Mark!-----Last Time

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"I could do what you have already done, but the results would be the same."

P.S. This is merely the "good part"!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

With all that is now known, it would certainly appear that the first shot is one of those infamous

Known Known's

[Thomas H. Purvis]

If one fully reviews the previously provided "Comparative Analysis" as well as the "Most Probable Cause" tabulation, it should be sufficient to stand on it's own.

However, there remains a final bit of information which adds the final and total confirmation that CE399 passed through an immensely dense material prior to striking JFK in the back.

This evidence was found in that portion of the base of the copper jacket which was removed from the bullet while it was in the National Archives.

In addition to that "impact damage" to the base of the copper jacket which was previously demonstrated, there were far more important deformations to the bullet which should have given virtually anyone familiar with ballistics an idea as to how the bullet came to exist.

Due to the external pressure exerted onto the outer shell of the bullet as it passed through the dense would of the oak limb, it literally "stretched" the copper jacket backwards on the bullet.

This "stretching becomes obvious at the base of the bullet where the outer shell of the copper jacket was stretched back past the normal base of the bullet to the extent that it formed a sharp "peak" around the 360-degree circumference of the bullet.

This sharp "peak" around the circumference created a sharp edge which, when coupled with the reduced velocity of the bullet, still managed to "Punch" out a uniform hole in the shirt of JFK as well as cut the skin of JFK and create the relatively "clean-cut" edges to the wound that were found by the autopsy surgeons.

Anyone with even a common background in ballistic studies would recognize that it is physically impossible for this bullet to have achieved this deformation without having passed through an extremely dense material.

To leave such a deformation on the bullet would ultimately risk that someone with only limited knowledge would thereafter recognize and reveal this information.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Drawing which demonstrates how the copper jacket of CE399 was literally "stretched" backwards past the base of the bullet by the external pressures exerted onto the copper jacket as the bullet passed through the limb of the live oak tree.

This "stretching" of the copper jacket created a sharp peak/edge at the bullet base, which ultimately aided the bullet in it's "punch" out of the clothing of JFK as well as having the 4mm X 7mm deformed base of CE399 punch a corresponding 4mm X7mm entry wound into the back of JFK in which the entry wound had the clean-cut edges.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Mark, this was for the most part, already a "known known" to you.

Mike! Any questions, or even comments?

Does anyone actually want to hear about the second and third shot impacts again?

Short Version: They both struck JFK in the head!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Now!

If I could only get the Attorney General's Office to complete the "Questionaire" on this information and return it.

[Mike Williams]

Now!

If I could only get the Attorney General's Office to complete the "Questionaire" on this information and return it.

Tom,

Nope no questions. I am up to speed and following.

The only comment I would have is to say this is a completely possible scenario.

And hell yea I wanna hear about 2 &3.

Mike

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Now!

If I could only get the Attorney General's Office to complete the "Questionaire" on this information and return it.

Tom,

Nope no questions. I am up to speed and following.

The only comment I would have is to say this is a completely possible scenario.

And hell yea I wanna hear about 2 &3.

Mike

OK!

But many here are of the same opinion as the monkey who was having sex with the skunk and then ceased.

"Ain't got all that I want, just got all that I can stand"

P.S. Yes I fired multiple rounds through approximately 1-inch thick tree limbs.

Absolutely proved the loss of stability and bullet tumbling and yes some of the bullets completely veared off sighting alignment considerably (primarily to left of target).

Others however also remained on a relatively consistent alignment with the target.

Raised hunting deer, it was against the law to hunt with rifles in S. MS long ago, as they were known as "brush cutters", as they bullets would penetrate small brush/limbs/twigs, and still stand the possibility of striking another hunter.

So, we grew up knowing the possibility of such actions.

One of the hunting magazines, some 20 years or so ago, (American Sportsman????) did an excellent article on this in which the shooters intentionally shot small pieces of wood stakes with the targets in the background, just to see what the probability of a target hit after having first struck the wood stake was.

An excellent reference article, and although I have it packed away somewhere with all of my other "gun" stuff, I can not even recall the magazine or the year right now.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia

By the way!

In event you may have "missed" that discussion regarding the angle of entry of the bullet into JFK's back.

Merely because an end-over-end rotating projectile initially impacts with the bullet base on an upward angle of attack, does not mean that the resistence offered by the skin offers sufficient resistence to the rotating force, that it stops the projectile from driving itself downward into human flesh as a result of the impact.

For all things, there is a reason and an answer!

And, for most things, there is also a reasonable answer!

[Mike Williams]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia

By the way!

In event you may have "missed" that discussion regarding the angle of entry of the bullet into JFK's back.

Merely because an end-over-end rotating projectile initially impacts with the bullet base on an upward angle of attack, does not mean that the resistence offered by the skin offers sufficient resistence to the rotating force, that it stops the projectile from driving itself downward into human flesh as a result of the impact.

For all things, there is a reason and an answer!

And, for most things, there is also a reasonable answer!

Tom,

A question.

Since the .9 grain fragment was a cast off from the impacting projectile, are we certain that it would have had the energy to have traveled through the remainder of the tissue and exited? Is it possible that this may have been a fragment from something different, a head shot perhaps?

It would seem to me that this fragments journey would be about 6 inches at least. If the main projectile traveled in to 2" that remains for the fragment to have traveled another 4" on its own to exit. Im not sure it would retain the velocity, due to its loss in mass, to achieve this.

This so far is the only real issue I have.

Mike

[Duke Lane]

Where have all the pictures gone?

Here is a blank line:

... which is about all I'm seeing. And it ain't my browser!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Where have all the pictures gone?

Here is a blank line:

... which is about all I'm seeing. And it ain't my browser!

Duke!

As has always been the problem, we are limited in attachment space that can be downloaded and left.

In order to continue with posting drawings; photo's; etc; I much go back into the "Manage My Attachements" area and delete previously posted, in order to re-acquire download KB to continue posting.

If there is something specific which you and/or anyone else wants a look at, I will make an attempt to comply.

However, even though promised before, this is the last time that I am digging through the multitude of boxes in order to attempt to find what has now become so mixed up that I can not even find anything in them.

Speak now or forever hold your piece.

Tom

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia

By the way!

In event you may have "missed" that discussion regarding the angle of entry of the bullet into JFK's back.

Merely because an end-over-end rotating projectile initially impacts with the bullet base on an upward angle of attack, does not mean that the resistence offered by the skin offers sufficient resistence to the rotating force, that it stops the projectile from driving itself downward into human flesh as a result of the impact.

For all things, there is a reason and an answer!

And, for most things, there is also a reasonable answer!

Tom,

A question.

Since the .9 grain fragment was a cast off from the impacting projectile, are we certain that it would have had the energy to have traveled through the remainder of the tissue and exited? Is it possible that this may have been a fragment from something different, a head shot perhaps?

It would seem to me that this fragments journey would be about 6 inches at least. If the main projectile traveled in to 2" that remains for the fragment to have traveled another 4" on its own to exit. Im not sure it would retain the velocity, due to its loss in mass, to achieve this.

This so far is the only real issue I have.

Mike

It is most unlikely that it is another of those pure coincidences that the lead protrusion which was squeezed from the base of CE399 measures 4.5mm in width, and the anterior throat wound of JFK was reportedly, by most accounts, from 3mm to 5mm in size.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia

By the way!

In event you may have "missed" that discussion regarding the angle of entry of the bullet into JFK's back.

Merely because an end-over-end rotating projectile initially impacts with the bullet base on an upward angle of attack, does not mean that the resistence offered by the skin offers sufficient resistence to the rotating force, that it stops the projectile from driving itself downward into human flesh as a result of the impact.

For all things, there is a reason and an answer!

And, for most things, there is also a reasonable answer!

Tom,

A question.

Since the .9 grain fragment was a cast off from the impacting projectile, are we certain that it would have had the energy to have traveled through the remainder of the tissue and exited? Is it possible that this may have been a fragment from something different, a head shot perhaps?

It would seem to me that this fragments journey would be about 6 inches at least. If the main projectile traveled in to 2" that remains for the fragment to have traveled another 4" on its own to exit. Im not sure it would retain the velocity, due to its loss in mass, to achieve this.

This so far is the only real issue I have.

Mike

It is most unlikely that it is another of those pure coincidences that the lead protrusion which was squeezed from the base of CE399 measures 4.5mm in width, and the anterior throat wound of JFK was reportedly, by most accounts, from 3mm to 5mm in size.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/mcclella.htm

Dr. McCLELLAND - The neck wound, when I first arrived, was at this time converted into a tracheotomy incision. The skin incision had been made by Dr. Perry, and he told me---although I did not see that---that he had made the incision through a very small, perhaps less than one quarter inch in diameter wound in the neck.

Mr. SPECTER - Do you recall whether he described it any more precisely than that?

Dr. McCLELLAND - He did not at that time.

Mr. SPECTER - Has he ever described it any more precisely for you?

Dr. McCLELLAND - He has since that time.

Mr. SPECTER - And what description has he given of it since that time?

Dr. McCLELLAND - As well as I can recall, the description that he gave was essentially as I have just described, that it was a very small injury, with clear cut, although somewhat irregular margins of less than a quarter inch in diameter, with minimal tissue damage surrounding it on the skin.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0019a.htm

I have a question!

Then how was it that it was reported that the anterior neck wound was created by a fragment?

"with a fragment wound of the trachea"

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Mark; Mike; and any others who have interest in facts.

Time to close the door on this relatively simple issue, so attached is a short summary.

Along with a nice "picture" for those who seem to only understand this method of research.

Applicable is:

A. There is no "Magic"!

B. 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.

C. Politicians, not unlike Magicians, can make things disappear.

D. If one will consistantly ask the correct question of the wrong person and the incorrect question of the right person, the issues will most likely remain confused.

But of course, we all know that I was merely sent here in order to confuse everyone (with the facts)!

So, if there are any further questions in regards to the first shot, please send them to Langly.

https://www.cia.gov/