting Kennedy at an earlier time. Specter took their lead and tried the same thing during the WC's study of the film. It was the realization that Connally was hit no later than 230 that eventually led to the forced creation of the SBT.

The early Z-film analysis by the SS and FBI was even wackier than Specter's. They, in fact, owe Specter and the WC a thanks, for if their earlier interpretations were allowed to stand, Lane and Co. would have got a re-examination of the evidence long before 1975.

It was the realization that Connally was hit no later than 230

Reaction, as seen in the Z-film, and thereafter labeling as if fact that a specific event is responsible, is pretty much like doing "Blood Spatter" analysis by looking at the film.

"Reaction to severe external stimuli" can take on many forms.

Tom/aka one who also "ducked".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good paper, well-researched and thought out. You are discussing the Z223-4 single-bullet scenario, which, ironically was not developed until Posner and CC came out. The WC did not even try to pinpoint frames in the Z film, but simply provided a general range wherein a scenario could have taken place. In addition, the WC used incorrect limo data, so even their flawed thesis was carried out with flawed information. HSCA tried to place the sb scenario around Z190.

Therefore, anyone who tries to espouse any of the sb scenarios while lumping them all together is speaking incorrectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In discussing the Single Bullet (SB), the discussion has centred mainly on the medical evidence. The geometrical evidence has largely been ignored. Artistic illustrations exist in abundance, but not scaled drawings*.

A full geometrical analysis would involve angles and distances. However, I have discovered that the Single Bullet theory (SBt) can easily be disproved geometrically simply by concentrating on the LONGITUDINAL component of each of the angles.

I can prove that, given the basic data of the SBt, the bullet must have come into the car from one of two buildings, the Dal-Tex or the Records.

My argument goes as follows:-

(1) The Zapruder film shows Kennedy passing out of view, seemingly unhurt, at Z205, and coming into view, wounded, at Z225. From this fact, on the official view, only one conclusion is possible: that the SB strike must have been in this Zapruder range.

(2) Leading defenders of the SBt (Posner, Myers, Bugliosi) put the SB strike at Z223, when, according to Myers' interpretation of the Zapruder film, Connally's shoulders were turned 37° to the right.**

(3) The LONGITUDINAL path of the bullet through Connally's chest made an angle of 66.5° with his shoulder-line.***

This angle comes from the HSCA, and is supported by Myers on his website (www.jfkfiles.com).

(4) The Single Bullet (CE399) emerged in a near-pristine state, which means that in its passage through Connally it could not have struck any bony substance. Therefore the bullet could not have undergone any deflection: the bullet must, if the SBT is true, have passed through Connally in the same straight path that it went through Kennedy.

(5) Michael Baden, the Chairman of the HSCA medical panel, confirmed this fact (4) in conversation with Gerald Posner. ["Case Closed", ps 334/5 ]****

(6) These facts by themselves (the 37° shoulder turn, the 66.5° chest transit of the bullet, and its straight path) geometrically establish that Oswald could NOT have been the shooter.

Why?.

(7) Because ONE VERY SIMPLE POINT AND LINE DIAGRAM SHOWS that the angles involved necessitate a bullet coming into the car(rear view) from L---> R, that is from a location opposite to the TSBD.

To facilitate quick comprehension of my diagram, I have added two more diagrams. These additional diagrams are far from being a necessity, but some people may find them helpful.

(9) No mathematics is required, other knowing what an angle is, and what parallels and perpendiculars are.

(10) FIRST DIAGRAM

AB is the actual midline of the Presidential car.

The lines either side of AB are imaginary lines drawn parallel to AB.

A bullet enters the car travelling across AB in the direction Y <--- X.

It will be noticed that the bullet crosses all the imaginary lines in the same way (angle and direction) that it crosses AB.

(11) A very important point follows from this. If, on any two-dimensional, point-and-line diagram, we mark where the SB strikes Connally's shoulder, and draw through this point an imaginary line parallel to the actual midline of the car, then we can determine, from this imaginary parallel, the direction of the bullet (L ---> R, or R --- L) with reference to the midline of the car.

(12) DIAGRAM TWO Helicopter, over-head View

E is the centre of the top of Connally's head (helicopter, over-head view); passing through E, is A1B1 an imaginary line parallel to the midline of the car; CD is an imaginary line at right angles to A1B1.

EF is a section of Connally's shoulder-line. When it coincides with CD, Connally is facing the front. According to the SBt, when Connally is struck by the SB, EF makes an angle of 37° with CD.

The SB travels H --- > I, and in doing so it strikes Connally at F, his right armpit, passing through his chest at an angle of 66.5°.[Myers, as I said in (3) on his website accepts this figure from the HSCA]

The dotted line IG is the perpendicular from I to EF. It shows that as the SB travels F ---> I, it moves also from F to G, ie., with reference to Connally's shoulder's-line, it is moving R ---> L.

(13) DIAGRAM THREE

This the diagram that exonerates Oswald

This is exactly the same as Diagram Two, except that at F (where the bullet strikes Connally's right armpit), an imaginary line JK has been drawn. JK is parallel to A1B1, and therefore parallel to AB, the car's actual midline.

The construction of JK shows clearly that H ---> I, the path of the bullet, comes into the car on the left of JK --- ie., the bullet comes into the car from L ---> R.

(12 ) Therefore Oswald cannot be the shooter, because any bullet that he could have fired into the car would travel R ---> L.

QED

ENDNOTES

*The Report, despite its discussions on the bullet's trajectory, and its mention of angles and distances did not produce a single accurate, scaled diagram.

Robert Frazier offered only one diagram to the Commission (CE 556), and that was to illustrate the trajectory of the bullet from its supposed point of fire in the TSBD to Kennedy’s right shoulder/neck; he did not offer any diagrams illustrating the Single Bullet trajectory across the car, even though he made definite statements about Connally's shoulder turns and the trajectory of the SB.(5H,169/74).

He told the Commission:

" ....I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet." (5H,173)

His failure to supply diagrams (so vitally needed where there are important references to significant angles) render his statements purely guesswork. Why the Commission did not insist on getting something better from him is a mystery.

The modern defenders of SBt (Posner,Myers and Bugliosi) disdain diagrams, believing that geometrical issues can be solved by words alone

** See Myers' website " Secrets of A Homicide"( Summary & Conclusions, Section 1, page 1/3, "Zapruder Frames" 223 & 224). Myers (referring to Frame 223) writes: "...he (Connally) is rotated 37° right ......"

*** On his website ("Summary & Conclusions", Section 2, page 2 ) Myers writes: "......the bullet was found to pass through JBC at an angle 24.5° downward and about 23.5° right to left."

[A bullet entering Connally's right armpit and moving longitudinally 23.5° leftwards would make a longitudinal angle of (90 -23.5)° ie., 66.5° with his right shoulder-line. ]

**** The Commission believed --- it was never questioned by them--- that the bullet that passed through Kennedy's back and exited just below his Adam's apple (ie in the region of his tie) passed through his body without deflection, and continued in its straight path through Connally's right armpit and in this straight path exited just below his right nipple.

It must be remembered that the Commission believed that the bullet that entered Kennedy’s neck(shoulder/back), and exited just below his Adam’s apple, did so in a straight path. The principles which underlay such a belief must, out of consistency, be applied to Connally.

The Report (p88), in describing the passage of the shoulder/ neck bullet through Kennedy, pointed out that the bullet struck no bone, and on this basis, by assuming a straight-line passage through Kennedy (at the believed downward angle), concluded that the bullet exited from the just below his Adam's apple.

Arlen Specter put the matter very clearly and simply. by suggesting that the bullet passed directly through Kennedy because it struck "only soft tissue and exiting on his neck"(6H,93).

Later, when hearing testimony from Frazier, Specter described the bullet that went through Kennedy's neck/ shoulder as "hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line"(5H,168). Two years later, in the famous “Life” magazine Assassination article of November 25th,’66 entitled “A Matter of Reasonable Doubt”, Arlen Specter was even more explicit, claiming that the Single Bullet could not have undergone a deflection through Kennedy “since it struck no bone in the President’s neck”

Clearly the assumption was that a high- velocity bullet would proceed through somebody in a straight line unless deflected by a bony substance. The corollary of this is that unless there is some bone matter in its path, a bullet will move through a body in a straight line.

This has a very dark consequence for Myers because he should be asked to explain what bone in Connally caused the deflection he (rather vaguely) writes about.

Arlen Specter took it for granted that the Single Bullet travelled in a straight line until it exited Connally . As did Robert Frazier who believed that for the Single Bullet theory to be credible, there had to be no deflection. (5H,172)

Dr Shaw, who operated on Connally, attending to all parts of Connally's entry and exit wounds, never made any reference to a deflection, except when, on exiting Connally, the Single Bullet took out a portion of rib, but even then, according to Dr. Shaw, there was "probably very little in the way of deflection" (6H,86; see (4H,105) ). When, on 9th November ’77, Dr Shaw was interviewed by HSCA Forensic Panel, he made no reference to any deflection.(HSCA Volume 1,272/5)

A point to be emphasized is that if there had been a deflection it couldn't have passed unnoticed. The reason is that, as Dr Shaw pointed out to the WC,

"When bone is struck by a high-velocity missile it fragments and acts much like bowling pins when they are struck by a bowling ball --- they fly in all directions" (6H,88)

Had there been a deflection --- had some bone matter been struck --- then the shattered bits of bone would have been immediately noticeable.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel, was presumably of this opinion when he told Gerald Posner in a November ’92 interview that Connally’s “ wounds were clearly the result of one bullet passing straight through him" [ Posner, “Case Closed, Chapt. 14 (p335, paper b. edtn.; my emphasis)]. This explains why Posner does not himself accept the deflection theory. On page 477 (Appendix A, pb edtn.), he writes that the trajectory of the Single Bullet was “not significantly altered until the bullet was slightly deflected by Connally’s rib.”

Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

"In order to exit just below JBC's right nipple (based on JBC's position at Zapruder frame 223), the bullet would then have to follow a slightly altered course after entering the Governor's body....." (Section 2, Summary & Conclusions, "Secrets of a Homicide")

Dale Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

The diagram below illustrates what Myers is saying. The legend and the diagram are the same as in the main text, except with one difference: a bullet path H1--->I1 has been added. This is the bullet path that Myers believes in. He has to put his faith in it because he is convinced that Oswald was the shooter, and that therefore the bullet must have come into the car from R --- > L . Dale Myers believes that this R ---> L angle (the bullet path H1--->I1 ) is 10°. [On his website, he has a computer illustration of the bullet coming into the car at 100]

The problem for Dale Myers is that this bullet path only makes an angle of 43° with Connally's shoulder-line. The angle, as we have seen, should be 66.5°. Therefore the bullet, on striking Connally's right armpit must turn through 23.5° right --- Dale Myers' "slightly altered course" --- thereby giving the 'illusion' (as Dale Myers would see it )that the bullet's path has been the L ---> R trajectory H ---> I.

This diagram illustrates Dale Myers’ bullet that that, on striking no bony substance,’ magically’ changes its direction on hitting Connally’s right armpit

Interestingly, on his website, Myers only quotes the opinions of 2 doctors: Dr Charles Petty, who sat on the HSCA Forensic Panel, and the aforementioned Dr. Michael Baden.

DR. Petty was one of the HSCA Forensic Panel who interviewed Dr Shaw . In his summary of the interview to the Forensic Panel, Dr Petty expressed the opinion that Dr Shaw could not establish that all the bone damage done to Connally’s lung came from the shattered rib; and Dr Petty thought that possibly, because of this seeming inadequacy, some other bone might have been struck, with a consequent deflection.(HSCA 8,149/50).

However all the other Panel members rejected Dr Petty’s doubts, and Dr Baden in his testimony to the Committee made no mention of a deflection. (HSCA 1,276?7). Neither did Dr. Petty in his testimony to the HSCA Committee (HSCA Vol 1, 376/81)

The truth is that no medical authority testified either to the Warren Commission or to the HSCA that the bullet that passed through Connally underwent a deflection whilst transiting his body. l

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In discussing the Single Bullet (SB), the discussion has centred mainly on the medical evidence. The geometrical evidence has largely been ignored. Artistic illustrations exist in abundance, but not scaled drawings*.

A full geometrical analysis would involve angles and distances. However, I have discovered that the Single Bullet theory (SBt) can easily be disproved geometrically simply by concentrating on the LONGITUDINAL component of each of the angles.

I can prove that, given the basic data of the SBt, the bullet must have come into the car from one of two buildings, the Dal-Tex or the Records.

My argument goes as follows:-

(1) The Zapruder film shows Kennedy passing out of view, seemingly unhurt, at Z205, and coming into view, wounded, at Z225. From this fact, on the official view, only one conclusion is possible: that the SB strike must have been in this Zapruder range.

(2) Leading defenders of the SBt (Posner, Myers, Bugliosi) put the SB strike at Z223, when, according to Myers' interpretation of the Zapruder film, Connally's shoulders were turned 37° to the right.**

(3) The LONGITUDINAL path of the bullet through Connally's chest made an angle of 66.5° with his shoulder-line.***

This angle comes from the HSCA, and is supported by Myers on his website (www.jfkfiles.com).

(4) The Single Bullet (CE399) emerged in a near-pristine state, which means that in its passage through Connally it could not have struck any bony substance. Therefore the bullet could not have undergone any deflection: the bullet must, if the SBT is true, have passed through Connally in the same straight path that it went through Kennedy.

(5) Michael Baden, the Chairman of the HSCA medical panel, confirmed this fact (4) in conversation with Gerald Posner. ["Case Closed", ps 334/5 ]****

(6) These facts by themselves (the 37° shoulder turn, the 66.5° chest transit of the bullet, and its straight path) geometrically establish that Oswald could NOT have been the shooter.

Why?.

(7) Because ONE VERY SIMPLE POINT AND LINE DIAGRAM SHOWS that the angles involved necessitate a bullet coming into the car(rear view) from L---> R, that is from a location opposite to the TSBD.

To facilitate quick comprehension of my diagram, I have added two more diagrams. These additional diagrams are far from being a necessity, but some people may find them helpful.

(9) No mathematics is required, other knowing what an angle is, and what parallels and perpendiculars are.

(10) FIRST DIAGRAM

AB is the actual midline of the Presidential car.

The lines either side of AB are imaginary lines drawn parallel to AB.

A bullet enters the car travelling across AB in the direction Y <--- X.

It will be noticed that the bullet crosses all the imaginary lines in the same way (angle and direction) that it crosses AB.

(11) A very important point follows from this. If, on any two-dimensional, point-and-line diagram, we mark where the SB strikes Connally's shoulder, and draw through this point an imaginary line parallel to the actual midline of the car, then we can determine, from this imaginary parallel, the direction of the bullet (L ---> R, or R --- L) with reference to the midline of the car.

(12) DIAGRAM TWO Helicopter, over-head View

E is the centre of the top of Connally's head (helicopter, over-head view); passing through E, is A1B1 an imaginary line parallel to the midline of the car; CD is an imaginary line at right angles to A1B1.

EF is a section of Connally's shoulder-line. When it coincides with CD, Connally is facing the front. According to the SBt, when Connally is struck by the SB, EF makes an angle of 37° with CD.

The SB travels H --- > I, and in doing so it strikes Connally at F, his right armpit, passing through his chest at an angle of 66.5°.[Myers, as I said in (3) on his website accepts this figure from the HSCA]

The dotted line IG is the perpendicular from I to EF. It shows that as the SB travels F ---> I, it moves also from F to G, ie., with reference to Connally's shoulder's-line, it is moving R ---> L.

(13) DIAGRAM THREE

This the diagram that exonerates Oswald

This is exactly the same as Diagram Two, except that at F (where the bullet strikes Connally's right armpit), an imaginary line JK has been drawn. JK is parallel to A1B1, and therefore parallel to AB, the car's actual midline.

The construction of JK shows clearly that H ---> I, the path of the bullet, comes into the car on the left of JK --- ie., the bullet comes into the car from L ---> R.

(12 ) Therefore Oswald cannot be the shooter, because any bullet that he could have fired into the car would travel R ---> L.

QED

ENDNOTES

*The Report, despite its discussions on the bullet's trajectory, and its mention of angles and distances did not produce a single accurate, scaled diagram.

Robert Frazier offered only one diagram to the Commission (CE 556), and that was to illustrate the trajectory of the bullet from its supposed point of fire in the TSBD to Kennedy's right shoulder/neck; he did not offer any diagrams illustrating the Single Bullet trajectory across the car, even though he made definite statements about Connally's shoulder turns and the trajectory of the SB.(5H,169/74).

He told the Commission:

" ....I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet." (5H,173)

His failure to supply diagrams (so vitally needed where there are important references to significant angles) render his statements purely guesswork. Why the Commission did not insist on getting something better from him is a mystery.

The modern defenders of SBt (Posner,Myers and Bugliosi) disdain diagrams, believing that geometrical issues can be solved by words alone

** See Myers' website " Secrets of A Homicide"( Summary & Conclusions, Section 1, page 1/3, "Zapruder Frames" 223 & 224). Myers (referring to Frame 223) writes: "...he (Connally) is rotated 37° right ......"

*** On his website ("Summary & Conclusions", Section 2, page 2 ) Myers writes: "......the bullet was found to pass through JBC at an angle 24.5° downward and about 23.5° right to left."

[A bullet entering Connally's right armpit and moving longitudinally 23.5° leftwards would make a longitudinal angle of (90 -23.5)° ie., 66.5° with his right shoulder-line. ]

**** The Commission believed --- it was never questioned by them--- that the bullet that passed through Kennedy's back and exited just below his Adam's apple (ie in the region of his tie) passed through his body without deflection, and continued in its straight path through Connally's right armpit and in this straight path exited just below his right nipple.

It must be remembered that the Commission believed that the bullet that entered Kennedy's neck(shoulder/back), and exited just below his Adam's apple, did so in a straight path. The principles which underlay such a belief must, out of consistency, be applied to Connally.

The Report (p88), in describing the passage of the shoulder/ neck bullet through Kennedy, pointed out that the bullet struck no bone, and on this basis, by assuming a straight-line passage through Kennedy (at the believed downward angle), concluded that the bullet exited from the just below his Adam's apple.

Arlen Specter put the matter very clearly and simply. by suggesting that the bullet passed directly through Kennedy because it struck "only soft tissue and exiting on his neck"(6H,93).

Later, when hearing testimony from Frazier, Specter described the bullet that went through Kennedy's neck/ shoulder as "hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line"(5H,168). Two years later, in the famous "Life" magazine Assassination article of November 25th,'66 entitled "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt", Arlen Specter was even more explicit, claiming that the Single Bullet could not have undergone a deflection through Kennedy "since it struck no bone in the President's neck"

Clearly the assumption was that a high- velocity bullet would proceed through somebody in a straight line unless deflected by a bony substance. The corollary of this is that unless there is some bone matter in its path, a bullet will move through a body in a straight line.

This has a very dark consequence for Myers because he should be asked to explain what bone in Connally caused the deflection he (rather vaguely) writes about.

Arlen Specter took it for granted that the Single Bullet travelled in a straight line until it exited Connally . As did Robert Frazier who believed that for the Single Bullet theory to be credible, there had to be no deflection. (5H,172)

Dr Shaw, who operated on Connally, attending to all parts of Connally's entry and exit wounds, never made any reference to a deflection, except when, on exiting Connally, the Single Bullet took out a portion of rib, but even then, according to Dr. Shaw, there was "probably very little in the way of deflection" (6H,86; see (4H,105) ). When, on 9th November '77, Dr Shaw was interviewed by HSCA Forensic Panel, he made no reference to any deflection.(HSCA Volume 1,272/5)

A point to be emphasized is that if there had been a deflection it couldn't have passed unnoticed. The reason is that, as Dr Shaw pointed out to the WC,

"When bone is struck by a high-velocity missile it fragments and acts much like bowling pins when they are struck by a bowling ball --- they fly in all directions" (6H,88)

Had there been a deflection --- had some bone matter been struck --- then the shattered bits of bone would have been immediately noticeable.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel, was presumably of this opinion when he told Gerald Posner in a November '92 interview that Connally's " wounds were clearly the result of one bullet passing straight through him" [ Posner, "Case Closed, Chapt. 14 (p335, paper b. edtn.; my emphasis)]. This explains why Posner does not himself accept the deflection theory. On page 477 (Appendix A, pb edtn.), he writes that the trajectory of the Single Bullet was "not significantly altered until the bullet was slightly deflected by Connally's rib."

Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

"In order to exit just below JBC's right nipple (based on JBC's position at Zapruder frame 223), the bullet would then have to follow a slightly altered course after entering the Governor's body....." (Section 2, Summary & Conclusions, "Secrets of a Homicide")

Dale Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

The diagram below illustrates what Myers is saying. The legend and the diagram are the same as in the main text, except with one difference: a bullet path H1--->I1 has been added. This is the bullet path that Myers believes in. He has to put his faith in it because he is convinced that Oswald was the shooter, and that therefore the bullet must have come into the car from R --- > L . Dale Myers believes that this R ---> L angle (the bullet path H1--->I1 ) is 10°. [On his website, he has a computer illustration of the bullet coming into the car at 100]

The problem for Dale Myers is that this bullet path only makes an angle of 43° with Connally's shoulder-line. The angle, as we have seen, should be 66.5°. Therefore the bullet, on striking Connally's right armpit must turn through 23.5° right --- Dale Myers' "slightly altered course" --- thereby giving the 'illusion' (as Dale Myers would see it )that the bullet's path has been the L ---> R trajectory H ---> I.

This diagram illustrates Dale Myers' bullet that that, on striking no bony substance,' magically' changes its direction on hitting Connally's right armpit

Interestingly, on his website, Myers only quotes the opinions of 2 doctors: Dr Charles Petty, who sat on the HSCA Forensic Panel, and the aforementioned Dr. Michael Baden.

DR. Petty was one of the HSCA Forensic Panel who interviewed Dr Shaw . In his summary of the interview to the Forensic Panel, Dr Petty expressed the opinion that Dr Shaw could not establish that all the bone damage done to Connally's lung came from the shattered rib; and Dr Petty thought that possibly, because of this seeming inadequacy, some other bone might have been struck, with a consequent deflection.(HSCA 8,149/50).

However all the other Panel members rejected Dr Petty's doubts, and Dr Baden in his testimony to the Committee made no mention of a deflection. (HSCA 1,276?7). Neither did Dr. Petty in his testimony to the HSCA Committee (HSCA Vol 1, 376/81)

The truth is that no medical authority testified either to the Warren Commission or to the HSCA that the bullet that passed through Connally underwent a deflection whilst transiting his body. l

Great, and welcome to the Forum. Can you upload the diagrams? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In discussing the Single Bullet (SB), the discussion has centred mainly on the medical evidence. The geometrical evidence has largely been ignored. Artistic illustrations exist in abundance, but not scaled drawings*.

A full geometrical analysis would involve angles and distances. However, I have discovered that the Single Bullet theory (SBt) can easily be disproved geometrically simply by concentrating on the LONGITUDINAL component of each of the angles.

I can prove that, given the basic data of the SBt, the bullet must have come into the car from one of two buildings, the Dal-Tex or the Records.

My argument goes as follows:-

(1) The Zapruder film shows Kennedy passing out of view, seemingly unhurt, at Z205, and coming into view, wounded, at Z225. From this fact, on the official view, only one conclusion is possible: that the SB strike must have been in this Zapruder range.

(2) Leading defenders of the SBt (Posner, Myers, Bugliosi) put the SB strike at Z223, when, according to Myers' interpretation of the Zapruder film, Connally's shoulders were turned 37° to the right.**

(3) The LONGITUDINAL path of the bullet through Connally's chest made an angle of 66.5° with his shoulder-line.***

This angle comes from the HSCA, and is supported by Myers on his website (www.jfkfiles.com).

(4) The Single Bullet (CE399) emerged in a near-pristine state, which means that in its passage through Connally it could not have struck any bony substance. Therefore the bullet could not have undergone any deflection: the bullet must, if the SBT is true, have passed through Connally in the same straight path that it went through Kennedy.

(5) Michael Baden, the Chairman of the HSCA medical panel, confirmed this fact (4) in conversation with Gerald Posner. ["Case Closed", ps 334/5 ]****

(6) These facts by themselves (the 37° shoulder turn, the 66.5° chest transit of the bullet, and its straight path) geometrically establish that Oswald could NOT have been the shooter.

Why?.

(7) Because ONE VERY SIMPLE POINT AND LINE DIAGRAM SHOWS that the angles involved necessitate a bullet coming into the car(rear view) from L---> R, that is from a location opposite to the TSBD.

To facilitate quick comprehension of my diagram, I have added two more diagrams. These additional diagrams are far from being a necessity, but some people may find them helpful.

(9) No mathematics is required, other knowing what an angle is, and what parallels and perpendiculars are.

(10) FIRST DIAGRAM

AB is the actual midline of the Presidential car.

The lines either side of AB are imaginary lines drawn parallel to AB.

A bullet enters the car travelling across AB in the direction Y <--- X.

It will be noticed that the bullet crosses all the imaginary lines in the same way (angle and direction) that it crosses AB.

(11) A very important point follows from this. If, on any two-dimensional, point-and-line diagram, we mark where the SB strikes Connally's shoulder, and draw through this point an imaginary line parallel to the actual midline of the car, then we can determine, from this imaginary parallel, the direction of the bullet (L ---> R, or R --- L) with reference to the midline of the car.

(12) DIAGRAM TWO Helicopter, over-head View

E is the centre of the top of Connally's head (helicopter, over-head view); passing through E, is A1B1 an imaginary line parallel to the midline of the car; CD is an imaginary line at right angles to A1B1.

EF is a section of Connally's shoulder-line. When it coincides with CD, Connally is facing the front. According to the SBt, when Connally is struck by the SB, EF makes an angle of 37° with CD.

The SB travels H --- > I, and in doing so it strikes Connally at F, his right armpit, passing through his chest at an angle of 66.5°.[Myers, as I said in (3) on his website accepts this figure from the HSCA]

The dotted line IG is the perpendicular from I to EF. It shows that as the SB travels F ---> I, it moves also from F to G, ie., with reference to Connally's shoulder's-line, it is moving R ---> L.

(13) DIAGRAM THREE

This the diagram that exonerates Oswald

This is exactly the same as Diagram Two, except that at F (where the bullet strikes Connally's right armpit), an imaginary line JK has been drawn. JK is parallel to A1B1, and therefore parallel to AB, the car's actual midline.

The construction of JK shows clearly that H ---> I, the path of the bullet, comes into the car on the left of JK --- ie., the bullet comes into the car from L ---> R.

(12 ) Therefore Oswald cannot be the shooter, because any bullet that he could have fired into the car would travel R ---> L.

QED

ENDNOTES

*The Report, despite its discussions on the bullet's trajectory, and its mention of angles and distances did not produce a single accurate, scaled diagram.

Robert Frazier offered only one diagram to the Commission (CE 556), and that was to illustrate the trajectory of the bullet from its supposed point of fire in the TSBD to Kennedy's right shoulder/neck; he did not offer any diagrams illustrating the Single Bullet trajectory across the car, even though he made definite statements about Connally's shoulder turns and the trajectory of the SB.(5H,169/74).

He told the Commission:

" ....I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet." (5H,173)

His failure to supply diagrams (so vitally needed where there are important references to significant angles) render his statements purely guesswork. Why the Commission did not insist on getting something better from him is a mystery.

The modern defenders of SBt (Posner,Myers and Bugliosi) disdain diagrams, believing that geometrical issues can be solved by words alone

** See Myers' website " Secrets of A Homicide"( Summary & Conclusions, Section 1, page 1/3, "Zapruder Frames" 223 & 224). Myers (referring to Frame 223) writes: "...he (Connally) is rotated 37° right ......"

*** On his website ("Summary & Conclusions", Section 2, page 2 ) Myers writes: "......the bullet was found to pass through JBC at an angle 24.5° downward and about 23.5° right to left."

[A bullet entering Connally's right armpit and moving longitudinally 23.5° leftwards would make a longitudinal angle of (90 -23.5)° ie., 66.5° with his right shoulder-line. ]

**** The Commission believed --- it was never questioned by them--- that the bullet that passed through Kennedy's back and exited just below his Adam's apple (ie in the region of his tie) passed through his body without deflection, and continued in its straight path through Connally's right armpit and in this straight path exited just below his right nipple.

It must be remembered that the Commission believed that the bullet that entered Kennedy's neck(shoulder/back), and exited just below his Adam's apple, did so in a straight path. The principles which underlay such a belief must, out of consistency, be applied to Connally.

The Report (p88), in describing the passage of the shoulder/ neck bullet through Kennedy, pointed out that the bullet struck no bone, and on this basis, by assuming a straight-line passage through Kennedy (at the believed downward angle), concluded that the bullet exited from the just below his Adam's apple.

Arlen Specter put the matter very clearly and simply. by suggesting that the bullet passed directly through Kennedy because it struck "only soft tissue and exiting on his neck"(6H,93).

Later, when hearing testimony from Frazier, Specter described the bullet that went through Kennedy's neck/ shoulder as "hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line"(5H,168). Two years later, in the famous "Life" magazine Assassination article of November 25th,'66 entitled "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt", Arlen Specter was even more explicit, claiming that the Single Bullet could not have undergone a deflection through Kennedy "since it struck no bone in the President's neck"

Clearly the assumption was that a high- velocity bullet would proceed through somebody in a straight line unless deflected by a bony substance. The corollary of this is that unless there is some bone matter in its path, a bullet will move through a body in a straight line.

This has a very dark consequence for Myers because he should be asked to explain what bone in Connally caused the deflection he (rather vaguely) writes about.

Arlen Specter took it for granted that the Single Bullet travelled in a straight line until it exited Connally . As did Robert Frazier who believed that for the Single Bullet theory to be credible, there had to be no deflection. (5H,172)

Dr Shaw, who operated on Connally, attending to all parts of Connally's entry and exit wounds, never made any reference to a deflection, except when, on exiting Connally, the Single Bullet took out a portion of rib, but even then, according to Dr. Shaw, there was "probably very little in the way of deflection" (6H,86; see (4H,105) ). When, on 9th November '77, Dr Shaw was interviewed by HSCA Forensic Panel, he made no reference to any deflection.(HSCA Volume 1,272/5)

A point to be emphasized is that if there had been a deflection it couldn't have passed unnoticed. The reason is that, as Dr Shaw pointed out to the WC,

"When bone is struck by a high-velocity missile it fragments and acts much like bowling pins when they are struck by a bowling ball --- they fly in all directions" (6H,88)

Had there been a deflection --- had some bone matter been struck --- then the shattered bits of bone would have been immediately noticeable.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel, was presumably of this opinion when he told Gerald Posner in a November '92 interview that Connally's " wounds were clearly the result of one bullet passing straight through him" [ Posner, "Case Closed, Chapt. 14 (p335, paper b. edtn.; my emphasis)]. This explains why Posner does not himself accept the deflection theory. On page 477 (Appendix A, pb edtn.), he writes that the trajectory of the Single Bullet was "not significantly altered until the bullet was slightly deflected by Connally's rib."

Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

"In order to exit just below JBC's right nipple (based on JBC's position at Zapruder frame 223), the bullet would then have to follow a slightly altered course after entering the Governor's body....." (Section 2, Summary & Conclusions, "Secrets of a Homicide")

Dale Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

The diagram below illustrates what Myers is saying. The legend and the diagram are the same as in the main text, except with one difference: a bullet path H1--->I1 has been added. This is the bullet path that Myers believes in. He has to put his faith in it because he is convinced that Oswald was the shooter, and that therefore the bullet must have come into the car from R --- > L . Dale Myers believes that this R ---> L angle (the bullet path H1--->I1 ) is 10°. [On his website, he has a computer illustration of the bullet coming into the car at 100]

The problem for Dale Myers is that this bullet path only makes an angle of 43° with Connally's shoulder-line. The angle, as we have seen, should be 66.5°. Therefore the bullet, on striking Connally's right armpit must turn through 23.5° right --- Dale Myers' "slightly altered course" --- thereby giving the 'illusion' (as Dale Myers would see it )that the bullet's path has been the L ---> R trajectory H ---> I.

This diagram illustrates Dale Myers' bullet that that, on striking no bony substance,' magically' changes its direction on hitting Connally's right armpit

Interestingly, on his website, Myers only quotes the opinions of 2 doctors: Dr Charles Petty, who sat on the HSCA Forensic Panel, and the aforementioned Dr. Michael Baden.

DR. Petty was one of the HSCA Forensic Panel who interviewed Dr Shaw . In his summary of the interview to the Forensic Panel, Dr Petty expressed the opinion that Dr Shaw could not establish that all the bone damage done to Connally's lung came from the shattered rib; and Dr Petty thought that possibly, because of this seeming inadequacy, some other bone might have been struck, with a consequent deflection.(HSCA 8,149/50).

However all the other Panel members rejected Dr Petty's doubts, and Dr Baden in his testimony to the Committee made no mention of a deflection. (HSCA 1,276?7). Neither did Dr. Petty in his testimony to the HSCA Committee (HSCA Vol 1, 376/81)

The truth is that no medical authority testified either to the Warren Commission or to the HSCA that the bullet that passed through Connally underwent a deflection whilst transiting his body. l

Great, and welcome to the Forum. Can you upload the diagrams? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In discussing the Single Bullet (SB), the discussion has centred mainly on the medical evidence. The geometrical evidence has largely been ignored. Artistic illustrations exist in abundance, but not scaled drawings*.

A full geometrical analysis would involve angles and distances. However, I have discovered that the Single Bullet theory (SBt) can easily be disproved geometrically simply by concentrating on the LONGITUDINAL component of each of the angles.

I can prove that, given the basic data of the SBt, the bullet must have come into the car from one of two buildings, the Dal-Tex or the Records.

My argument goes as follows:-

(1) The Zapruder film shows Kennedy passing out of view, seemingly unhurt, at Z205, and coming into view, wounded, at Z225. From this fact, on the official view, only one conclusion is possible: that the SB strike must have been in this Zapruder range.

(2) Leading defenders of the SBt (Posner, Myers, Bugliosi) put the SB strike at Z223, when, according to Myers' interpretation of the Zapruder film, Connally's shoulders were turned 37° to the right.**

(3) The LONGITUDINAL path of the bullet through Connally's chest made an angle of 66.5° with his shoulder-line.***

This angle comes from the HSCA, and is supported by Myers on his website (www.jfkfiles.com).

(4) The Single Bullet (CE399) emerged in a near-pristine state, which means that in its passage through Connally it could not have struck any bony substance. Therefore the bullet could not have undergone any deflection: the bullet must, if the SBT is true, have passed through Connally in the same straight path that it went through Kennedy.

(5) Michael Baden, the Chairman of the HSCA medical panel, confirmed this fact (4) in conversation with Gerald Posner. ["Case Closed", ps 334/5 ]****

(6) These facts by themselves (the 37° shoulder turn, the 66.5° chest transit of the bullet, and its straight path) geometrically establish that Oswald could NOT have been the shooter.

Why?.

(7) Because ONE VERY SIMPLE POINT AND LINE DIAGRAM SHOWS that the angles involved necessitate a bullet coming into the car(rear view) from L---> R, that is from a location opposite to the TSBD.

To facilitate quick comprehension of my diagram, I have added two more diagrams. These additional diagrams are far from being a necessity, but some people may find them helpful.

(9) No mathematics is required, other knowing what an angle is, and what parallels and perpendiculars are.

(10) FIRST DIAGRAM

AB is the actual midline of the Presidential car.

The lines either side of AB are imaginary lines drawn parallel to AB.

A bullet enters the car travelling across AB in the direction Y <--- X.

It will be noticed that the bullet crosses all the imaginary lines in the same way (angle and direction) that it crosses AB.

(11) A very important point follows from this. If, on any two-dimensional, point-and-line diagram, we mark where the SB strikes Connally's shoulder, and draw through this point an imaginary line parallel to the actual midline of the car, then we can determine, from this imaginary parallel, the direction of the bullet (L ---> R, or R --- L) with reference to the midline of the car.

(12) DIAGRAM TWO Helicopter, over-head View

E is the centre of the top of Connally's head (helicopter, over-head view); passing through E, is A1B1 an imaginary line parallel to the midline of the car; CD is an imaginary line at right angles to A1B1.

EF is a section of Connally's shoulder-line. When it coincides with CD, Connally is facing the front. According to the SBt, when Connally is struck by the SB, EF makes an angle of 37° with CD.

The SB travels H --- > I, and in doing so it strikes Connally at F, his right armpit, passing through his chest at an angle of 66.5°.[Myers, as I said in (3) on his website accepts this figure from the HSCA]

The dotted line IG is the perpendicular from I to EF. It shows that as the SB travels F ---> I, it moves also from F to G, ie., with reference to Connally's shoulder's-line, it is moving R ---> L.

(13) DIAGRAM THREE

This the diagram that exonerates Oswald

This is exactly the same as Diagram Two, except that at F (where the bullet strikes Connally's right armpit), an imaginary line JK has been drawn. JK is parallel to A1B1, and therefore parallel to AB, the car's actual midline.

The construction of JK shows clearly that H ---> I, the path of the bullet, comes into the car on the left of JK --- ie., the bullet comes into the car from L ---> R.

(12 ) Therefore Oswald cannot be the shooter, because any bullet that he could have fired into the car would travel R ---> L.

QED

ENDNOTES

*The Report, despite its discussions on the bullet's trajectory, and its mention of angles and distances did not produce a single accurate, scaled diagram.

Robert Frazier offered only one diagram to the Commission (CE 556), and that was to illustrate the trajectory of the bullet from its supposed point of fire in the TSBD to Kennedy's right shoulder/neck; he did not offer any diagrams illustrating the Single Bullet trajectory across the car, even though he made definite statements about Connally's shoulder turns and the trajectory of the SB.(5H,169/74).

He told the Commission:

" ....I can only say that my opinion must be based on your assumption that there was not a deviation of the bullet through the President's body and no deviation of the bullet through the Governor's body, no deflection. On that basis then you can say that it is possible for both of them to have been hit with one bullet." (5H,173)

His failure to supply diagrams (so vitally needed where there are important references to significant angles) render his statements purely guesswork. Why the Commission did not insist on getting something better from him is a mystery.

The modern defenders of SBt (Posner,Myers and Bugliosi) disdain diagrams, believing that geometrical issues can be solved by words alone

** See Myers' website " Secrets of A Homicide"( Summary & Conclusions, Section 1, page 1/3, "Zapruder Frames" 223 & 224). Myers (referring to Frame 223) writes: "...he (Connally) is rotated 37° right ......"

*** On his website ("Summary & Conclusions", Section 2, page 2 ) Myers writes: "......the bullet was found to pass through JBC at an angle 24.5° downward and about 23.5° right to left."

[A bullet entering Connally's right armpit and moving longitudinally 23.5° leftwards would make a longitudinal angle of (90 -23.5)° ie., 66.5° with his right shoulder-line. ]

**** The Commission believed --- it was never questioned by them--- that the bullet that passed through Kennedy's back and exited just below his Adam's apple (ie in the region of his tie) passed through his body without deflection, and continued in its straight path through Connally's right armpit and in this straight path exited just below his right nipple.

It must be remembered that the Commission believed that the bullet that entered Kennedy's neck(shoulder/back), and exited just below his Adam's apple, did so in a straight path. The principles which underlay such a belief must, out of consistency, be applied to Connally.

The Report (p88), in describing the passage of the shoulder/ neck bullet through Kennedy, pointed out that the bullet struck no bone, and on this basis, by assuming a straight-line passage through Kennedy (at the believed downward angle), concluded that the bullet exited from the just below his Adam's apple.

Arlen Specter put the matter very clearly and simply. by suggesting that the bullet passed directly through Kennedy because it struck "only soft tissue and exiting on his neck"(6H,93).

Later, when hearing testimony from Frazier, Specter described the bullet that went through Kennedy's neck/ shoulder as "hitting no bones, and proceeded in a straight line"(5H,168). Two years later, in the famous "Life" magazine Assassination article of November 25th,'66 entitled "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt", Arlen Specter was even more explicit, claiming that the Single Bullet could not have undergone a deflection through Kennedy "since it struck no bone in the President's neck"

Clearly the assumption was that a high- velocity bullet would proceed through somebody in a straight line unless deflected by a bony substance. The corollary of this is that unless there is some bone matter in its path, a bullet will move through a body in a straight line.

This has a very dark consequence for Myers because he should be asked to explain what bone in Connally caused the deflection he (rather vaguely) writes about.

Arlen Specter took it for granted that the Single Bullet travelled in a straight line until it exited Connally . As did Robert Frazier who believed that for the Single Bullet theory to be credible, there had to be no deflection. (5H,172)

Dr Shaw, who operated on Connally, attending to all parts of Connally's entry and exit wounds, never made any reference to a deflection, except when, on exiting Connally, the Single Bullet took out a portion of rib, but even then, according to Dr. Shaw, there was "probably very little in the way of deflection" (6H,86; see (4H,105) ). When, on 9th November '77, Dr Shaw was interviewed by HSCA Forensic Panel, he made no reference to any deflection.(HSCA Volume 1,272/5)

A point to be emphasized is that if there had been a deflection it couldn't have passed unnoticed. The reason is that, as Dr Shaw pointed out to the WC,

"When bone is struck by a high-velocity missile it fragments and acts much like bowling pins when they are struck by a bowling ball --- they fly in all directions" (6H,88)

Had there been a deflection --- had some bone matter been struck --- then the shattered bits of bone would have been immediately noticeable.

Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the HSCA Forensic Panel, was presumably of this opinion when he told Gerald Posner in a November '92 interview that Connally's " wounds were clearly the result of one bullet passing straight through him" [ Posner, "Case Closed, Chapt. 14 (p335, paper b. edtn.; my emphasis)]. This explains why Posner does not himself accept the deflection theory. On page 477 (Appendix A, pb edtn.), he writes that the trajectory of the Single Bullet was "not significantly altered until the bullet was slightly deflected by Connally's rib."

Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

"In order to exit just below JBC's right nipple (based on JBC's position at Zapruder frame 223), the bullet would then have to follow a slightly altered course after entering the Governor's body....." (Section 2, Summary & Conclusions, "Secrets of a Homicide")

Dale Myers offers no explanation for his deflection at Z223: he simply implies that a deflection must have occurred because the Single Bullet demands it.

The diagram below illustrates what Myers is saying. The legend and the diagram are the same as in the main text, except with one difference: a bullet path H1--->I1 has been added. This is the bullet path that Myers believes in. He has to put his faith in it because he is convinced that Oswald was the shooter, and that therefore the bullet must have come into the car from R --- > L . Dale Myers believes that this R ---> L angle (the bullet path H1--->I1 ) is 10°. [On his website, he has a computer illustration of the bullet coming into the car at 100]

The problem for Dale Myers is that this bullet path only makes an angle of 43° with Connally's shoulder-line. The angle, as we have seen, should be 66.5°. Therefore the bullet, on striking Connally's right armpit must turn through 23.5° right --- Dale Myers' "slightly altered course" --- thereby giving the 'illusion' (as Dale Myers would see it )that the bullet's path has been the L ---> R trajectory H ---> I.

This diagram illustrates Dale Myers' bullet that that, on striking no bony substance,' magically' changes its direction on hitting Connally's right armpit

Interestingly, on his website, Myers only quotes the opinions of 2 doctors: Dr Charles Petty, who sat on the HSCA Forensic Panel, and the aforementioned Dr. Michael Baden.

DR. Petty was one of the HSCA Forensic Panel who interviewed Dr Shaw . In his summary of the interview to the Forensic Panel, Dr Petty expressed the opinion that Dr Shaw could not establish that all the bone damage done to Connally's lung came from the shattered rib; and Dr Petty thought that possibly, because of this seeming inadequacy, some other bone might have been struck, with a consequent deflection.(HSCA 8,149/50).

However all the other Panel members rejected Dr Petty's doubts, and Dr Baden in his testimony to the Committee made no mention of a deflection. (HSCA 1,276?7). Neither did Dr. Petty in his testimony to the HSCA Committee (HSCA Vol 1, 376/81)

The truth is that no medical authority testified either to the Warren Commission or to the HSCA that the bullet that passed through Connally underwent a deflection whilst transiting his body. l

Great, and welcome to the Forum. Can you upload the diagrams? Thanks.

____________________________________________

Alaric,

Did you intend to add something to the post (a diagram, for example), or did you just want to "bump" it to the top of the list again? Interesting post, by the way. Have you got anything to add to it?

--Thomas

____________________________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
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...