A new proposal re the JFK shots and wounds

[David Josephs]

And even as far over as to miss TSBD entirely....  the scenario works well...  

add triangulation.... the south and north knoll ... and the actual direction of his head....  more left side damage ala Huber?

[Colm Byrne]

47 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

And even as far over as to miss TSBD entirely....  the scenario works well...  

add triangulation.... the south and north knoll ... and the actual direction of his head....  more left side damage ala Huber?

Which scenario works well, please be more specific.

 

Edited July 18, 2020 by Colm Byrne

[Greg Doudna]

On 7/14/2020 at 3:57 PM, David Josephs said:

Greg, I wish you all the luck and success you can find... 

I'd only suggest to dig a bit more deeply before offering "conclusions", as opposed to theories or hypotheses.   

Some thoughts to consider

1. TOMLINSON's bullet is never authenticated as CE399... in fact, CE399 comes into existence when ROWLEY hands it to TODD
   CE2011 p.2.   https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1140#relPageId=430&tab=page  
    
2. Bullets do enter without exiting... FBI reports a bullet behind the ear IN ADDITION TO the bullet they are calling CE399
   Paul O'connor tells us a bullet was removed from the intercostal muscles in the lower right side of JFK's back
   A Dr. Young tells us corpsmen were sent to retrieve bone pieces and find another fully intact bullet....
   Cliff V is mentioning an exotic item that did exist and very possibly was employed to "freeze" JFK in place....

David, theory or hypotheses, yes. On #1 I hope you realize my summary outline of argument at the top of this topic had nothing to do with C399, but instead concerned only the original stretcher bullet, and in fact I think C399 was substituted for the stretcher bullet. Two of the four witnesses who saw the original stretcher bullet intact either on the stretcher or in the immediate moments after it was found indicated it was intact with a pointed nose, not intact with round nose as is C399--neither of those witnesses were either known to or called by WC--and FBI diplomatically reported to the WC that key figures in the chain of custody such as Rowley were unable to confirm it was the same bullet, which looks a little like a paraphrase of "that does not look like the same bullet". C399 of course was testified to be matched to Oswald's rifle, but the original stretcher bullet, the bullet of JFK's back wound per reconstruction, would be from a different rifle than Oswald's. 

On #2 could you explain your first and second sentences? What FBI report has a bullet behind (JFK's?) ear? Do you mean in addition to the stretcher bullet? (Not C399, which has nothing to do with the question here.)

And are you sure there is a reference to Paul O'Connor saying that a bullet was removed from the intercostal muscles in the right side of JFK's back? I cannot find Paul O'Connor saying that. O'Conner said those at the autopsy found a bullet went in JFK's back but did not exit anywhere else. But I cannot find O'Connor referring to seeing or knowing of a bullet removal.

Thanks David--  

[David Butler]

I think the bullet lodged behind the ear report is this one

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=707

[Greg Doudna]

Well that is interesting David Butler! Wonder what that was about--some misunderstanding?

I see also in that Nov 22 message that the original interpretation of the stretcher bullet was that it came from JFK.

Edited July 26, 2020 by Greg Doudna

[Micah Mileto]

5 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

 

And are you sure there is a reference to Paul O'Connor saying that a bullet was removed from the intercostal muscles in the right side of JFK's back? I cannot find Paul O'Connor saying that. O'Conner said those at the autopsy found a bullet went in JFK's back but did not exit anywhere else. But I cannot find O'Connor referring to seeing or knowing of a bullet removal.

Thanks David--  

O'Connor recalls that Jenkins or someone else told him that the doctors had "...found a fragment of a bullet lodged in the intercostal muscle on the right rear side.." of the President's body.

 

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/pdf/md64.pdf

[Greg Doudna]

48 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

O'Connor recalls that Jenkins or someone else told him that the doctors had "...found a fragment of a bullet lodged in the intercostal muscle on the right rear side.." of the President's body.

 

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/pdf/md64.pdf

Thanks Micah, interesting.

I see from an anatomy chart that the intercostals go up as high as the collarbone area. O'Connor says later in that account, perhaps after a moment's further thought, that he "believes he was told this information by '...one of the corpsmen, possibly the photographer'." A fragment, not a whole bullet, as he remembered hearing it. I suppose there are three possibilities: related to the back wound, related to the throat wound, or erroneous report. But if a bullet fragment had been found, would it not have been recorded and turned over to the FBI for examination? 

[Greg Doudna]

I came across this in the archives of this forum from a Robert Prudhomme, Aug. 7, 2016 ( http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22956-jfks-shallow-back-wound-revisited-for-the-umpteenth-time/page/6/), making a case for a rear occipital entrance --> throat exit, though Prudhomme connects it to a forward motion of JFK's head prior to, not after, the Z313 head shot.  The reason I ruled out pre-Z313 for this was because I did not see JFK's head at an angle pre-Z313 that would allow a trajectory from a rear-building shot in agreement with those two JFK wounds. I assumed a straight-line trajectory of the bullet going into the rear of the skull straight through to the throat. Yet according to the Lipsey HSCA deposition, "the consensus at the autopsy, at least while he was listening, was that the throat wound was caused by a bullet fragment from the shot that struck at the EOP, and that the bullet passed under the skull, grazing it as it passed."

It is also interesting that according to the Lipsey deposition the original thinking of the autopsists was two, not one, head-shot bullets for JFK. The blur analysis of Zapruder fairly strongly and clearly suggests an additional shot followed very quickly after the head shot of Z313, which should be accounted for. This Z320-329 final shot could be a second JFK head shot; the Connally hit; both (modified single-bullet theory post-Z313); or a missed shot. My outline at the start of this topic proposed the third of those four possibilities for the post-Z313 shot, but there are different ways others think this should be put this together. 

 

~ ~ ~ [quoted from Robert Prudhomme] ~ ~ ~

Just to throw another monkey wrench into the works, it is interesting to return to Lt. Richard Lipsey's deposition to the HSCA.

While he was relating how the autopsists spent so much time dissecting lower organs in search of a bullet of bullet fragments, he also discussed the head wound and the throat wound. I can only assume he was relating what he overheard Humes, Finck and Boswell discussing, as Lipsey had no medical training himself, and was only an observer, and took no active part in the autopsy.

Lipsey related to the HSCA that the consensus was that one bullet struck JFK's just to the right of the external occipital protuberance while another bullet struck JFK's head in (you won't believe this) the cowlick area.

Look at this x-ray with the arrow pointing toward the external occipital protuberance (EOP) and imagine JFK leaning slightly forward, following the back shot, much like the figure in the x-ray is leaning forward. Now imagine a bullet travelling at a 23° angle downward (Dal-Tex Building?) striking JFK just to the right of the EOP.

Would the bullet enter the skull. or slide under the skull and impact the cervical (neck) vertebrae? According to Lipsey, the consensus at the autopsy, at least while he was listening, was that the throat woundwas caused by a bullet fragment from the shot that struck at the EOP, and that the bullet passed under the skull, grazing it as it passed.

We find additional clues to this matter in the HSCA deposition of Jerrol Custer, the x-ray technician who took all of the x-rays of JFK on 22/11/63. He claimed the x-rays he saw of JFK's neck are not the ones he was shown by the HSCA, and that the x-rays he recalled showed many bullet fragments in the vicinity of cervical vertebrae C3/C4.

If we allow for JFK's forward lean, plus the 3% downhill slope of Elm St., is it possible to line up a bullet path that passes through the right of the EOP (under the base of the skull), right side of cervical vertebrae C3/C4 and the right side of JFK's trachea at about the 2nd tracheal ring? I believe JFK was first shot, in the back, when behind the Stemmons sign, and this theoretical shot that passed under his skull may be the "lunge" forward we can see JFK making just as he appears from behind the sign; the one many people have interpreted as JFK "coughing up" a bullet. A bullet impact this high on the torso would account for the "lunge" forward.

If I am correct in this theory, and the Z film is authentic, we would know the exact moment a bullet struck and grazed the lower rear of JFK's skull. Not only that, we know the almost exact location of the entrance and exit wound, assuming the fragment continued on in a straight path. If we could determine the exact position JFK was in at this moment, it should be possible to determine exactly which window of the Dal-Tex Building th shot came from. 

~ ~ ~ [end quotation] ~ ~ ~

 

Edited July 27, 2020 by Greg Doudna

[Cliff Varnell]

12 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

throat exit 

No amount of evidence gets a Pet Theorist off their beloved pet theories.  Ever.

[Micah Mileto]

2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

No amount of evidence gets a Pet Theorist off their beloved pet theories.  Ever.

What's so wrong about thinking the throat wound could be an exit for a bullet or fragment hitting the EOP?

[Cliff Varnell]

13 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

What's so wrong about thinking the throat wound could be an exit for a bullet or fragment hitting the EOP?

Because you’re ignoring the witness testimonies and neck x-ray in order to promote a Lone Nut talking point.

You’re bashing witnesses who described the throat wound as an entrance, and you’re bashing the most well-corroborated single witness in the case — Secret Service Special Agent Glen Bennett.  Bennett made a contemporaneous written report describing the back shot occurring right before the head shot in a “bang...bang-bang” shooting sequence.  There are 56 ear witness statements to the bang...bang-bang sequence.

Since the second bang was the back shot and the third bang was the head shot that leaves the throat shot first.

You’re ignoring the air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes.

I find this Pet Theorizing repugnant, to put it mildly.

Edited July 27, 2020 by Cliff Varnell

[Micah Mileto]

33 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Because you’re ignoring the witness testimonies and neck x-ray in order to promote a Lone Nut talking point.

You’re bashing witnesses who described the throat wound as an entrance, and you’re bashing the most well-corroborated single witness in the case — Secret Service Special Agent Glen Bennett.  Bennett made a contemporaneous written report describing the back shot occurring right before the head shot in a “bang...bang-bang” shooting sequence.  There are 56 ear witness statements to the bang...bang-bang sequence.

Since the second bang was the back shot and the third bang was the head shot that leaves the throat shot first.

You’re ignoring the air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes.

I find this Pet Theorizing repugnant, to put it mildly.

None of this pertains to the EOP wound. Do you suspect here was no EOP wound? We'll never know until the body is dug up.

[Cliff Varnell]

20 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

None of this pertains to the EOP wound. Do you suspect here was no EOP wound? We'll never know until the body is dug up.

The throat wound doesn’t pertain to the EOP wound.  The first shot struck him in the throat, from the front.  That’s why JFK’s initial response was to place his fists in front of his throat.

Why is that fact so difficult to process?

This should have been settled in the 60’s but for an army of Pet Theorists pimping false mysteries.

[Chris Davidson]

53 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

None of this pertains to the EOP wound. Do you suspect here was no EOP wound? We'll never know until the body is dug up.

The relevance of one shot (from behind) in relationship to the EOP.  imo

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24596-shooter-location/?do=findComment&comment=369883

[David Josephs]

On 7/18/2020 at 3:07 PM, Colm Byrne said:

Which scenario works well, please be more specific.

 

The idea of the image was to show that a south knoll shot is not out of the question... 

It's really up to each of us to "see" which scenario works...  and have at least some compelling evidence with which to back yourself up....

The search function in this forum is very good....  you can find quite a lot of material on most every aspect of the case...

That south knoll shot may have cleared the windshield and have been Cliff's shot to the throat with the windshield hole/crack being from another source... IDK

Triangle though...  East (Dal-Tex/Courthouse/street level), North (knoll) and South (knoll)...

The shot from the fence is absurdly close... once you've been there and seen it....

Hope that helps
DJ