Dismantling the Single Bullet Theory Pt 5

[James R Gordon]

Pat,

Thanks for the article. It is exactly the kind of information I was looking for.

Although your focus is proving how illogical the idea of the SBT is, you still raise very important questions for the throat wound.

Question 1:- Your references on the kind of damage, that even the Oswald rifle could achieve and it was not the most high powered rifle, is it your position that it was not that kind of rifle that created the throat wound? I have been grappling with the question of how such a bullet flying at such speed first did not go right through the throat and second did not create much more damage. I discount Humes comment about “slid between”. I agree it was an outrageous comment but it was because Humes knew there had been no such wound and he also knew the kind of damage such a bullet would incur had it really inflicted such a wound.

Although Malcolm Perry, when talking to the HCSA, suggests that although he certainly did not examine the throat area he did see sufficient to have the impression that major damage had not be inflicted in the throat.

If he is right, and I am not saying he is, there is a real dilemma. The kind of damage you describe ought to have taken place, yet appears not to have happen. Yet, at the same time, experienced doctors, first impressions ( and yes I agree there was nothing more than that ) were that the wound they were looking at was a bullet wound.

Do you have any thoughts on this.

Question 2:- I had noted Perry’s comment about the laceration to the right side of the trachea as well as Carrico’s comment. Taken together it suggests that something had to have passed in that direction. You may have noted the reference I gave from Perry who suggested that it appeared to him that there had been no damage to the main arteries. So whatever did pass in that direction appears not to have created the kind of damage you so excellently describe.

I have read suggestions that it could be a low powered velocity shot. In one way that makes sense, but then I am forced to ask why anyone would want to bring a low powered gun when intending to assassinate the President of the United States?

Do you have any thoughts on this?

Question 3:- Finally there is the directional issue. It is clear from all the evidence that the right side of Kennedy was injured. I.e. the right lung, the right strap muscle, the right side of the trachea.

If the shot was coming from the North Knoll, that position is left of Kennedy’s position. Therefore the natural area to be damaged by such a shot ought to be the left side. But it is Kennedy's right side.

Now there are two moments: one around Z 160 and the other around Z 190 when Kennedy’s neck is turned to his right. However his body is still facing forward and I am not sure any shot, no matter how far Kennedy's neck is turned, would have a bullet travel down the right side. I am wondering if, even in that situation, the bullet would not still progress down the left side.

The ideal position in order to damage the right organs in Kennedy would be the South knoll. But I can’t get my head around the idea that anyone would be positioned over there.

Do you have any ideas on this?

Thanks for the article. I’ll follow up your references as well as the full chapter on your site.

James.

[James R Gordon]

Sounds like Flechette, to me...

Cliff,

I agree there is a logic to the Flechette idea. But from where could it be fired from?

At a rough guess the angle of decline within JFK's body will be something like 15-20º. So that suggests the gunman has to be on a higher plane than street level.

If your position is the North Knoll, I am not sure that the area damaged would be JFK's right side. There is the turn of the road at say Z190 as well as the position of Kennedy in the car at that moment. All would suggest that logical area to be damaged would be the left side as opposed to the right.

To give some idea what I mean I have drawn a graphic on Don Roberdeau's map. The red arrow represents the direction JFK's head is turned. the black arrow the direction of the car and by implication the direction JFK is seated. His body is not turned, it is just his head. The blue arrow is a line drawn from the GKS. As can be seen were a shot taken from here the damage should be to JFK's left side and not his right, which was damaged. If Badgemman were used the angle would be worse. See below

That brings up back to the South Knoll, and who would use a Flechette from the South Knoll?

James.

Edited June 3, 2012 by James R Gordon

[Cliff Varnell]

Sounds like Flechette, to me...

Cliff,

I agree there is a logic to the Flechette idea. But from where could it be fired from?

I used to think Black Dog Man was a shooter dressed as a cop. Maybe he was. Or maybe she was a young black woman with a baby in one hand and a bottle of coke in the other. Rosemary Willis described BDM as a "conspicuous" person who disappeared in an instant. Shooter making his escape -- civilian ducking for cover?

I'd entertain a shot from behind the picket fence north of BDM (JFK's right).

[James R Gordon]

Cliff,

When I made that last posting, I was just casually thinking about where the bullet could have come from and decided to post this concern. Soon after I began to regret I had made such a statement. However, since then, I have not been able to get the thought out of my mind. If the shot came from the North Knoll, which is certainly what I would have considered to be the natural home for such a shot, the more I keep asking why was the right side of JFK injured and not the left side.

Since that posting I have done some reading about what this injury looked like when Kennedy arrived at Parkland. I was wanting to see if the information could help explain why the right side was damaged. However as a result of the reading I am now changing my position regarding damage to arteries and blood vessels. I now agree with you that indeed they were damaged.

My reasons are as follows:-

Here is what Malcolm Perry said amount of blood in the upper chest area:-

1. “As I noted, I did not see any underlying injury of the pleura, the coverings of the lungs, or the lungs themselves. But in the presence of this large amount of blood in this area, one would be unable to detect small injuries to the underlying structures.” H3 P. 371

First, he makes it clear that the amount of blood in this area makes it very difficult to see the smaller injuries.

2. “I noticed there was free air and blood in the mediastinum and although I could not see any evidence, myself any evidence, of it in the pleura of the lung the presence of this blood in this area could be indicative of the underlying condition.” H3 P. 370

Second, the middle section of the chest, the “mediastinum”, was full of blood.

3. “There was there was so much blood that the tissues were discolored.” H 6 P. 11

Third, and this is the critical evidence for me, within around 10 minutes there was so much blood in the area it had actually discolored body tissues.

4. “This bruising, as you describe, would have been obscured by the fact that there was a large amount of blood, hematoma, present in the neck and the mediastinum and hence all the blood tissues were covered by this blood.” H3 P. 381

Specter asks Perry whether he saw any bruising of the neck muscles. Perry replies that there was so much blood it was impossible to see whether they had been bruised.

5. “Mr. SPECTER. Was there blood in that area which tended to obscure your view?

Dr. PERRY. It was exuding blood during that procedure and thus I did not examine it very closely.” H3 P. 388

Perry says that the blood that was flowing made it difficult to see and he did not examine further.

6. “There was no evidence of a hemothorax or a pneumothorax through my examination; only it is sufficient this could (not) have been observed because of the free blood in the mediastinum.” H3 P. 832

There is a typo error here. It is clear that Perry must have said “not”, without the word his sentence makes no sense. So what he says is that his examination of the upper chest area was inhibited by the amount of blood.

Taken together, it is clear to me that a vast amount of blood was in the area, and enough to discolor body tissues within around the 10 minutes between the assassination and when Perry did the tracheotomy. That makes it clear to me that arteries had to have been damaged. Humes had to have both observed it as well known that and therefore was aware he was lying when he declared in both testimony and in the autopsy protocol that they had not been damaged. It is true that Malcolm Perry, in his testimony also said they had not been damaged, but that may be because he was severely lent on. His testimony, as described above, is strong evidence that they were damaged.

2. Returning to the problem of where the shot came from, the first thing I did was look for evidence of what the shot and damage looked like in Parkland.

Where the shot struck:-

Dr. Carrico:-

This was probably a 4-7 mm. wound, almost in the midline, maybe a little to the right of the midline, and below the thyroid cartilage. H6 P. 3

I am taking this to mean Right as looking towards the body and not the body’s right. If it is the body’s right then that is not facing any gunman at Z 190. The turn at Z 190 has hidden that side of the neck. That part of the neck is not facing any gunman until after Z 225

What damage was done by the bullet:-

Dr. Perry:-

a. There was an injury to the right lateral aspect of the trachea at the level of the external wound. H6 P. 10

b. The trachea was deviated slightly to the left. H6 P. 10

c. I noticed a small ragged laceration of the trachea on the anterior lateral right side. H3 P. 370

d. I could not see any evidence, myself any evidence, of it in the pleura of the lung the presence of this blood in this area could be indicative of the underlying condition. H3 P. 370

Now I am well aware that the images below are in 2D and not 3D. I accept that 3D with, first access to the Y axis as well as viewing of all 3 axis’ together, gives a far better understanding. I therefore accept that what I have below is limited.

However I do feel, even though it is in 2D, I feel this does raise questions – the biggest one being why given the trajectory of the bullet and the way Kennedy was facing at the time did the bullet damage the right side and not the left side.

It is not my position that Z 190 was the moment, I just feel it had to be around that area and I have used Z190 as my example. Although JFK’s head moves towards the left from Z190 – Z200, his body position is still the same.

The turning of the head to the right is a serious problem, because Dr. Carrico states the impact was to the right of center. Any head movement to the left makes that much more difficult.

See image below:-

What the image shows:-

Image a shows the model with the head turned to the right similar to Z190.

Image b is a close up of that image.

Image c is a crop of Don Roberdeau’s map with a line drawn from the Grassy Knoll shooter’s position. Don suggests JFK’s head is fully turned to the right, hence the red arrow. In Z190 I am not sure his head is turned so far to the right.

Image d highlights the damage on the model.

My problem is this:-

1. The bullet will have struck the flesh on the neck before it gets to the trachea. Why does the bullet not carry on its leftward trajectory. There is no bones etc to stop it at this point. The head, at that point is turned to the right thereby offering the left side as a path and avenue.

2. In order for it to bend the trachea to the left, as Perry stated, the bullet has to have impacted to the left of the midline, and by quite some distance. Thereby allowing the bullet to damage the trachea in that manner. Carrico was clear that the bullet struck to the right of the midline. That makes perfect sense given how Kennedy’s head was turned at this point.

3. The bruise of the right side of the trachea, that Perry testifies to, makes it very clear that the bullet travelled on the RHS of the trachea. I don’t see how it could do that.

The kernel of my problem is this. It is best seen on Don’s map. In order for the bullet, being fired from this position and impacting as described by Carrico and Perry, the bullet would have to make a very significant change in direction after impact in order to do so. It has to be something in the order of 40-50º and I cannot see a reason why it would do so. Now I know bullets will do strange things when traveling through a body and changing direction is very common. But this change is not just very significant but had to take place immediately on impact if it is to damage the areas described.

You mentioned, Cliff, the Badgeman/Blackdogman as a source for the shot. That would not help. A shot from that source would make the angle more obtuse and compound the problems.

I have been wresting with this problem over the last few days and there are only two sources that would allow a shot to impact the right side of Kennedy.

a) The South Knoll. I am reluctant to seriously consider this. Although Gary Mack’s study about “Inside the Car” was flawed with regard to the gunman’s position, he was studying Z 312 and not Z190. However even at Z190 I am not sure how much of Kennedy would be exposed for such a shot.

The Storm Drain area at the west of Railroad Car Park. From what I can see that would give a perfect line of fire to both strike the neck right of the midline and also travel left of the trachea and be able to do the damage as described. Even Gary Mack’s gunman suggested this was a possibility.

I do not have any solutions, I just don’t have an answer as to how the bullet could strike where it did and not damage the left side of Kennedy.

James.

[James R Gordon]

The Demise

Of

The Single Bullet Theory

Although the title may be a little pompous, I am convinced that I have discovered a fatal factor that critically undermines the credibility SBT.

The Achilles heel of the SBT has always been that point when the bullet traversed the upper chest area of JFK: the least examined element of the theory.

For those who want the conclusion at the beginning:-

The SBT states that a shot fired from the 6^th floor east window of the TSBD struck JFK in the upper right back. This bullet then travelled through his body exiting his throat between Trachea rings 3 & 4. The bullet then continued to inflict five more injuries on John Connally.

Malcolm Perry, Charles Carrico and Commander Humes are all on record stating that the bullet either entered or exited through the Trachea. If the bullet entered the Trachea then, at some point, it had to exit it.

I can now prove that the bullet did so through the rear of the Trachea. Such a point is fatal for the SBT. This is so, because this area is hidden from view by the Cervical spine. There is no way a bullet entering the back, even where CE 903 places it, could reach this area of the Trachea. This point is blocked from the bullet’s path by the Cervial spine and the gap between the Trachea and the Cervical spine is extremely narrow.

This highlights one of the critical weaknesses of the advocates of the SBT. The details of what had to have happened had a bullet actually travelled through the upper chest area of JFK has not been one they have given any thought to. And that is the difference between generalised theorising and detailed study.

What follows is a description of the Path of the Bullet from the throat to the back:-

Although the SBT’s path is in the reverse order, it is easier for me to examine this path from front to back.

See Group Image 1 below:-

What you see:-

Image A1 is a rotated version of FOX 1 with a line drawn down the body’s center

Image A2 is a close up version of A1

Image B is an image of an anatomical model with an arrow pointing to Trachea rings 3&4

Image C is an image of an anatomical model with the bruise to the trachea highlighted

Image D is an image of an anatomical model showing the bullet’s exit point on the rear of the trachea.

1. Where did the bullet enter/exit the throat:-

Charles Carrico, the first doctor to see JFK, states that the wound was slightly to the right of the midline.

“This was probably a 4-7 mm. wound, almost in the midline, maybe a little to the right of the midline, and below the thyroid cartilage.” H6 P. 3

See Image group 1 images A1 and A2.

Carrico’s statement can be verified with FOX 1. See image A1 and magnified A2. What I did was draw a line between the two Clavical bones. The Red Arrow. Then I drew a vertical line through the middle of the red arrow. This may not be strictly accurate, but it is sufficiently accurate to verify that the bullet entered right of center.

2. Where did the bullet go next:-

See Image group 1 Image B

Because JFK was not breathing Dr. Carrico decided to insert an Endotracheal tube. While inserting this tube Dr. Carrico was able to glimpse the Trachea. He said that through the larynzo scope he saw “ a ragged wound of the trachea was noticed immediately.” CE 392 P. 4 + H2 P. 362

The importance of this statement is that first the report was written 3 hours and 20 minutes after JFK had been pronounced dead and 45 minutes before the plane carrying JFK’s body landed in Washington. Second this is noticed prior to Malcolm Perry entering the room and performing the tracheotomy. Therefore the damage cannot be ascribed as a consequence of the tracheotomy.

Malcolm Perry backs up Charles Carrico. In his testimony, he stated that he “noticed a small ragged laceration of the trachea on the anterior lateral right side.” H3 P. 370

This is important not just because he backs up Carrico, but like the bullet’s entry on the throat, the entry into the trachea is also right of the midline.

Malcolm Perry makes another observation. The impact of the bullet striking the trachea bent the trachea slightly to the left. The trachea was “deviated slightly to the left.” H6 P. 10

This bending of the Trachea is supported by Carrico in his HSCA interview on January 11^th 1978 he commented, “I noticed at that time probably some deviation of the trachea to the left, very slight.” HSCA 7 P. 268

3. So where did the bullet go next:-

Once inside the trachea there were only four things the bullet could do.

i. It could remain in the trachea stuck.

ii. It could change direction and veer to the left.

iii. It could change direction and veer to the right.

iv. It could carry on forward.

1. Since no bullet was ever found in the body, the bullet clearly did not remain in the trachea.

2. There was no damage to the left side of the body, so it clearly did not veer left.

3. So did the bullet veer to the right?

In his HCSA interview in 1978 Carrico comments that he “saw some modest amount of hematoma in the recesses to the right of the trachea.” HSCA 7: P. 268 + H4 P. 360 So although Carrico saw bruising on the right side of the Trachea, he did not see a tear.

This bruising is illustrated by Image group 1, image C.

In his testimony and autopsy protocol Commander Humes made no mention of a tear of the lateral (right) portion of the Trachea.

Therefore the bullet did not veer to the right.

That meant that bullet exited the Trachea through the back. This is illustrated by Image group 1, Image D. the red dot indicates the point at which the bullet exited the Trachea.

4. What evidence is there that the bullet did indeed exit through the back of the Trachea and what impact did that have?

Just beyond the Trachea is the Spinal column and between the two there is very little space. Any missile exiting the rear of the Trachea would have no option but to strike the Cervical spine. There is not the room for it to veer to the right to avoid striking the spine.

Image Group 1, image C gives an idea of the short distance between the Trachea and the Spinal column. Image Group 1, Image C shows that the Cervical Vertebra 7 (C7) is on the same plane as Trachea rings 3&4. This highlighted by the blue arrow.

See Group Image 2 below:-

What you see:-

Image E is X-Ray 9. It was taken prior to the beginning of the autopsy taking place.

Image F1 is an annotated cropped version of X-Ray 9.

Image F2 is a clean copy of the cropped version of X-Ray 9 for you to verify my findings.

Image F3 is a clean negative copy of the cropped version of X-Ray 9. It highlights the data of the XRay in a different way.

Image G is a drawing of a Thoratic Vertebrae. The two wings are referred to as the vertebrae’s Transverse Process’s.

Image H is a drawing of a Cervical Vertebrae. The two little grey cups are referred to as the vertebrae’s Transverse Process’s.

Images I1 + I2 are cropped copies of XRay 8 that was taken at the suggestion of Pierre Fink when Humes informed him that he was puzzled he could find no bullets. The autopsy was well under way when this XRay was taken. I1 is an annotated version, I2 is a clean version.

Image J is a model of the of the upper chest area of a human skeleton.

Image K is an annotated version of XRay 9.

Without digressing too much, in 1978 when the HCSA examined the case one aspect that they were concerned with is arrowed in yellow in Group 2 images in E and I1. Basically they did not know what it was and during the months of February 1978 to August 1978 the Committee contacted four Professors about this problem: Professors Chase, Seaman, McDonnel and Davis. There was considerable dispute between these four Professors as to what they were seeing. Members can read their reports in HSCA Vol 7. In the end the opinion of the Committee was to cite Professor McDonnel: “The panel noted an interruption in the continuity of the right transverse process of the 1st thoracic vertebra much more clearly delineated in the computer-assisted enhancement of film No 8.” HSCA 7 P. 98 Number 8 XRay is image I.

Unfortunately, the HCSA omitted from their reference to Professor McDonnel, his hedging. The Professor was not sure whether what he was seeing was T1 or Intervertebral disk C6 C7. HSCA Vol 7 P. 219 Addendum C You can see an example of such a disk which is arrowed in Red in image J. The particular disc he is talking about is the one between C7 & C6 cervical vertebrae’s. This is arrowed in blue. This comment was omitted from the report and so the HSCA report is on record stating that what was damaged was the right transverse process of T1.

Unfortunately they were wrong. Professor McDonnel was right when he suggested it could be C7.

What had got the committee so curious is the anomaly highlighted in yellow in Images F1 & I1. That is the reason they contacted the four professors. Although these vertebrae’s are next to each other, they are also very different. If you look at Image G, a drawing of a Thoracic Vertebrae, you will see that it has unique wings for its Transverse Process. You will also notice that the Transverse Process of the Thoracic vertebrae is very different from those of Cervical Vertebrae.

Although the C7 vertebrae is right above the T1 vertebrae they are distinguishable from their positions on the bodies spine.

If you look at Image F1, you will see that I have highlighted an area blue. This is the right Transverse Process of T1. In both F2 & F3, you can clearly see an outline the image of the Transverse Process that I have drawn around. If you look at image I1 you can see, arrowed with the Red arrow, the Process even more clear, and in particular the unique wings of the Process

In image F1 you can also see this anomaly which appears to be adjacent to the T1 Process. However images I1 + I2 lets you see that this anomaly is not adjacent to the T1 Process, but above it. And what is above T1 is C7

What appears to have happened is that when the bullet exited the rear of the trachea, it struck C7 Cervical Vertebrae. This is outlined in Red on image F1. Image F3, the negative version, gives a clear account of the damage to the vertebrae. The complete right transverse process has been destroyed. There is nothing there to be seen.

But it is even worse than that. It is not just the C7 process that has been destroyed; the Intervertebral disk C6 C7 ( that lies above it ) has also been destroyed.

How can we say, that disk has been damaged? These disks of muscle support the vertebrae’s above and below: and together they support the neck and the head. If you look at image K, you will see that the entire neck has collapsed to the right exactly where C7 is. The destruction of the muscle is what has allowed the neck to fall. It is no longer there to support to support the neck and that is why the neck has fallen. XRay 9 was taken before the autopsy began, so the damage cannot be ascribed to the work of Commander Humes.

No one can say precisely when the neck dropped onto T1, but it was sometime between the assassination and the body arriving at Bethesda and being X-rayed. Most likely it was when the body was laid in the coffin in Parkland to be flown back to Washington.

But there is no documentation that the back of the Trachea was damaged:-

That is true, but what is equally true is that Commander Humes did not dissect the throat area. He was completely unaware that the throat wound was anything more than a Tracheotomy, until he conferred with Malcolm Perry. At that point it was too late to examine the wound. So to suggest that, because the Autopsy protocol says nothing about a wound in the back of the Trachea, means there was no wound: that is wrong. There is no mention of a wound in the back of the Trachea, not because there was none: it was because the back of the Trachea was not examined.

And XRays 8+9 make it clear that damage was done to the cervical spine. And evidence makes it clear the bullet exited the rear of the trachea. Together they are proof that although there is no mention of damage to the rear of the trachea in the Autopsy Protocol, there was indeed damage to the rear of the trachea.

5. What has this to do with the SBT:-

It has everything to do with it.

i. Testimony has established that the bullet entered the trachea.

ii. It has been established that the bullet exited the trachea through the rear of the trachea.

That means for the SBT to be viable, the bullet must:-

i. Enter the body above the shoulder bone. Any lower and the bullet will pierce the lung.

ii. Pass above the lung and bruise it.

iii. Damage the C7 vertebra and intervertebral disk C6 C7.

iv. Enter the trachea between the Cervical Spine and Trachea.

v. Exit the trachea between trachea rings 3 & 4 and damage the right strap muscle.

vi. Exit out the throat, and continue on its journey to wound John Connally.

I’m sure many imaginative arguments can be made for much of the above. But no one can show how a bullet moving from back to front can squeeze between the Cervical spine and the Trachea. That is one of the criteria for the SBT as it travels through the upper chest because we know it exited out of the trachea. So if the bullet cannot be shown to enter the trachea from the rear then the theory fails.

That is the world of difference between the external trajectories ( from the TSBD to JFK’s back ) and the internal trajectory through the neck. The external trajectories have no obstacles in their path: the internal trajectory is full of obstacles all of which must be met.

And that is why the SBT fails and must fail.

James.