Why I believe the SBT is nothing but BS

[Pat Speer]

All I know, James, is that we've got two competing theories at play here, and one of them must be correct:

One is the SBT. And one is a theory which has TWO separate bullets going into JFK's body, not exiting, and causing very little damage to the internal parts of Kennedy's body. (And that 2-bullets theory is, of course, one that you refuse to talk about, but it MUST be a theory that you surely DO endorse at the end of the day, correct? Because you don't think just ONE bullet could successfully navigate JFK's upper back and emerge from the throat.)

Given these options (and despite James' analysis of what Bullet CE399 would have no choice in hitting if the SBT is correct), and coupled with so many OTHER factors, I place my support in the Single-Bullet Theory.

Among those "other factors" are ---

The Zapruder Film;

Connally being wounded in the UPPER BACK too;

The bullet going into Connally at an ANGLE;

The total lack of any bullets to explain these wounds other than CE399;

The fact that the two victims are generally lined up in a straight line to accept one bullet from the viewpoint of the ONLY KNOWN LOCATION FOR AN ASSASSIN in Dealey Plaza at the precise point in time when the two men WERE struck by rifle fire (per the Z-Film analysis);

The WC's and HSCA's conclusions of CE399 being the bullet that traversed both JFK & JBC.

The above list of things provides a combination of facts and circumstances that, in my opinion, CORROBORATE the single-bullet hypothesis, and at the same time that combination of facts and factors makes ANY other hypothesis virtually impossible to accept or believe.

You disagree. Well, so be it.

In short, I am forced to believe that somewhere along the line, your analysis that has led to your conclusion that one bullet could not possibly have travelled clear through President Kennedy's upper back and neck HAS to be flawed.

I have got to the point where I am now going to ignore you and anything you have to say.

Ten-four. That's fine by me.

Good luck in proving your anti-SBT theory, James.

Did you contact Dr. Wecht yet? Here again is his contact info....

http://www.cyrilwecht.com/services.php

Adios.

David, I've been in contact with Dr. Wecht for some time, and made an appearance at his conference last year.

He thinks the SBT is nonsense, as you well know. He thinks this in large part because he thinks CE 399 not damaged enough to have done all that is claimed of it.

But he also has problems with the trajectory, as demonstrated last year by his appearance in last year's Fox Special. There he gave some support for the theory of John Orr--that A bullet, NOT CE399, entered Kennedy's back and was deflected out his throat after striking his spine.

In short, if you think he believes a bullet passed from back to front through Kennedy, without striking bone or suffering serious damage, you are mistaken.

[Pat Speer]

You just made your first mistake, boy-o!

Only my first, Bobby? I'm surprised you're letting me off so easy. Because I would have thought you considered all of my posts to be one great-big "mistake". But I guess not.

Honestly, Dave, the crap you're coming up with proves how desperate you're getting.

I'd say it's more in line with just exactly what I said twice previously in this thread....

Everything is always close but never quite close enough for conspiracy theorists.

Common sense ALONE dictates that the fracture (but not the breaking into pieces) of the T1 vertebra had to have been caused by a high-speed projectile. A bullet that's just about SPENT (i.e., STOPPED) inside Kennedy's neck isn't going to cause such a "shock wave" to damage the vertebra. Correct?

Ergo, a HIGH-SPEED PASSING MISSILE is what must have caused that slight T1 fracture. Just as that same high-speed passing missile is what must have caused the bruises on top of the lung and pleura. How could any SPENT bullet or bullets account for such "shock wave" type of damage OR the bruises that were found inside JFK's neck?

And since we all know exactly WHERE on Kennedy's body that high-speed missile entered his body (via the autopsy photos and the Boswell face sheet and the autopsy report too), your conclusion about the path of the bullet must be in error -- because T1 WAS fractured slightly and we KNOW where that bullet entered---14 cm. below the right mastoid process.

But, David, you just don't get it. The lack of damage to the interior structures of the neck RULES OUT that the damage to T-1 was caused by a high-velocity bullet. On my website I call this the speed trap. If the bullet struck T-1, then it would have been more damaged than CE 399. So LNs claim T-1 was damaged by the temporary cavity of the bullet. Only, guess what, the interior of the neck was not shredded, as would be the case if this damage had been caused by a high-velocity bullet with a large temporary cavity. OOPS.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Tell me something, Dave. Why do you think there was such a panic to get the limousine out of Dallas that day?

[James R Gordon]

Ok David, lets have another go, hopefully I might make more progress this time.

On post 132 of this thread you made the following point.

"Since there was positively NO MAJOR DAMAGE inside Kennedy's neck and upper back, it means that NO BULLETS (no matter how many you think struck the President) hit the lungs or punctured the chest cavity of John F. Kennedy on November 22nd.

What evidence do you have that the lung was not compromised? And by saying that I accept that there was a bruise on the apex of the lung. The bruise does not signify the lung was compromised.

[David Von Pein]

So when is it going to hit you, David? The cowlick entry was a hoax! Nobody at the autopsy saw it. And no one in recent years has even pretended it's supported by the medical evidence.

I wonder why the ruler is in this precise position in this autopsy picture? Yes, it's there to provide "scale". But its precise LOCATION is rather intriguing, don't you think?

Plus, one of the biggest reasons to know the bullet entered high on the head instead of low (apart from the obvious fact that it did via the above autopsy photograph which shows the bullet hole near the cowlick) is the brain damage (or lack of such damage) in the lower part of Kennedy's brain. If the bullet had entered near the EOP, JFK's cerebellum would have been damaged (and it wasn't damaged), and there would have been more damage, in general, to the lower portions of the brain, just as Dr. Petty said in 1986:

[End Off-Topic Post.]

Edited June 2, 2014 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

If you think [Dr. Wecht] believes a bullet passed from back to front through Kennedy, without striking bone or suffering serious damage, you are mistaken.

You're wrong. Go to 13:13 of this audio....

https://app.box.com/shared/l32qdwygw8

So, has Dr. Wecht changed his mind since 2007?

Edited June 2, 2014 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

What evidence do you have that the lung was not compromised?

Dr. Humes' WC testimony in 1964 [emphasis DVP's]....

"In attempting to relate findings within the President's body to this wound which we had observed low in his neck, we then opened his chest cavity, and we very carefully examined the lining of his chest cavity and both of his lungs. We found that there was, in fact, no defect in the pleural lining of the President's chest. It was completely intact. However, over the apex of the right pleural cavity, and the pleura now has two layers. It has a parietal or a layer which lines the chest cavity and it has a visceral layer which is intimately in association with the lung. 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. It, therefore, was our opinion that the missile while not penetrating physically the pleural cavity, as it passed that point bruised--either the missile itself or the force of its passage through the tissues--bruised both the parietal and the visceral pleura."

-------------------

Dr. Humes' ARRB testimony in 1996 (previously posted in this thread, btw) [emphasis DVP's]....

"We saw a contusion on the upper lobe of the lung. There was no defect in the pleura anyplace. So it's obvious that the missile had gone over that top of the lung. Of course, the more I thought about it, the more I realized it had to go out from the neck. It was the only place it could go, after it was not found anywhere in the X-rays."

-------------------

Dr. Finck's testimony at the Clay Shaw trial in 1969 [emphasis and added commentary by DVP]....

"This creates a great deal of mutilation to dissect, and we limited our examination in that respect, not to create unnecessary mutilation of the cadaver. I was satisfied with the aspect of the wound of entry in the back of the neck, a bruise in the upper part of the lung and the lining of the chest cavity which is called the pleura [but no mention of the lung or pleura being torn or seriously damaged], and I did not do any extensive dissection along the bullet path."

-------------------

Dr. Boswell's ARRB testimony in 1996 [emphasis DVP's]....

"We probed this hole which was in his neck with all sorts of probes and everything, and it was such a small hole, basically, and the muscles were so big and strong and had closed the hole and you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it. But when we opened the chest and we got at--the lung extends up under the clavicle and high just beneath the neck here, and the bullet had not pierced through into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura."

Edited June 2, 2014 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

Dave, what do you think might have caused JFK's trachea (windpipe) to be deviated somewhat to the left, as observed by several Trauma Room One doctors?

[David Von Pein]

I don't know, Bob. But why is that tremendously important or significant?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Because it simply is tremendously important and significant, Dave.

Do you know what the only condition is, related to the respiratory system, that can cause deviation of the trachea to one side or the other?

[Robert Prudhomme]

I just love watching Dave play "Golly gee Bob! I have no idea!"

As if....

[David Von Pein]

Do you know what the only condition is, related to the respiratory system, that can cause deviation of the trachea to one side or the other?

Golly gee, Bob! I have no idea!

I can't wait to find out from the all-knowing Robert Prudhomme what the answer is, though.

Edited June 2, 2014 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

The only respiratory condition that will cause the trachea to deviate to the left is a tension pneumothorax in the right lung.

Can you define this condition and tell me if it was possible JFK had a tension pneumothorax in the right lung?

[Pat Speer]

So when is it going to hit you, David? The cowlick entry was a hoax! Nobody at the autopsy saw it. And no one in recent years has even pretended it's supported by the medical evidence.

I wonder why the ruler is in this precise position in this autopsy picture? Yes, it's there to provide "scale". But its precise LOCATION is rather intriguing, don't you think?

Plus, one of the biggest reasons to know the bullet entered high on the head instead of low (apart from the obvious fact that it did via the above autopsy photograph which shows the bullet hole near the cowlick) is the brain damage (or lack of such damage) in the lower part of Kennedy's brain. If the bullet had entered near the EOP, JFK's cerebellum would have been damaged (and it wasn't damaged), and there would have been more damage, in general, to the lower portions of the brain, just as Dr. Petty said in 1986:

Thanks, David, for providing me with the opportunity to bust yet another one of your favorite myths...

As far as Petty's belief the EOP entrance was incompatible with the damage to the brain...THAT"S THE POINT I'VE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE FOR TEN YEARS. The Clark Panel believed the damage was inconsistent with an EOP entrance, and deluded themselves into believing this meant the bullet entered at the top of the head, rather than admitting the OBVIOUS. The reason the brain wasn't damaged between the EOP entrance and the large exit was because...ding, ding,ding...the bullet didn't travel upwards within the skull, but downwards within the neck.

Edited June 3, 2014 by Pat Speer

[James R Gordon]

Where exactly was the Back Wound of entry?

During an idle moment I was looking at the autopsy image of the back wound. We are informed that the damage to the jacket is 4.5cm right of the spine and it would appear that is where the wound also is: 4.5cm to the right of the spine.

Looking at the autopsy image I began to wonder exactly where are the vertebra’s in relation to that wound.

The body of a vertabra is roughly 33mm. There are variations with the individual vertebra, but essentially T1 to T4 is approximately the figure. Now onto that needs to be added the size of the “Process”, I do not know it’s value – but I have assigned 10mm.

Now the body value is for the whole vertebra, so that the actual value of the right hand side of the vertebra is 16.5mm + 10mm which equals a distance of 26.5mm. In mm the wound’s distance from the spine is 45mm. So the wound is 18.5mm right from the edge of the transverse process.

So my first question was whether a wound in such a position would actually damage T1? If the bullet strikes through flesh and muscle why would it damage T1. It is well away from T1.

Next I began to wonder exactly where is the wound. Humes describes it thus: “Situated on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula there is a 7 x 4 millimeter oval wound. This wound is measured to be 14 cm, from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process.” My emphasis. MD3 P. 3

He specifies that this wound’s position is “above the upper border of the scapula.” I take it by the upper border Humes is referring to “superior border.” The red line is identifying the superior border of the Scapula which is where Humes is stating the area of this wound is above. It is not on that red line it is above it.

The Scapula:-

In the above image you will see above the Scapula the Clavicle R. That is the bone that Dr. Boswell is holding onto to steady the body for Dr. Humes. So effectively Humes is saying that the wound is above the superior edge of the Scapula and below Clavicle R where Dr Boswell has his hand.

Now I am sure some will argue that what we see in the image is that the wound is below the Clavicle R. But Humes had also said it was above the superior border, and that position well above the position of the wound on this autopsy image.

The FOX image makes clear that the autopsy’s description of the position of this wound is just a nonsense.

The yellow arrow has tried to identify the spine. I have taken the wound entry to be 45mm right of center. Having got the horizontal position, where is the vertical position.

The Clavicle is on the same plane as T1. So it is clear the wound is below T1.

The outmost edge of the Scapular Spine is between T4 and T3. And the wound is above that.

It is probably above T3 but below T2. George Buckley’s comment about the position of the wound being at the level of T3 is about right.

The Back image:-

The first point to be made is that this position of the wound is well below the apex of the lung. Had the SBT been a valid theory then the bullet would have to travel through the lung. Humes wants to suggest that the wound is just below the Clavicle. The Fox image makes clear that, wherever the wound is, it is well below the clavicle. The apex of the lung is at the level of the clavicle.

Whatever the authority the autopsy protocol has, it is contradicted by the FOX image. The wound is very close to the edge of the Scapula spine and therefore is well below the apex of the lung. It would seem impossible to argue that position of the wound is not anywhere near T2 and T3 but actually above the superior edge of the Scapula and just below the Clavicle.

There are other problems like the height differential and the angle of climb the bullet would require to make. However they pale when compared to the inescapable fact that the back wound of entry is below the apex of the lung and likely to be between T2 and T3.

James.