Jump to content
The Education Forum

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 1

Recommended Posts

Dismantling The Single Bullet Theory” Pt 1:- An Introduction

Why this posting:-

Like many researchers I have often looked at the “Single Bullet Theory” (hereafter referred to as SBT ). I am in the middle of a major project creating a 3D model of the Plaza, similar to that of Dale Myers. I am hoping to unveil my model next year. However, because of the model, I have spent many hours looking at the SBT, knowing that at some time I am going to have to address it with the model.

A few weeks ago I realised there could be another approach to the theory. The more I looked into it, the more I began to see the potential it offered to “dismantle” this theory. Although this is an adjunct to my model, I realised it was also a “stand alone” project and so I have decided to post it now. I am sure I will return to this when I have completed the model.

What is the posting comprised of:-

The posting is in four/five parts because I felt posted in one posting might be overkill and the structure of the project lends itself to separate sections.

The five sections are:-

a) Section 1:- an introduction.

B) Section 2:- a description of the medical issues involved of the single bullet passing through the body of JFK. Here I will define the criteria of what the bullet must do and what it is not allowed to do. The issues that are defined in this section will be further explored in the four movies in Section 3.

c) Section 3:- This section comprises of 4 10 minute videos using a professional 3D program to examine, in detail, the complex problems and issues that any bullet would have to contend with had it actually done what the theory suggests it had to. Why up to 4 videos? It will take around 20+ minutes to cover the detail I want to cover and a single video files came in over 2GB. Luckily this aspect of the project also lends itself to division into parts. One document I would suggest you have with you when you are looking at these videos is CE 385 + CE 386, the colour versions. I will be posting them in Section 2 and you might want to take a copy and keep it handy for I will be referring to them quit a bit.

d) Section 4:- This section is a criticism of Commander Humes. Once I compared my 3D models (and I have purchased 2 versions and now know that they are highly accurate representations of the human anatomy) with CE 385 I could see exactly the deliberate errors ( and yes I do believe they were deliberate ) Commander Humes introduced into the JFK human structure in order to persuade the Commission about the validity of the SBT. This section criticizes the role he took to give authority to the SBT.

e) Section 5:- “So where did the bruise on the Lung and the Right Strap come from?” The title of this section reflects my feeling, and hopefully you will feel the same, that section 3 is devastating to the SBT. That is why I have deliberately called this project “Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory.” However if the SBT did not cause the bruise on the lung and the right strap, then something else had to have done so. I have no conclusion here but I do have a few ideas to suggest for others to look into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 2_a

The Criteria for the Single Bullet theory

If I may be pardoned, the simple view of the SBT theory is that the bullet entered at X point. Where on the back it enters varies depending on who presenting their views. Dale Myers uses the definition accepted by HCSA, the 14cm measure that Commander Humes defined. Then it travels through the body and exits at Y point. Again where point Y is depends on who is presenting. Of course each demonstrates how the trajectory does, or does not, leads onto John Connally and also leads back to the sixth floor window of the TSBD.

In simplistic terms that is how the theory is generally presented. What I have not seen is a presentation of what happens when the bullet travels through the back and neck and what obstacles face it. If you look at CE 385, it is a simple entry passage and exit, that is all it describes. There is no indication as to the problems that faced the bullet as it purportedly travelled through the neck.

So what are the 7 criteria for this bullet in order to satisfy the SBT?

1) That it enters higher than the exit point. CE 385 has it just above Costa 1 R bone.

WCH Vol 2 P. 361

“We ascertained physical measurements at the time of autopsy that this wound was 14cm from the tip of the mastoid process and 14 cm from the acromion was its central point.”

2) On its journey through the throat it must scrape the top of the right lung.

MD 3 Autopsy Report P. 5

“A 5cm diamater area of purplish red discoloration and increased firmness to palpation is situated in the apical portion of the right upper lobe.” + WCH Vol 2 P. 363 “As depicted in figure 385, in the apex of the right pleural cavity there was a bruise or contusion or eccmymosis of the parietal pleura as well as a bruise of the upper portion, the most apical portion of the right lung”

3) The bullet bruised the Strap muscles on the Right Hand Side.

MD 3 Autopsy Report P. 6

“there is considerable ecchymosis of the strap muscles of the right side of the neck”

4) The bullet did not damage any other organ as it made its way through the throat.

WCH Vol 2 P. 363

“it is our opinion that the missile traversed the neck and slid between these muscles and other vital structures with a course in the neck such as the carotid artery, the jugular vein and other structures because there was no massive hemmorhage or other massive in this portion of the neck.”

5) The bullet enter the Trachea.

WCH Vol 2 P. 363

“I am unable to say how much of the defect in the trachea was made by the knife of the surgeon, and how much of the defect was made by the missile wound.”

6) To exit the body between Trachea rings 3 and 4.

MD 3 Autopsy Report P. 3

“Situated on the anterior neck at approximately the level of the third and fourth tracheal rings is 6.5cm long transverse with widely gaping irregular edges.”

+ WCH Vol 2 P. 363

“I am unable to say how much of the defect in the trachea was made by the knife of the surgeon, and how much of the defect was made by the missile wound.”

7) To have caused no damage to any other bones in that region of the body.

MD 3 Autopsy Report P. 5

“Aside from the above described skull wounds there are no significant gross skeletal abnormalities,”

+ WCH Vol 2 P. 364

“The missile, to the best of our ability to ascertain, struck no bone protuberances, no bony prominences, no bones as it traversed the Presidents body.

In his autopsy report and testimony Commander Humes listed a series of items that had been damaged and linked them to the SBT. Therefore he defined exactly what damage the bullet created in the upper body of President Kennedy. They were:-

a) an entry hole in the upper back. Taking his testimony and the chart CE 386 it would appear that position had to be above the bone Costa IR


B) it created a bruise on the top of the right lung


Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 2_b

The Criteria for the Single Bullet theory (B)

Because of image limitation I am having to break this part up

c) it then damaged the Right Strap muscle


d) it then entered the trachea. Although he does not document how it does so or where, he does state that it exited through the trachea.

So to summarise, the bullet must damage 4 areas within the upper body of President Kennedy. These four areas are the criteria that define what this bullet is allowed to do and must do. If when examining the path this bullet took it can’t be shown to be able to damage any one of the 4 criteria, then by definition something else did and that also means that the SBT is invalid. This is so, because in his testimony and in the Autopsy report Commander Humes laid down the criteria that defined this bullet and its path and what this bullet had to damage.

What is the bullet not allowed to damage?

Answer: everything else.

That includes the bones, the arteries, the blood vessels, any muscle other than the Right strap muscle.

So to summarise, if in a 3D analysis it is clear that the bullet would have to damage one of these in its attempt to get from the back to exiting the trachea then that would invalidate the theory. This is so because in his testimony and the autopsy report Commander Humes stated that these area were undamaged.

This is a view of the skeleton from the angle of the bullets entry. The brown strap is the right strap muscle. The bullet must damage this as well as entering and exiting the trachea. I can’t see how it can do that.

See image below. This is a similar view with the vein structure in place.

Although in the first image there was a line of sight to the trachea, that line of sight is now blocked.

The problem for the SBT is that the bullet cannot damage anything other than the four criteria listed above. Nor is the argument that the bullet hit a bone and was deflected on to is correct course. That is forbidden because Commander Humes stated that no bones were damaged. Other than the four criteria listed nothing else can be damaged. If the bullet damages something else that invalidates the theory.

So what in essence is the problem? It is this. On its journey from the back to the front must must damage the four criteria and it must not damage any other organ in that area.


So looking specifically:-

i) If the bullet is able to find a trajectory to be able to bruise the top of the lung, how can it (from the trajectory) then go on to damage the right strap muscle?


ii) If the bullet able to find a trajectory to be able to bruise the right strap muscle, how can (from that trajectory) then go on to damage the lung?


iii) What trajectory would the bullet have to find to be able to miss all the veins and arteries?

The SBT glosses over all of this. It is only when you look at it in detail that you see the impossibility of the theory. All attention has been on the external trajectories. The internal trajectory has been all but ignored.

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 3_a

The Criteria Governing The SBT Internal Trajectory

The Videos (a)

Comment on Photobucket:- I used Photobucket to upload the videos and had considerable problems with size. However when I fixed that I went and forgot about the 10 minute restriction. I breach that on some and loose some of the end of the videos. Videos 3 + 4 appears to have suffered the greatest cut, however the main information is still there. I will leave these versions at present but will re-do them and link the new versions to this document. Sorry about that.

This section includes the four videos that explore the “Single Bullet Theory” from within a 3D model of the human body. It is my understanding that these programs are very accurate. I even bought a second one to be sure that what I was seeing in the first is exactly what I was seeing on the other. I was concerned that I was getting a false image. I understand that what these programs do is to ensure that aspect of the body is in its correct size and proportion. What I mean is that although my body is different from that model as well as being different from the body of JFK the proportional size of, lets say my lung, is the same as in the model. Also where the lung is in my body is the same as where the lung is in the model. It is in that sense these are highly accurate models.

I am not a trained medical practitioner and I may have made mistakes through these presentations, although I have tried very hard not to. For that I apologise. However I firmly believe that the central concern of the videos: the complexity and impossibility of any missile traversing the body AND doing the damage to the specific organs it is required to AS WELL as missing any other organs, I believe the videos verify that point.

Video 1 looks at structures in the body and relate those structures to what we see in CE 385 and CE 386.


Video 2 looks at the various trajectories for the SBT and outlines their pitfalls. Specifically it also introduces the difficulty that the right strap muscle creates for the Single Bullet theory.


Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 3_b

The Criteria Governing The SBT Internal Trajectory

The Videos (B)

Comment on Photobucket:- I used Photobucket to upload the videos and had considerable problems with size. However when I fixed that I went and forgot about the 10 minute restriction. I breach that on some and loose some of the end of the videos. Videos 3 + 4 appears to have suffered the greatest cut, however the main information is still there. I will leave these versions at present but will re-do them and link the new versions to this document. Sorry about that.

Video 3 introduces the circulatory structures and highlights the increased impossibility of an already impossible task.


Video 4 Summarizes what has been attempted through the videos as well as highlighting the difference between the external trajectories and internal ones.


Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 4

The Role Of Commander Humes In Giving Authority To The SBT

Towards the end of his presentation on the Single Bullet Theory, Dale Myers comments:

“So it is not a Magic Bullet at all. It is not even a Single Bullet theory, in my opinion. It is a Single Bullet fact.”

To a very large extent, the reason many consider the SBT to be a “fact”, is in due in no small part to the contribution of Commander James Humes. In what is close to fifty years since the assassination, during that time Commander Humes has been the subject of considerable criticism; much of it, in my opinion, undeserved. I do not see him as an active participant in the cover-up like Douglas Horne sees him. I tend to agree with David Lifton that he was someone caught up in a situation that was way over his head. I think Lifton is right when he suggests that Humes tried, on occasions, to send signals that would lead to the truth. On a number of occasions he suggests that the actual photographs taken at the autopsy might be more accurate than the three drawings he brings. WCH Vol 2 P. 369 + WCH Vol 2 P. 371 + WCH Vol 2 P. 372

However, whatever his reasons may have been, that does not erase the part he played in ensuring that this “theory” would be seen by all as a “fact.” And for that he is solely and totally responsible.

Commander Humes was, first and foremost, a surgeon and most of all he was the surgeon who carried out the autopsy on President Kennedy. He knew very well the condition of the throat and the position of all the veins and arteries therein, because he had examined them and pronounced them to be intact. WCH Vol 2 P. 363 It did not help that he had also not traced the throat wound because he was unaware there was even one there at all. And unable to own up to that he wrote into the Autopsy Report, a report that declares the had indeed thoroughly examined the body. Like it or not, that is now the official autopsy record. It does not matter that Commander Humes did not examine the throat wound, the report says he did. And that is now the official document of the autopsy of President Kennedy.

Commander Humes, better than anyone else, clearly knew what difficulties any bullet would have had to traverse if it had, indeed, travelled from the back to the front of the body. Knowing, and declaring, that there was no damage to the upper arteries of the body he will have known how unlikely it was that any bullet could have travelled through that area of body from back to front and yet cause no damage.

Although it was Harold Rydberg who drew the drawings for the Warren Commission, it was Commander Humes who gave him all the data. Although Commander Humes had no part in the actual drawing, the finished drawings were as much his drawings, just as though he had drawn them himself. No data got on these drawings that had not been supplied to Rydberg by Commander Humes himself. That includes the position of the right lung. When asked about the data that was provided to Harold Rydberg, Humes said “We had made certain physical measurements of the wounds, and of their position on the body of the late President, and we provided these and supervised directly Mr. Rydberg in making these drawings.” (emphasis added) WCH Vol 2 P. 350 So he suggests that what we see in CE 385 is a careful replication of what was seen on the body of the president. Re-positioning the lung was crucial. It had already been noted in the autopsy as having been damaged and if that could not be explained by the SBT, then it meant something else had to have caused it. That is why CE 385 has a cutaway: to explain not just the path of the bullet, but how the lung could have been damaged.

The line of trajectory, in CE 385, is the only one that Commander Humes could create that would allow a bullet to strike the back and exit between the 3rd and 4th trachea rings. And here is the problem about the lung. In its natural position this bullet’s trajectory would not have come in contact with the right lung. If it is essential to the SBT that the lung is bruised, and it is, then that is why the lung had to be moved up from its normal position. But since, in its natural position, the lung could not have been damaged then that means that whatever did damage the lung, it was not the SBT.

In addition, CE 385 does not illustrate the numerous veins and arteries that are in this bullet’s path. The “lie” of CE 385 is that this bullet had no obstacles to overcome as it makes its way from the back to the front. When in fact it has significant and impossible obstacles to overcome. The exclusion of this data was the responsibility of Commander Humes. Nothing got into these drawings or was omitted from these drawing that had not first been decided by Commander Humes. In that sense Commander Humes had total ownership of these drawings.

And this is the criticism of Commander Humes. When these drawings were presented to the Commission and taken into evidence on Monday 14th March 1964, Commander Humes knew that he had moved the position of the lung in order to ensure that it could be damaged by the bullet as it passed through the body. He knew if the SBT was not responsible for this damage, then something else was. And that would have to be explained. He also knew that, by excluding the circulatory structure from the diagram he was hiding the impossibility of the SBT. Had any of the Commission seen the vein and artery structures in that part of the throat they would have been bound to comment on it. And those questions and comments would have led to the downfall of The Single Bullet Theory.

And so with these drawings, especially CE 385, Commander Humes is responsible for creating the “lie” of the Single Bullet Theory. A lie, that many years later, Dale Myers was able to refer to as a “fact.”

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 5

So if the Right Lung and Right Strap Muscle were not damaged by the Single Bullet, how were they damaged?

That is the “Sixty Four Thousand Dollar question.” I don’t have ready answers to this question. It is only right and proper to state that there is one argument as how this damage could have occurred. It was put forward by David Lifton in his book “Best Evidence”: his theory is that their damage were partly a consequence of the body being altered and bullets being removed. This argument is further explored by Douglas Horne in his books “Inside the ARRB.” In these books he suggests that Commander Hume’s was a more active participant in the cover-up.

Like the wound to the back, there are no easy explanations to this wound. No bullets were found in the body to explain these wounds, yet the wounds were there all the same.

One problem I see is that if you were shooting at the President from the north side of the plaza, in the “Grassy Knoll” area, you would normally expect that the left lung would be more likely to be damaged because of the trajectory and the position of JFK in the car. You would not expect the right lung to be damaged. Unless JFK were turned to his right, it is more logical that if any lung is to be injured it is more likely to be the left lung.

The natural position to injure the right side of JFK would be if you were shooting from the South Knoll, and the Post Office car park. In the program “Inside the Car”, Gary Mack dismissed this as a potential site for a shooter. Although I tend to agree with his overall decision, he did not position his gunman in the position that gunman would have been in had there been a gunman there. He has his gunman positioned outside the car park and a couple of feet lower than the car park. Had the gunman been in the Post Office car park he would have been in a higher location than Gary Mack has his gunman.


Had there been a gunman there he would most likely have been behind the fence rather than in front. Also there is no evidence that had a gunman been there he would have been lying down, as is suggested by the marksman Gary employed. True the Post Office Car Park did not have a wooden fence, like the railroad one, but there were a few trees, outside the car park, to hide behind. The east corner of the car park seems quite secluded. Also that area of the car park is hidden from windows in the front of the building. It would not be impossible for a gunman to be positioned there.


My model is not completed at the moment so I can’t judge exactly what kind of target such a gunman would have acquired. However, even though there are the above weaknesses in Gary’s argument, I tend to agree that a throat shot from this angle is probably out. Pity, because this position is the natural trajectory and angle to be able to wound the right lung and strap.

That means that the shot which caused this damage, however illogically, had to have come from the south of the plaza and the grassy knoll area there.

So what can we say about these wounds. Well:-

i) They occurred before Z 224

ii) They were not a consequence of the Single Bullet theory. Playing “devil’s advocate” it would be really convenient had they been a consequence of it. But they were not.

iii) They were not a consequence of the head shot, because that had yet to happen.

iv) And these two organs were damaged during the assassination. They are not figments of the imagination. Therefore they have to be explained.

The only suggestion I can offer and I will examine it when the model is up and running. Maybe the shot occurred at a point when Kennedy head was turned to his right. Thereby allowing a side on shot to the throat. The point has to be reasonable close to Z 224/225 otherwise we would have seen his reaction earlier. The only moment I can point to is around the Z 190 area.

As I said at the beginning I can offer no solutions here. All I am able to say is that their damage was not a consequence of the SBT. Yet they were damaged during the assassination. What needs to be done is to determine when they were damaged.

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

(James, I noticed that the different threads in this series are already scattered over two pages of the forum. If you would like, I will post quotes of your series in the space I have reserved here for them, so that they are in sequence, when I have time to do it, tonight. If not, I will delete all my posts in this thread.)


Thank you very much. Please do.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Six days ago I posted a series on the SBT. From what I can see it has been looked at 347 times and yet there has been no response.

The SBT suggests that, aside from an entry and exit wound, only the top of the lung and a strap muscle was bruised.

The series raised the idea that had a bullet traversed such a path much more damage would have to have been inflicted on the body.

I have the highest respect for my fellow members of this forum, but I am surprised that no one has made any major comment on an issue that I feel is the real weakness of the SBT.


Edited by James R Gordon
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

  • Create New...