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

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff, would you mind explaining what you believe occurred during the assassination?

I think there is an excellent chance that JFK was struck in the throat with a paralytic circa Z190 and struck in the back within a second or so after Z255.

Makes sense to me that the second shot was a kill shot with a toxin.

The first shot came from Black Dog Man, the second shot came from the Dal-Tex.

Can't say for sure it went down that way, but the scenario accounts for the nature and timing of the throat/back wounds.

Also I would be curious to know what you believe the chain of evidence is to prove beyond doubt that BENNETT completed and submitted his report at 5:00 on 11/22/1963?

His contemporaneous notes have the time listed at the bottom.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2112.htm

There is no proof the back wound was created on AF1, Doug Horne has uncovered evidence that two caskets arrived at Bethesda on 11/22/1963, it appears the alterations to JFK was accomplished at Bethesda just prior to the autopsy. JFKs body was removed from casket on AF1 and placed in a body bag.

So Bennett was calling the shots on the location of the back wound?

First, he put on paper that the back wound was 4" down, then someone else followed this lead and punched a hole in the back too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

For such a precise plan they sure gummed it up with that one!

...No, I don't buy a bit of this. And it's bad enough to call good conspiracy witnesses liars and incompetents, but I especially loathe the tendency to turn them into perps.

Bennett's statements -- low back wound, shots fired in rapid succession -- blows holes in the Lone Nut scenario you're claiming he was instrumental in maintaining.

As far as I know the existence of a back wound was only recorded by BENNETT and BURKLEY.

True that, although years later Nurse Diana Bowron told author Harrison Livingstone that she saw the back wound at Parkland.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Jon G. Tidd]

"As far as I know the existence of a back wound was only recorded by BENNETT and BURKLEY.

True that, although years later Nurse Diana Bowron told author Harrison Livingstone that she saw the back wound at Parkland."

How can it be that only Bennett and Burkley recorded the existence of a back wound? Boswell's face sheet depicts a back wound as well.

[Robert Mady]

Cliff, If I may reiterate what I think you are saying is the first 'firecracker' like noise caused the throat wound at about Z-190 - I agree with this.

A second 'firecracker' like sound occurred at Z-265 or so and BENNETT claimed to hear these two sounds and see the result of the second one.

What about the three rifle shots? Why did BENNETT only claim to hear one rifle shot when the majority of witnesses claimed to hear three, including many SSA? When did the three rifle shots occur?

Why would one mans claims be more significant than MOORMAN, HILL, SUMMERS and HUDSON to name a few that claimed the first shot they heard was when the limo was at Z-313 ? And that other shots then followed.

Concerning later day interviews, not usually worth much, if the back wound had been real it would have been explored in medical WC testimony, the back wound as far as I could determine from WC testimony was not mentioned and when nurses where specifically asked about wounds none of them claimed to have seen any wound other than the head or neck wound. The absence of testimony is significant... this fact in the case is telling, it is telling that there is no evidence for it being real. IMO

[Robert Mady]

Jon, you are correct, although I would consider evidence resulting from the autopsy at Bethesda to be considered unreliable.

It is interesting to note that in the opinion of Doug Horne, it was Boswell who altered KENNEDYs wounds to reflect shots from the rear fiction.

True that, although years later Nurse Diana Bowron told author Harrison Livingstone that she saw the back wound at Parkland."

I would again point to the fact that the WC would have revealed evidence of back wound in testimony if it had been authentic, in my opinion.

I believe that news media is very capable of historical revisionism and we can see 51 years of evidence that as a system the news media has done everything possible to maintain the government lie concerning the assassination.

Miss BOWRON - I just saw one large hole.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you see a small bullet hole beneath that one large hole?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you notice any other wound on the President's body?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff, If I may reiterate what I think you are saying is the first 'firecracker' like noise caused the throat wound at about Z-190 - I agree with this.

A second 'firecracker' like sound occurred at Z-265 or so and BENNETT claimed to hear these two sounds and see the result of the second one.

What about the three rifle shots? Why did BENNETT only claim to hear one rifle shot when the majority of witnesses claimed to hear three, including many SSA? When did the three rifle shots occur?

Bennett said he heard a sound that reminded him of a firecracker (throat shot) and then turned to see JFK struck in the back and then the head.

That's 3 shots.

Why would one mans claims be more significant than MOORMAN, HILL, SUMMERS and HUDSON to name a few that claimed the first shot they heard was when the limo was at Z-313 ? And that other shots then followed.

Bennett's comments are consistent with Linda Willis' statements, for one.

Concerning later day interviews, not usually worth much, if the back wound had been real it would have been explored in medical WC testimony, the back wound as far as I could determine from WC testimony was not mentioned and when nurses where specifically asked about wounds none of them claimed to have seen any wound other than the head or neck wound. The absence of testimony is significant... this fact in the case is telling, it is telling that there is no evidence for it being real. IMO

Or the witnesses were intimidated. The low back wound destroys the SBT -- so it's no mystery why the WC tried to down-play it.

[Cliff Varnell]

Jon, you are correct, although I would consider evidence resulting from the autopsy at Bethesda to be considered unreliable.

It is interesting to note that in the opinion of Doug Horne, it was Boswell who altered KENNEDYs wounds to reflect shots from the rear fiction.

True that, although years later Nurse Diana Bowron told author Harrison Livingstone that she saw the back wound at Parkland."

I would again point to the fact that the WC would have revealed evidence of back wound in testimony if it had been authentic, in my opinion.

I believe that news media is very capable of historical revisionism and we can see 51 years of evidence that as a system the news media has done everything possible to maintain the government lie concerning the assassination.

Miss BOWRON - I just saw one large hole.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you see a small bullet hole beneath that one large hole?

Miss BOWRON - No, sir.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you notice any other wound on the President's body?

Miss BOWRON - No, sir.

People make mistakes, Robert.

What mistake is more likely -- a nervous Bowron mis-stating what she saw, or the careless plotters punching a hole in JFK's back that destroys the Lone Nut scenario they so carefully and precisely plotted?

[Cliff Varnell]

"As far as I know the existence of a back wound was only recorded by BENNETT and BURKLEY.

True that, although years later Nurse Diana Bowron told author Harrison Livingstone that she saw the back wound at Parkland."

How can it be that only Bennett and Burkley recorded the existence of a back wound? Boswell's face sheet depicts a back wound as well.

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

[Robert Mady]

Cliff

First, he put on paper that the back wound was 4" down, then someone else followed this lead and punched a hole in the back too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

For such a precise plan they sure gummed it up with that one!

It would be incomprehensible to me to think that the conspirators would have made intricate plans to shoot the President but not consider how to cover it up and hide critical evidence or alter critical evidence, to assure they could control the outcome. In the early hours after the assassination, I would think a number of people that controlled the operation were making decisions as quickly as they could to minimize any controversy as well as directing actions to produce a successful cover-up, not every decision they would have made would have been to their benefit, they had to work with the situations as they arose trying to direct it all to the outcome they desired. A successful transfer of power without recourse. They accomplished this, they did this so well that after 51 years many still have no idea what the heck happened.

[Robert Mady]

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.

[Robert Mady]

Cliff, I don't understand why you associate the back wound with weakening the lone nut scenario.

It was intended to solidify the lone nut scenario as well as reinforce shots coming from the rear.

The first shot was proposed to be a short shot and resulted in a bullet that only penetrated an inch into KENNEDY, this bullet then fell out at the hospital on the gurney, this bullet was found to be a perfect forensic match for the Carcano used in the assassination, the shallow wound and the 'pristine' bullet go together like a hand in a glove. There are no other reasonable explanations for the existence of a 'pristine' bullet. The plan disintegrated when this bullet was later required to have wounded CONNALLY. "xxxx happens' plans change to go with the evidence that could not be successfully altered. Evidently the story does not have to be believable it just needs to be repeated as many times as necessary to shut people up.

[Robert Mady]

Cliff I have been answering your questions, it would be courteous to answer some of mine please address these

What about the three rifle shots?

Why did BENNETT only claim to hear one rifle shot when the majority of witnesses claimed to hear three, including many SSA?

When did the three rifle shots occur?

Why would one mans claims be more significant than MOORMAN, HILL, SUMMERS and HUDSON to name a few that claimed the first shot they heard was when the limo was at Z-313 ?

And that other shots then followed, can you explain this testimony?

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff, I don't understand why you associate the back wound with weakening the lone nut scenario.

It's too low to have been associated with the throat wound.

Destroys the SBT.

Establishes the throat wound as an entrance.

It was intended to solidify the lone nut scenario as well as reinforce shots coming from the rear.

Then the Keystone Kop Konspirators created a wound in a location that had to be constantly lied about?

Neh. Don't buy a bit of it.

The first shot was proposed to be a short shot and resulted in a bullet that only penetrated an inch into KENNEDY, this bullet then fell out at the hospital on the gurney, this bullet was found to be a perfect forensic match for the Carcano used in the assassination, the shallow wound and the 'pristine' bullet go together like a hand in a glove.

A short shot FMJ! Another monumental screw-up by the Gang That Couldn't Mutilate Straight.

There are no other reasonable explanations for the existence of a 'pristine' bullet. The plan disintegrated when this bullet was later required to have wounded CONNALLY. "xxxx happens' plans change to go with the evidence that could not be successfully altered. Evidently the story does not have to be believable it just needs to be repeated as many times as necessary to shut people up.

Looks to me like CE-399-pristine-bullet was planted.

Kennedy's killers were stuck with defective ammo?

How do you account for the air pocket overlaying C7/T1?

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff I have been answering your questions, it would be courteous to answer some of mine please address these

What about the three rifle shots?

Why did BENNETT only claim to hear one rifle shot when the majority of witnesses claimed to hear three, including many SSA?

When did the three rifle shots occur?

I did answer this.

Bennett heard what he thought was a firecracker. He stated in his official report 11/23/63 that he was looking at the crowd to the right.

Willis 5 shows him looking to the right.

Willis 5 was taken in startle response to the throat shot.

Bennett states that he turned to the front to see JFK struck in the back, and then in the head.

That's three shots.

Why would one mans claims be more significant than MOORMAN, HILL, SUMMERS and HUDSON to name a few that claimed the first shot they heard was when the limo was at Z-313 ?

And that other shots then followed, can you explain this testimony?

The testimony on the number and timing of the shots are all over the map. I fail to see your point.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Cliff Varnell

[Robert Mady]

Cliff

I agree 'pristine' bullet was planted.

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

The SBT was created much later...

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

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.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Robert Mady

[Robert Mady]

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.