James R Gordon Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 A couple of years ago I posted an image of JFK's shirt. It was quite a revelation. It high definition taken from the front and it showed the back entrance hole very clearly. It also lets us see that the entrace wound was low down around T3. I have mislaid my copy of the image. If anyone has a copy of the image can they re-postit for me? James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 1 hour ago, James R Gordon said: A couple of years ago I posted an image of JFK's shirt. It was quite a revelation. It high definition taken from the front and it showed the back entrance hole very clearly. It also lets us see that the entrace wound was low down around T3. I have mislaid my copy of the image. If anyone has a copy of the image can they re-postit for me? James https://www.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/159wo5/the_bloody_shirt_worn_by_jfk_during_the/ Um. The hole is visible. The WC and the HSCA say the bullet that made that hole, shot from above, then exited JFK's Adam apple, and then entered JBC's back. When probed, the wound in JFK's back was pointed downwards.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Govus Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 Back of the shirt, not the front, but, works for me. Angling down upon the T3 river. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted July 26, 2022 Author Share Posted July 26, 2022 The copy of the shirt was probably taken by the FBI, UNlike this copy the shirt was open and allowed a close look at the entrance at the back. the definition was as good as this version. The difference is the shirt was open and it was possuble to measure the distance the hole was down from the collar. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted July 26, 2022 Author Share Posted July 26, 2022 I have found the image i was looking for. DVP's argument on the SBT thread was that the back wound was higher than the throat wound. From this image JFK's bach entrance wound was higher than JFK's throat wound he would look very different than we recognise him to be. I see DVP has scuttled off the site. I showed him a high quality and rotated image of the back wound and asked him to point out where below the back wound the throat wound was. Below the back entrance wound is the Scapular. Little wonder he fled the scene. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 I wonder what Rumpole of the Old Bailey would think of the blood stain splatter. Shot from the right front? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 Were the images authentic/original? I mean, it would be very easy for me to move bullet holes around digitally and clone stamp on a program like photoshop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 2 hours ago, John Butler said: I wonder what Rumpole of the Old Bailey would think of the blood stain splatter. Shot from the right front? That's not blood stain spatter. That's a blood stain created as Kennedy sat leaning to his left and then on his back in the limo. It can be presumed that much of that blood came from his head wound. It tells us nothing about the direction of the shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 53 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said: Were the images authentic/original? I mean, it would be very easy for me to move bullet holes around digitally and clone stamp on a program like photoshop. Yes, those are the actual locations of the bullet holes. From patspeer.com, Chapter 11: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 NARA Shirt photo's https://www.maryferrell.org/photos.html?set=NARA-JFKCLOTHES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 15 minutes ago, Pat Speer said: Yes, those are the actual locations of the bullet holes. From patspeer.com, Chapter 11: Good - Thanks Pat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted July 26, 2022 Author Share Posted July 26, 2022 Thanks Robin. I do not know when your image was made but I believe my one was by the FBI in 1964. I have compared your image with mine and it appears your hole is cleaner and larger. Mine appears much more ragged. James. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 (edited) 28 minutes ago, James R Gordon said: Thanks Robin. I do not know when your image was made but I believe my one was by the FBI in 1964. I have compared your image with mine and it appears your hole is cleaner and larger. Mine appears much more ragged. James. Posted as found James,, it isn't my photo. The top portion of the hole looks like a cut line ? It looks too clean and extended at the top, and does not appear ragged like the bottom portion. Is it possible that someone snipped off a tiny sample for some sort of forensic testing in the lab. (Although not sure why they would do that) Edited July 26, 2022 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Price Posted July 26, 2022 Share Posted July 26, 2022 10 minutes ago, Robin Unger said: Is it possible for some reason that someone snipped off a tiny sample for some sort of forensic testing in the lab. Not that my opinion/voice is needed on this, but that's exactly what I noticed. Maybe this is where a sample was taken to try to find metallic traces that could be tied to the bullet or to match fabric found on the bullet (CE 399). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James R Gordon Posted July 26, 2022 Author Share Posted July 26, 2022 Robin, I was not doubting the authenticity of your image. I believe it was a later image - 1980's - 1990s. The reason I point out the differences is that a while ago Gary Murr was kind enough to share his Connally clothing images from the 1990's. Though I found his images important and interesting through time the fabric damage had changed. I be;ieve that is what we see in your image. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now