Who's telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Are you saying Clint Hill is wrong about the back of Kennedy's head being blown off, and the Z-film right?

Hi Daniel; Thank you for asking, but I most warn that I do not pretend to expertise in either the film or the medical evidence, and in particular I do not have the Dallas medical evidence at my fingertips.

My understanding is that, on the day of the shooting, the Dallas doctors (Kemp Clark comes to mind) thought the head wound was TANGENTIAL, and I have to say that the wound in the Zapruder film could be seen as a tangential wound, were it not for the FORCE with which the bullet drove JFK backwards. It has been pointed out here that Clint Hill had a limited view, and was already in motion, at Z313. Hill was also wearing sunglasses, and i can't imagine that these helped him see more clearly.

Our esteemed Statesman Josiah Thompson discusses the head-snap in detail in his classic SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS, and all alternate explanations for the head snap (Jet Effect, etc.) have been disproven.

Of course Kemp Clark had not read SIX SECONDS, and had not seen the ZFilm. I believe that, if Kemp Clark had seen the ZFIlm, he would not have guessed that the wound was tangential.

Clark's second guess was an exit from the throat wound. Again, the ZFIlm shows that the throat wound clearly happened earlier in time.

But the short answer to your question, Daniel, is that I do not trust the reliability of eyewitness memory as much as some folk here seem to do thus I do not rely on Clint Hill's memory, or on the memories of Dallas Doctors or nurses recalled 20-odd years after the fact.

I do rely on the Zapruder film, which Abe Zapruder authenticated under oath, in open court.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Which is why he has become such an embattled figure.

Ha Ha! Mr. Di Eugenio is a barrel of laughs today!

[Daniel Gallup]

[but the important thing to note about what I did there is this:

Lifton took the FBI document at face value!

This is shocking. Everyone knows that FBI reports are skeletal in nature. They are never in depth. Many times they are hearsay, and therefore unreliable. I know this from experience. As do many others.

Lifton doesn't need my poor defense; however much Lifton took the FBI report at face value, he checked it out with the FBI, who related that Sibert and ONeill recorded what Humes said. Then the FBI said that this information turned out to be wrong. Sibert said this directly to Law (ITEOH, p. 144). Lifton asks, Why wasn't the disavowal also in the FBI medical report? A good question, IMO. Now, which is more likely to be true, an excited utterance by Humes at the onset of the autopsy that something is amiss, or a conclusion later that in fact all was well, given all the strange goings on that night, with Humes being between a rock and a hard place? Best, Daniel

[Daniel Gallup]

Are you saying Clint Hill is wrong about the back of Kennedy's head being blown off, and the Z-film right?

Hi Daniel; Thank you for asking, but I most warn that I do not pretend to expertise in either the film or the medical evidence, and in particular I do not have the Dallas medical evidence at my fingertips.

My understanding is that, on the day of the shooting, the Dallas doctors (Kemp Clark comes to mind) thought the head wound was TANGENTIAL, and I have to say that the wound in the Zapruder film could be seen as a tangential wound, were it not for the FORCE with which the bullet drove JFK backwards. It has been pointed out here that Clint Hill had a limited view, and was already in motion, at Z313. Hill was also wearing sunglasses, and i can't imagine that these helped him see more clearly.

Our esteemed Statesman Josiah Thompson discusses the head-snap in detail in his classic SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS, and all alternate explanations for the head snap (Jet Effect, etc.) have been disproven.

Of course Kemp Clark had not read SIX SECONDS, and had not seen the ZFilm. I believe that, if Kemp Clark had seen the ZFIlm, he would not have guessed that the wound was tangential.

Clark's second guess was an exit from the throat wound. Again, the ZFIlm shows that the throat wound clearly happened earlier in time.

But the short answer to your question, Daniel, is that I do not trust the reliability of eyewitness memory as much as some folk here seem to do thus I do not rely on Clint Hill's memory, or on the memories of Dallas Doctors or nurses recalled 20-odd years after the fact.

I do rely on the Zapruder film, which Abe Zapruder authenticated under oath, in open court.

Thanks for the clarification. It is clear to me that all students of the case have a mental hierarchy concerning the evidence in this case as a means to resolving conflicts in the record. That is, some evidence trumps others when the conflicts become apparent. I think that's why we need to continue to study the reliability of all evidence that is set out on the table. But thanks for the replay, and best, Daniel

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Cliff,

Your hypothesis states that it was planned, in advance, to eliminate the patsy, and to do so promptly. (Agreed).

Further, that not doing so was a foul-up of considerable importance. (Agreed).

I am in general agreement with David that the timeline shows that Kellerman's seizing the body (and the simultaneeous seizure of the limousine, which constituted an integral element of the crime scene) was planned well ahead.

It seems to me though, that the silencing of Lee Oswald took place more or less on schedule. I submit that the plotters wanted to allow enough time to elapse for the press to buy into Oswald as a plausible assassin, and by Sunday morning the press was just about convinced, having heard only police propaganda.

Unlike some researchers, I see no good evidence of a plan to kill Oz in the Texas Theater.

[Ron Ecker]

I am in general agreement with David that the timeline shows that Kellerman's seizing the body (and the simultaneeous seizure of the limousine, which constituted an integral element of the crime scene) was planned well ahead.

I think it's quite possible that Kellerman didn't seize the body, as in keeping it out of Rose's hands. It's quite possible that Kellerman was determined, using gunplay if necessary, to get that casket out of Parkland because there was no body in it. Imagine the potential embarrassment if it were opened. "Hey, look, we've lost the body!"

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Sadly, this is typical of what one finds in the conspiracy literature. While I don't expect to change the minds of those utterly and permanently convinced there was an exit wound on the back of Kennedy's head, I do hope to curtail the spread of such smoke. Please help me in this cause.

Glad to help, Patrick. Sorry I'm late.

I am not ready to buy the theory of an entrance in the back of the head OR an exit through the throat, but I am a great admirer of your work on the case and, in particular, your dispassionate and logical approach to the evidence. The clown on the basketball court is not what convinced me, though it is one for the books, but I have always thought that you are probably correct about the angle of view of the Dallas doctors who later recalled a large wound in the back of the head.

My own view is that there was one head wound, as seen on the Zfilm, that this was caused by an explosive bullet from the grassy knoll, per Ayoobs analysis which is on your website.

Some researchers who believe the fatal shot came from the knoll seem to think that in order to prove their case they need to show an exit wound in the back of the head. As Ayoob makes clear, an exploding bullet from the knoll would not neccessarily exit. I would add that, If it did exit, surely it would be on the LEFT REAR of the head.

PS: Check out this thread. You may find it helpful in using the forum software.

http://educationforu...opic=15256&st=0

[Cliff Varnell]

Lifton took the FBI document at face value!

This is shocking. Everyone knows that FBI reports are skeletal in nature. They are never in depth. Many times they are hearsay, and therefore unreliable. I know this from experience. As do many others.

Jim,

As long as Sibert and O'Neill followed the proper FBI protocols in their reporting there is no reason to summarily dismiss their report on the JFK autopsy.

Unless you want to argue that FBI reports are 100% wrong every time, the fact that pre-autopsy surgery to the head appeared in the FBI report raises the serious possibility that such surgery occurred. This element of doubt is sufficient to impeach the rest of the head wound(s) evidence, especially in light of how contradictory the photos, x-rays and witness statements are.

Discussion of JFK's head wounds doesn't deserve 1/10th of the timber and bandwidth devoted to it.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Cliff Varnell

[Bill Miller]

My own view is that there was one head wound, as seen on the Zfilm, that this was caused by an explosive bullet from the grassy knoll, per Ayoobs analysis which is on your website.

Some researchers who believe the fatal shot came from the knoll seem to think that in order to prove their case they need to show an exit wound in the back of the head. As Ayoob makes clear, an exploding bullet from the knoll would not neccessarily exit. I would add that, If it did exit, surely it would be on the LEFT REAR of the head.

I believe it was Dr. Clark that said that if a bullet passed through the brain in a straight path that it will shed little energy, thus exiting opposite of the entry wound. But if a bullet hits on a 'tangent' that it will shed a lot of energy and can change its path before exiting. If this one possibility is true, then the avusled bones on the right side of JFK's head could be the result of a tangent strike.

Another possibility is that the bullet had been scored. This would cause the bullet to break apart as it enters the skull and the force of any given fragment which would of course be moving in any direction once the missile breaks apart could have offered enough force to blow open the back of the head.

Just something to consider.

The large bulge on the back of the head in the Zapruder and Nix films indicate that the bones were sprung open in a rearward direction.

Bill

Edited January 24, 2011 by Bill Miller

[Pat Speer]

Thank you for reminding us, David. This is another smoking gun.

I no longer have my BEST EVIDENCE video. Is this interview available on the BE video or some other video?

Is a transcript available?

Ray, I have not done anything with my Doyle Williams interview--yet. I a number of others as well (e.g., Vince Drain). I believe I had them transcribed. Will have to check.

DSL

I, for one, would find the Drain interview most interesting, should it be made available. I thank you in advance.

[Pat Speer]

Okay, now, that's eight witnesses, all of whom said the kill shot impacted on the side of the President's head, and none of whom noted an explosion or wound on the back of his head.

And that is what we see in the Zapruder film.

As Ayoob and other firearms experts have pointed out, this is consistent with an EXPLODING BULLET from the grassy knoll. An exploding BULLET will not neccesarily leave an exit wound, according to Ayoob.

Massad Ayoob, The JFK Assassination: A Shooter's Eye View, American Handgunner, March/April 1993. "The explosion of the President's head as seen in frame 313 of the Zapruder film is simply not characteristic of a full metal-jacket rifle bullet traveling at 2,200 fps or less. It is far more consistent with an explosive wound of entry with a small-bore, hyper-velocity rifle bullet traveling between 3,000 and 4,000 fps, and probably toward the higher end of that scale ...An explosive wound of entry occurs when a highly liquid area of the body, such as the brain, is struck by a high velocity round. The tissue swells violently during the microseconds of the bullet's passing, and seeks the line of least resistance. That least resistance is the portal of the entry wound that appeared a microsecond before, and the bullet will not bore an exit hole to relieve the pressure for another microsecond or two--perhaps not at all if the bullet fragments inside the brain. If the cataclysmic cranial injury inflicted on Kennedy was indeed an explosive wound of entry, the source of the shot would have had to be forward of the Presidential limousine, to its right, and slightly above...the area of the grassy knoll."

and the bullet will not bore an exit hole to relieve the pressure for another microsecond or two--perhaps not at all if the bullet fragments inside the brain.

THE X-RAYS (CONTROVERSIAL TO BE SURE) SHOW A FRAGMENTING BULLET HIT THE BRAIN.

Raymond, correct me if I am wrong. Are you saying Clint Hill is wrong about the back of Kennedy's head being blown off, and the Z-film right (that all the ejecta left from the top and front, and presumably,there was no exit wound as described by the doctors at Parkland)? Notice I am speaking directly to the heading of this thread, with apologies to all those active in the subthreads contained herein. Thanks in advance for clarification. Best, Daniel

Daniel, it is plain silly to claim Hill's recollections of the head wound are grossly at odds with the Z-film. They are slightly at odds with the z-film, but far more at odds with the recollections of those claiming the wound was a blow-out on the back of the head.

In other words, if you wanna believe Hill is accurate, then you gotta assume Crenshaw and those pushing the accuracy of his recollections are in error.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

t's quite possible that Kellerman was determined, using gunplay if necessary, to get that casket out of Parkland because there was no body in it.

Lifton considered this possibility at page 673 of BEST EVIDENCE, as I am sure you are aware. It seems that either Jackie or Aubrey Rike & Peanuts Maguire (or all three) remained in trauma room one with the coffin containing the body until it was wheeled out to the ambulance.

Was the decision to prevent a local autopsy and remove the body only made AFTER the arrest of Lee Oswald, as Cliff suggests?

According to Clint Hill, that decision was made shortly after 1.30, when the Secret Service confirmed that JFK was dead. Hill attributes the order for a casket to Ken O'Donnell, though this is more likely to be at the urging of Secret Service than the urging of Jackie, or even O'Donnell's own initiative, since both he and Jackie must have been in a state of complete shock.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=1135&relPageId=757

BEST EVIDENCE continues, (pp673-4):

[A]t 1.40 Vernon O'Neal arrived at Parkland with the ....casket. ...

....At 1.58, according to Secret Service reports, the casket was wheeled from the emergency room and put aboard the O'Neal hearse.

During that 18 minute period the argument erupted with the Dallas coroner, and FBI agent Doyle Williams was ejected by Kellerman & Co.

I cannot find the time of the arrest of lee Oswald, but the first TV mention of an arrest was at 1.49 CST.

1:49 "A Dallas policeman has been shot to death two miles from the scene of the assassination. A suspect is now in custody"

http://www.jfk-online.com/dbmedcovlho.html

If the request for a casket was the first move in a plan to prevent a local autopsy, then it appears that plan was already in motion before Lee Oswald was arrested.

[Cliff Varnell]

t's quite possible that Kellerman was determined, using gunplay if necessary, to get that casket out of Parkland because there was no body in it.

Lifton considered this possibility at page 673 of BEST EVIDENCE, as I am sure you are aware. It seems that either Jackie or Aubrey Rike & Peanuts Maguire (or all three) remained in trauma room one with the coffin containing the body until it was wheeled out to the ambulance.

Was the decision to prevent a local autopsy and remove the body only made AFTER the arrest of Lee Oswald, as Cliff suggests?

According to Clint Hill, that decision was made shortly after 1.30, when the Secret Service confirmed that JFK was dead. Hill attributes the order for a casket to Ken O'Donnell, though this is more likely to be at the urging of Secret Service than the urging of Jackie, or even O'Donnell's own initiative, since both he and Jackie must have been in a state of complete shock.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=1135&relPageId=757

BEST EVIDENCE continues, (pp673-4):

[A]t 1.40 Vernon O'Neal arrived at Parkland with the ....casket. ...

....At 1.58, according to Secret Service reports, the casket was wheeled from the emergency room and put aboard the O'Neal hearse.

During that 18 minute period the argument erupted with the Dallas coroner, and FBI agent Doyle Williams was ejected by Kellerman & Co.

I cannot find the time of the arrest of lee Oswald, but the first TV mention of an arrest was at 1.49 CST.

1:49 "A Dallas policeman has been shot to death two miles from the scene of the assassination. A suspect is now in custody"

http://www.jfk-online.com/dbmedcovlho.html

If the request for a casket was the first move in a plan to prevent a local autopsy, then it appears that plan was already in motion before Lee Oswald was arrested.

Well done, Raymond. The casket was ordered at 1:30 and arrived at 1:40. News of Oswald's arrest was out by 1:49.

But wouldn't a casket be arranged as a matter of course once the man was dead?

And ordering a casket isn't the same thing as ordering departure. When was the decision to leave made? Recall that at 1:15 Johnson told Kilduff that he waiting to see if it was a Communist conspiracy. Maybe Oswald's arrest answered that question for him?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Thomas's study indicates (if memory serves) a muzzle velocity for the behind-the-fence-weapon in the range that Ayoob specifies.

JT

Tink,

According to Don Thomas the acoustic fingerprint of the knoll shot indicates a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,350 to 2,550 feet per second.

Ayoob:

"The explosion of the President's head as seen in frame 313 of the Zapruder film is simply not characteristic of a full metal-jacket rifle bullet traveling at 2,200 fps or less. It is far more consistent with an explosive wound of entry with a small-bore, hyper-velocity rifle bullet traveling between 3,000 and 4,000 fps, and probably toward the higher end of that scale .

No cigar for Don THomas, I fear. His muzzle velocity calculations seem way too low by Ayoob's standards.

As you may recall, Josiah, I do not share in the Acoustic Faith, whose disciples claim that three shots were fired from the TSBD. There is good reason to believe that 399 was planted, as you yourself suggested back in 1966 in the New York Review of Books

To the Editors:

Permit me to bolster R. H. Popkin’s brilliant reconstruction of the Kennedy assassination (July 28) by adding to his account certain facts which have just recently come to light.

(a) Commission Exhibit 399—Popkin states that “there is no evidence that the Commission could obtain anything like pristine No. 399 in any of its tests.” Actually, there is one test performed by the Commission which did produce two bullets virtually identical with 399. In order to get control rounds for use in ballistics comparison tests Special Agent Frazier test-fired two bullets from Oswald’s rifle (3:437). Although Frazier indicates only that he test-fired the rifle to get these rounds, it is standard ballistics practice to obtain such rounds by firing into a long tube of cotton waste. When we look at the two bullets so produced (Commission Exhibit 572; 17:258), we find they appear to be virtually identical with 399. Although the Commission appears not to have realized it, a test had been performed which indicated quite clearly that 399 was a plant, that its most likely source was the test-firing of Oswald’s gun into cotton.

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/1966/oct/06/the-second-oswald-1/

If 399 was planted, then why not the limo fragments?

If 399 was planted, the acoustic claim of three shots from the TSBD looks suspect, even apart from the findings of the National Academy of Science.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

But wouldn't a casket be arranged as a matter of course once the man was dead?

THe answer would be Yes, in the case of death by natural causes. In the case of a violent homicide, most DECIDEDLY NOT, unless someone had something to hide!

When was the decision to leave made?

THe timeline strongly suggests that the decision to remove the body was already being implemented --in the form of the struggle with Theron Ward & Doyle Williams -- even before the arrest was announced. It does not look like a sudden reaction to news of the arrest. The process began with the ordering of the casket.