For Cliff Varnell: Where did the Bullet in JFK's Back go?

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff

Good point. The FBI guys recorded the back wound as well.

It is an insignificant point, the FBI guys recorded seeing it at the autopsy!

The back wound was created before the autopsy, it was recorded at the autopsy and seen by many if not all present at the autopsy, there is no argument about this, the fact remains that it is conceivable that this wound was created just prior to the autopsy, it was not an authentic wound incurred during the assassination.

Just because something is "conceivable" doesn't make it "plausible" much less "likely."

In your scenario Bennett is a big-time ballplayer, dictating the location of the crucial back wound BEFORE the mutilation was performed.

But his statements destroy the Lone Nut Scenario.

Naw man, this shiznit don't fit.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff, I no longer wish to continue this conversation, thanks for the comments.

Cliff you might check out DTL thread, witnesses that recorded shots, numbers and type are mapped out for easy reference. The witnesses are actually very consistent, it is only a myth that correlations are not possible. Analysis of this data is very easy to do since it is presented in a visual format.

Are you saying that no witnesses heard a shot before Z313?

Bennett's statement matches Linda Willis' statement. Off the top of my head...I think there are other shot-pause-shot-shot witnesses.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff

I agree 'pristine' bullet was planted.

The question is why was it planted and how was it's existence going to be explained?

Seems self-evident. Once it was settled that Oswald acted alone (by the WASP high command) all the official evidence had to conform to that conclusion.

The SBT was created much later...

I disagree. The requirements of the SBT were laid down to the autopsists when FBI SA Sibert called the FBI Lab and SA Killion said the Magic Bullet was en route from Dallas.

That bullet had to account for both the back and throat wounds.

Specter and Humes followed orders and just filled in the blanks.

The SBT was not part of the plan, the plan had to evolve because TAGUE's injuries required one of the shots.

Looks to me that JFK's killers wanted the murder to look like a conspiracy.

A Castro conspiracy.

The SBT was not in existence until much later, remember CONNALLYS hospital testimony, three shots three hits. The pawn and his wife had to stick with this lie the rest of their lives, because this is what they told the Nation on 11/27/1963 was true.

[Robert Mady]

Correct - No witness heard a rifle shot before Z-313.

There was a shot that had some sort of popping sound, termed a 'noise' or 'firecracker' like sound by a very few witnesses.

Which include, G NEWMAN, W NEWMAN and evidenced by reactions of CLINT HILL, LANDIS, BENNETT and READY simultaneously looking toward the gk immediately following Z-189. At least these witnesses recorded hearing it or are seen to react to it.

No one including JACKIE comprehended that JFK had been fired upon or wounded as a result. This is why the SSA did not have a reaction other then to look around to determine what had made the odd noise. They did not stand down under fire!!!

The shot at ~Z-189 was the first of 4 shots fired, the other three started at Z-313 and were all rifle shots.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Cliff Varnell]

Correct - No witness heard a rifle shot before Z-313.

Cool. Matches the Autopsists Scenario (I like to call it) of JFK struck with non-conventional weaponry.

There was a shot that had some sort of popping sound, termed a 'noise' or 'firecracker' like sound by a very few witnesses.

Is Linda Willis chopped liver?

(quote on)

Mr. Liebler: Did you hear any shots, or what you later learned to be shots, as the motorcade

came past you there?

Ms. Willis: Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two

real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to

the people, and he grabbed at his throat, and he kind of slumped forward, and then

I couldn't tell where the second shot went.

(quote off)

How about Nellie Connally?

(quote on)

Mrs. Connally:...I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was

a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right. I turned over my right shoulder

and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck.

(quote off)

Or Clint Hill?

(quote on)

Mr. Hill: We were running still 12 to 15 miles per hour, but in the curve I believe we slowed down maybe to 10, maybe to 9...Well, as we came out of the curve, and began to straighten up, I was viewing the area which looked to be a park. There were people scattered throughout the entire park. And I heard a noise from my right rear, which to me seemed to be a firecracker. I immediately looked to my right and, in so doing, my eyes had to cross the Presidential limousine and I saw President Kennedy grab at himself and lurch forward and to the left...

(quote off)

Which include, G NEWMAN, W NEWMAN and evidenced by reactions of CLINT HILL, LANDIS, BENNETT and READY simultaneously looking toward the gk immediately following Z-189. At least these witnesses recorded hearing it or are seen to react to it.

No one including JACKIE comprehended that JFK had been fired upon or wounded as a result.

Willis, Connally and Hill describe JFK reacting to trauma.

All close proximity witnesses.

This is why the SSA did not have a reaction other then to look around to determine what had made the odd noise. They did not stand down under fire!!!

The shot at ~Z-189 was the first of 4 shots fired, the other three started at Z-313 and were all rifle shots.

We're not that far apart, Robert. I don't regard Bennett as the Master Perp so I'd put the sequence as:

Circa Z190 throat shot with non-conventional weapon.

Circa Z265 back shot with non-conventional weapon.

Z313 triangulation of rifle fire -- 3 shots 3 hits all to the head.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Robert Mady]

Cliff

Bennett's statement matches Linda Willis' statement. Off the top of my head...I think there are other shot-pause-shot-shot witnesses.

Take the time to analyze the maps posted in DTL thread illustrating the witnesses claims of shots.

If we want to use rules to play that only require one or two witnesses as proof of an assassination scenario, I could prove there were six shots fired from two directions or I can prove only one shot was fired, I can prove the shots were all even or went bham.bham...bham or bham....bham.bham.

But the majority of evidence dictates there were four shots fired, the first one was 'silent'

the last three were rifle shots that came from the monument area and were all fired in about 3-1/2 seconds where after the first shot there was a pause and then two more shots almost simultaneously bham....bham.bham. This is what the majority of evidence dictates along with the limo slowing or stopping just before the first rifle shot and accelerating at the second or third rifle shot.

If you disbelieve the back wound was post added, find the proof that it occurred during the assassination, otherwise you place yourself on a limb when you hinge a theory on insignificant non-compelling evidence. You must also be able to provide a reasonable answer why this evidence was not introduced in WC testimony, saying a nervous witness just neglected to recall a wound she had observed on the President is not compelling.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff

Bennett's statement matches Linda Willis' statement. Off the top of my head...I think there are other shot-pause-shot-shot witnesses.

Take the time to analyze the maps posted in DTL thread illustrating the witnesses claims of shots.

If we want to use rules to play that only require one or two witnesses as proof of an assassination scenario, I could prove there were six shots fired from two directions or I can prove only one shot was fired, I can prove the shots were all even or went bham.bham...bham or bham....bham.bham.

But the majority of evidence dictates there were four shots fired, the first one was 'silent'

the last three were rifle shots that came from the monument area and were all fired in about 3-1/2 seconds where after the first shot there was a pause and then two more shots almost simultaneously bham....bham.bham.

That's how Bennett and Willis described it.

What's your beef?

I'm being taken to task for agreeing with you?

This is what the majority of evidence dictates along with the limo slowing or stopping around the first shot and accelerating at the second or third shot.

If you disbelieve the back wound was post added, find the proof that it occurred during the assassination, otherwise you place yourself on a limb when you hinge a theory on insignificant non-compelling evidence.

I have a Dealey Plaza back wound eye witness whose account is corroborated by Willis 5 and Altgens 6.

This eye witness destroys the Lone Nut Scenario

You have conjecture that includes two incredible screw ups by the perps -- defective ammo and a badly mis-placed mutilation.

Who's out on a limb with an untenable theory?

You must also be able to provide a reasonable answer why this evidence was not introduced in WC testimony, saying a nervous witness just neglected to recall a wound on the President is not compelling.

Because the Warren Commission wasn't on the up and up and the least said about the back wound the better for them.

Self-evident...

Edited January 5, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Robert Mady]

If I have misunderstood your position, I apologize, I will go back and reread the thread when I have adequate time.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

Cliff

I have a Dealey Plaza back wound eye witness whose account is corroborated by Willis 5 and Altgens 6.

Neither of these photographs can be used as proof of a back wound, we know from Parkland doctors the throat wound was an entrance wound, I have been told emphatically by Robert P that the throat wound could not have been connected to the back wound because of physical anatomy of a body.

BENNETT is the only person to have claimed to see the President wounded in the back, the question I would have is; BENNETT was 20 or 30 feet away, what exactly could he have seen? A 6.5mm hole appear in KENNEDYS coat?

ROBERTS and KINNEY were much closer as well as continuously observing the President as was HILL, they did not recall seeing the back wound nor did their testimonies corroborate BENNETTS.

Are you going in circles, I thought you said the back wound occurred a second or so after A6 (A6 is ~Z-255) Willis #5 is ~Z-200, how are these two photographs evidence of a back wound?

Edited January 5, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff

I have a Dealey Plaza back wound eye witness whose account is corroborated by Willis 5 and Altgens 6.

Neither of these photographs can be used as proof of a back wound, we know from Parkland doctors the throat wound was an entrance wound, I have been told emphatically by Robert P that the throat wound could not have been connected to the back wound because of physical anatomy of a body.

BENNETT is the only person to have claimed to see the President wounded in the back, the question I would have is; BENNETT was 20 or 30 feet away, what exactly could he have seen?

What did he say?

About 4 inches down from the right shoulder. The bullet holes in the clothes are 4 inches below the collars.

He nailed it.

A 6.5mm hole appear in KENNEDYS coat?

ROBERTS and KINNEY were much closer as well as continuously observing the President as was HILL, they did not recall seeing the back wound nor did their testimonies corroborate BENNETTS.

In what way do their testimonies contradict Bennett?

Are you going in circles, I thought you said the back wound occurred a second or so after A6 (A6 is ~Z-255) Willis #5 is ~Z-200, how are these two photographs evidence of a back wound?

Willis relates to the timing of the throat shot and Bennett looking to the right.

[Robert Prudhomme]

Would anyone care to give me his definition of what a "short shot" is?

[Cliff Varnell]

Would anyone care to give me his definition of what a "short shot" is?

Correct me if I'm wrong -- doesn't "short shot" refer to a defective round?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Yes, it usually does, with the result being a tremendous reduction in the muzzle velocity of the bullet fired from that round. This is one of the great myths of the JFK assassination, that the "shallow" back wound in JFK was from a "short shot".

Can you see the problems with this idea, and why it is not a rational explanation?

[Robert Mady]

Robert P. we have attempted to discuss this previously

I will repeat

Short shot or bad ammunition was the excuse for:

1) First sound heard which was described as the "firecracker" like sound

2) Proposed confusion of the SSA and utter failure to react to gunfire

3) 'Pristine' bullet found on stretcher

4) Shallow back wound

5) Bullet found on stretcher "being a forensic match to the Carcano rifle to the exclusion of all others".

6) The 'pristine' bullet made the Carcano rifle, conclusively, the murder weapon used for the assassination.

A short shot bullet will drop and it did drop, it also did not have the velocity to penetrate very far into KENNEDYS body.

All of this was the MYTH that was being propagated.

The idea of a short shot hitting KENNEDY in the back, was counter evidence for the shot from the front that entered KENNEDY in the throat and evidence for the first silent 'firecracker' like shot having come from behind not in front.

Who do you think planted the 'pristine' bullet and why? Some one just didn't arbitrarily plant the bullet on the stretcher knowing that it was from the anticipated murder weapon but have no logical explanation as to how it could have come into existence. The 'pristine' bullet created from the vacuum without a reason to be in existence would be evidence of a conspiracy, it had to have a reason to be in existence. The reason would be the hole punched in KENNEDYS back before autopsy.

I will believe the conspirators would have pre-determined that this wound could have been possible from a short shot, they were not stupid.

You can count on the fact that the government could and would find weapon 'experts' to testify that a short shot from the proposed murder weapon at that distance and from that elevation could have produced the shallow wound. Proof: They found 'experts' to proclaim it was 'plausible' that the 'pristine' bullet could cause seven wounds including punching thru bones and remain nearly unaffected. 'Experts' can be produced to prove virtually anything.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Jon G. Tidd]

Robert Mady @ post #129:

Robert, the chain-of-custody and provenance problems with C.E. 399 are well-known.

Question: Do you know when (i.e., the date) the pristine bullet first surfaced? By this I mean first appeared "in public" as a visible, tangible item.

It's clear to me C.E. 399 was not the bullet turned over to Richard Johnsen by O.P. Wright at Parkland Hospital on 12-22-63. It's also clear to me C.E. 399 is a fabrication, created by the FBI.

I like your argument that the pristine bullet was "created" to match the back wound. I'm wondering whether the pristine bullet was "created" and presented publicly before or after the Warren Commission learned of James Tague's wounding.