Pat Speer's Chapter 16b conclusions

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

@Pat Speer After reading information on your website, I have some questions.

1. Figure 13 depicts the image of a soldier with an entrance bullet on top of the ear and the top of the head being blown off by a dum dum bullet.

2. 6.5mm Military Rifle Wounds depict four images of soldiers hit by FMJ bullets labeled with corresponding case numbers.

3. There are eleven soldier cases listed, all hit by FMJ bullets.

4. You state: ..."On April 29, 1996 ... by rifles firing bullets at a greater velocity than those which struck Kennedy."

5. "True full-metal-jacketed military projectiles are, under the Hague Convention specifications, in fact designed to wound not kill." - https://www.clinicalradiologyonline.net/article/S0009-9260(09)00238-4/fulltext

 

6. IMO - I believe that Dr. Clark was spot on that a tangential injury occurred to JFK.  I also believe that a bullet originated from the right, which exited the top of the head, similar to figure 13.

7. Tangential Wound Comparison depicts two different scenarios.  Comparing Apples and Oranges.

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

A. Why do you conclude in your chapter that an FMJ bullet struck JFK?

B. IMO - Figure 13 (1) most accurately depicts the injuries to JFK, even though it is a drawing.  Why did you not reference a dum dum bullet or reference a bullet instead of an FMJ bullet to depict the tangential injury to JFK? 

The X-rays clearly show a snow storm of metallic objects from the ear to the top of the skull.  I have no idea what type of bullet struck JFK, just want to know more about damage caused by different types of bullet.

C. Why would you offer an opinion on the velocity of the bullet that struck JFK?  How would anyone know the velocity if there is no real answer to the type of rifle or type of ammunition used?

D. You state: ..."tangential impact on the skull can break splinters of bone from the skull's inner table."  You mention bone splintering inward into the brain by a tangential shot from an FMJ bullet, yet your make no mention of the effects of a dum dum bullet on a tangential injury.  Does the bone splinter?  Does a dum dum bullet splinter inside the brain?

E. In (7) figure 10.9. you compare an individuals tangential wounds from the front to the back of the skull to JFK's injuries.  Figure 10.9 shows brain matter, JFK's injury only show scalp fatty tissue and your image states that it is "brain-soaked hair".  Do you have reason to believe that it is brain matter instead of scalp fatty tissue?

 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Keyvan Shahrdar
Typo 2

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

@Pat Speer After reading information on your website, I have some questions.

1. Figure 13 depicts the image of a soldier with an entrance bullet on top of the ear and the top of the head being blown off by a dum dum bullet.

2. 6.5mm Military Rifle Wounds depict four images of soldiers hit by FMJ bullets labeled with corresponding case numbers.

3. There are eleven soldier cases listed, all hit by FMJ bullets.

4. You state: ..."On April 29, 1996 ... by rifles firing bullets at a greater velocity than those which struck Kennedy."

5. "True full-metal-jacketed military projectiles are, under the Hague Convention specifications, in fact designed to wound not kill." - https://www.clinicalradiologyonline.net/article/S0009-9260(09)00238-4/fulltext

 

6. IMO - I believe that Dr. Clark was spot on that a tangential injury occurred to JFK.  I also believe that a bullet originated from the right, which exited the top of the head, similar to figure 13.

7. Tangential Wound Comparison depicts two different scenarios.  Comparing Apples and Oranges.

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

A. Why do you conclude in your chapter that an FMJ bullet struck JFK?

B. IMO - Figure 13 (1) most accurately depicts the injuries to JFK, even though it is a drawing.  Why did you not reference a dum dum bullet or reference a bullet instead of an FMJ bullet to depict the tangential injury to JFK? 

The X-rays clearly show a snow storm of metallic objects from the ear to the top of the skull.  I have no idea what type of bullet struck JFK, just want to know more about damage caused by different types of bullet.

C. Why would you offer an opinion on the velocity of the bullet that struck JFK?  How would anyone know the velocity if there is no real answer to the type of rifle or type of ammunition used?

D. You state: ..."tangential impact on the skull can break splinters of bone from the skull's inner table."  You mention bone splintering inward into the brain by a tangential shot from an FMJ bullet, yet your make no mention of the effects of a dum dum bullet on a tangential injury.  Does the bone splinter?  Does a dum dum bullet splinter inside the brain?

E. In (7) figure 10.9. you compare an individuals tangential wounds from the front to the back of the skull to JFK's injuries.  Figure 10.9 shows brain matter, JFK's injury only show scalp fatty tissue and your image states that it is "brain-soaked hair".  Do you have reason to believe that it is brain matter instead of scalp fatty tissue?

 

A. Why do you conclude in your chapter that an FMJ bullet struck JFK? 

PS: A lot of people have studied individual pieces of the case and have come up with fantastical ideas. My website and research reflect an attempt to see what the evidence in sum indicates, because it most assuredly isn't what we've been told, by the WC or even our fellow researchers. It's been awhile but I believe I started off by wondering if the FMJ bullet fragments found in the limo are compatible with Kennedy's large head wound. I found that they are, but not if his large head wound was the exit for a bullet creating a small entrance. In short, while his head wound resembled a wound created by a dum-dum bullet, it is also consistent with that of a FMJ bullet that struck his skull at a shallow angle. 

B. IMO - Figure 13 (1) most accurately depicts the injuries to JFK, even though it is a drawing.  Why did you not reference a dum dum bullet or reference a bullet instead of an FMJ bullet to depict the tangential injury to JFK? 

The X-rays clearly show a snow storm of metallic objects from the ear to the top of the skull.  I have no idea what type of bullet struck JFK, just want to know more about damage caused by different types of bullet.

PS: Answered above.

C. Why would you offer an opinion on the velocity of the bullet that struck JFK?  How would anyone know the velocity if there is no real answer to the type of rifle or type of ammunition used?

PS: The enormous size of the skull fractures is incompatible with the impact of a low-velocity bullet.

D. You state: ..."tangential impact on the skull can break splinters of bone from the skull's inner table."  You mention bone splintering inward into the brain by a tangential shot from an FMJ bullet, yet your make no mention of the effects of a dum dum bullet on a tangential injury.  Does the bone splinter?  Does a dum dum bullet splinter inside the brain?

PS: I don't recall if I found anything about this, but I assume a dum dum bullet would have a similar impact on the skull. As stated, the impact of an FMJ bullet at a tangent gives the appearance of the impact of a dum dum bullet. I don't recall finding any articles describing any subtle differences between the two but would love to read one should you find one. 

E. In (7) figure 10.9. you compare an individuals tangential wounds from the front to the back of the skull to JFK's injuries.  Figure 10.9 shows brain matter, JFK's injury only show scalp fatty tissue and your image states that it is "brain-soaked hair".  Do you have reason to believe that it is brain matter instead of scalp fatty tissue?

PS: Numerous witnesses said they saw brain matter in the limo, or dripping from his head in the operating room. It only makes sense that some of this was in his hair. If I recall the morticians said they cleaned brain matter from the hair. Still, why do you raise this issue? 

[Tom Gram]

2 hours ago, Keyvan Shahrdar said:

@Pat Speer After reading information on your website, I have some questions.

1. Figure 13 depicts the image of a soldier with an entrance bullet on top of the ear and the top of the head being blown off by a dum dum bullet.

2. 6.5mm Military Rifle Wounds depict four images of soldiers hit by FMJ bullets labeled with corresponding case numbers.

3. There are eleven soldier cases listed, all hit by FMJ bullets.

4. You state: ..."On April 29, 1996 ... by rifles firing bullets at a greater velocity than those which struck Kennedy."

5. "True full-metal-jacketed military projectiles are, under the Hague Convention specifications, in fact designed to wound not kill." - https://www.clinicalradiologyonline.net/article/S0009-9260(09)00238-4/fulltext

 

6. IMO - I believe that Dr. Clark was spot on that a tangential injury occurred to JFK.  I also believe that a bullet originated from the right, which exited the top of the head, similar to figure 13.

7. Tangential Wound Comparison depicts two different scenarios.  Comparing Apples and Oranges.

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

A. Why do you conclude in your chapter that an FMJ bullet struck JFK?

B. IMO - Figure 13 (1) most accurately depicts the injuries to JFK, even though it is a drawing.  Why did you not reference a dum dum bullet or reference a bullet instead of an FMJ bullet to depict the tangential injury to JFK? 

The X-rays clearly show a snow storm of metallic objects from the ear to the top of the skull.  I have no idea what type of bullet struck JFK, just want to know more about damage caused by different types of bullet.

C. Why would you offer an opinion on the velocity of the bullet that struck JFK?  How would anyone know the velocity if there is no real answer to the type of rifle or type of ammunition used?

D. You state: ..."tangential impact on the skull can break splinters of bone from the skull's inner table."  You mention bone splintering inward into the brain by a tangential shot from an FMJ bullet, yet your make no mention of the effects of a dum dum bullet on a tangential injury.  Does the bone splinter?  Does a dum dum bullet splinter inside the brain?

E. In (7) figure 10.9. you compare an individuals tangential wounds from the front to the back of the skull to JFK's injuries.  Figure 10.9 shows brain matter, JFK's injury only show scalp fatty tissue and your image states that it is "brain-soaked hair".  Do you have reason to believe that it is brain matter instead of scalp fatty tissue?

 

Pat does a great job of showing that the currently in-vogue lone assassin theory by Sturdivan et al. of an EOP entrance, breakup in skull, and exit from top of head is extremely unlikely, and that the evidence strongly supports a tangential strike at the point of exit. The fragment path is one of the best items of evidence IMO, since Sturdivan’s theory is that the fragments were all carried up to the top of the head by bloodflow or something, which strains credulity to the max. The Z-film back and to the left motion too fits perfectly with Pat’s theory.

I’m glad you posted this, since I have a question for Pat too that I just remembered:

F. Sturdivan and others, while incredibly inconsistent, now claim that the bullet struck near the EOP and exploded out of the skull midway through its track - at the point of maximum cavitation. You counter by suggesting that since the bullet broke up on entry, there should have been a much larger entrance wound. 

Couldn’t the bullet have fractured on entry but not reached maximum yaw and broken apart until later in the wound track? I found a study that gives an example of a FMJ bullet that broke up in a test skull and created a large wound of exit consistent with other bullets that didn’t break up and reached maximum yaw 5-10cm away from the entrance. There’s also an interesting note with two citations I can’t access that might be relevant:

"The exit wound associated with a high energy round producing a temporary cavity will vary with the length of the wound tract and whether the exit point occurs within or after the temporary cavity [6, p262; 11, p261]."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-017-1737-9

There are plenty of reasons to doubt Sturdivan’s version, particularly the X-Ray fragment path and everything you describe in Chapter 16b; but under certain conditions, could a bullet striking occipital bone on a trajectory from the snipers nest to JFK’s position at Z312 - which based on the contour of the skull and JFK’s left and forward lean seems like it could create the “up and left” entrance trajectory noted at autopsy - have exploded out the top of JFK’s head? I guess it’s a probability question - like even though it's much more likely that JFK’s wounds were caused by a tangential strike, is there a non-zero probability, however tiny, that Sturdivan could be correct in his basic premise of an EOP entrance and explosion out the top of the head? 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Tom Gram

[Pat Speer]

22 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

Pat does a great job of showing that the currently in-vogue lone assassin theory by Sturdivan et al. of an EOP entrance, breakup in skull, and exit from top of head is extremely unlikely, and that the evidence strongly supports a tangential strike at the point of exit. The fragment path is one of the best items of evidence IMO, since Sturdivan’s theory is that the fragments were all carried up to the top of the head by bloodflow or something, which strains credulity to the max. The Z-film back and to the left motion too fits perfectly with Pat’s theory.

I’m glad you posted this, since I have a question for Pat too that I just remembered:

F. Sturdivan and others, while incredibly inconsistent, now claim that the bullet struck near the EOP and exploded out of the skull midway through its track - at the point of maximum cavitation. You counter by suggesting that since the bullet broke up on entry, there should have been a much larger entrance wound. 

Couldn’t the bullet have fractured on entry but not reached maximum yaw and broken apart until later in the wound track? I found a study that gives an example of a FMJ bullet that broke up in a test skull and created a large wound of exit consistent with other bullets that didn’t break up and reached maximum yaw 5-10cm away from the entrance. There’s also an interesting note with two citations I can’t access that might be relevant:

"The exit wound associated with a high energy round producing a temporary cavity will vary with the length of the wound tract and whether the exit point occurs within or after the temporary cavity [6, p262; 11, p261]."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-017-1737-9

There are plenty of reasons to doubt Sturdivan’s version, particularly the X-Ray fragment path and everything you describe in Chapter 16b; but under certain conditions, could a bullet striking occipital bone on a trajectory from the snipers nest to JFK’s position at Z312 - which based on the contour of the skull and JFK’s left and forward lean seems like it could create the “up and left” entrance trajectory noted at autopsy - have exploded out the top of JFK’s head? I guess it’s a probability question - like even though it's much more likely that JFK’s wounds were caused by a tangential strike, is there a non-zero probability, however tiny, that Sturdivan could be correct in his basic premise of an EOP entrance and explosion out the top of the head? 

I believe it's possible for a bullet to be deflected upon entrance and curve upwards before exploding from the skull. But such a bullet would almost certainly leave fragments on the bullet path, and a large permanent cavity within the brain connecting entrance and exit. Neither of these were found in this case. The medical evidence indicates that all the fragments were towards the top of the head if not on the outside of the top of the head. And the damage to the brain (which if I recall Sturdivan neglects) does not support such a scenario. 

There's also this. It's been awhile but some of this is coming back to me. The large fractures at the top of the head indicate the impact or exit of an intact bullet, not a fragmented bullet. Explosions of fragmented bullets (or shotgun pellets) create large holes but not large fractures. 

So this creates a conundrum for Sturdivan supporters... If the bullet broke up upon impact low on the back of the skull, and then exploded from the top of the skull, how is it that all the bullet fragments are at or on the outside of the skull by the exit, and how is that the skull fractures at the supposed exit are much greater than the skull fractures at the supposed entrance?  (Answer: it isn't.)

The evidence is clear that an impact occurred at the supposed exit.

[Bill Fite]

Sorry to have to ask, but given the bullet fragments on the X-ray posted previously, with the larger ones to the rear of the skull and the cloud of smaller ones more to the front --doesn't that indicate a shot from the front given the formula for momentum?

momentum = mass * velocity

velocity has both speed and direction

so the larger fragment would travel farther away from the point of entry.

Is there another explanation?

Also, the bullet path would be more at the temple area then going back across the top of the brain.

[Pat Speer]

39 minutes ago, Bill Fite said:

Sorry to have to ask, but given the bullet fragments on the X-ray posted previously, with the larger ones to the rear of the skull and the cloud of smaller ones more to the front --doesn't that indicate a shot from the front given the formula for momentum?

momentum = mass * velocity

velocity has both speed and direction

so the larger fragment would travel farther away from the point of entry.

Is there another explanation?

Also, the bullet path would be more at the temple area then going back across the top of the brain.

The largest fragment was found behind the right eye. The large fragment at the back of the skull on the x-rays is probably on the scalp or in the hair, as there was no brain at that location. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Pat Speer

[Henry Frost]

From what we see in the Zapruder film and the autopsy photos, the Z313 impact does look like a keyhole tangential wound.

Pat, I notice you mentioned Gerda Dunckel on your website, she was indeed a wizard with image processing.

She created a gif starting a few frames before Z313 for about 20 Z-frames.  But if you extract the frames, there are more than 20 frames.  She used a process known as frame interpolation, where the software generates intermediate frames between existing ones that approximate what they should look like. The end result is a perceived higher frame rate than the 18 fps of the Zapruder film.

Anyway, I thought her work should be in the record.  Warning, clip is graphic:

https://imgur.com/a/fkLjEOx

 

 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Henry Frost

[Gerry Down]

3 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

Pat does a great job of showing that the currently in-vogue lone assassin theory by Sturdivan et al. of an EOP entrance, breakup in skull, and exit from top of head is extremely unlikely, and that the evidence strongly supports a tangential strike at the point of exit. The fragment path is one of the best items of evidence IMO, since Sturdivan’s theory is that the fragments were all carried up to the top of the head by bloodflow or something, which strains credulity to the max. The Z-film back and to the left motion too fits perfectly with Pat’s theory.

I’m glad you posted this, since I have a question for Pat too that I just remembered:

F. Sturdivan and others, while incredibly inconsistent, now claim that the bullet struck near the EOP and exploded out of the skull midway through its track - at the point of maximum cavitation. You counter by suggesting that since the bullet broke up on entry, there should have been a much larger entrance wound. 

Couldn’t the bullet have fractured on entry but not reached maximum yaw and broken apart until later in the wound track? I found a study that gives an example of a FMJ bullet that broke up in a test skull and created a large wound of exit consistent with other bullets that didn’t break up and reached maximum yaw 5-10cm away from the entrance. There’s also an interesting note with two citations I can’t access that might be relevant:

"The exit wound associated with a high energy round producing a temporary cavity will vary with the length of the wound tract and whether the exit point occurs within or after the temporary cavity [6, p262; 11, p261]."

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-017-1737-9

There are plenty of reasons to doubt Sturdivan’s version, particularly the X-Ray fragment path and everything you describe in Chapter 16b; but under certain conditions, could a bullet striking occipital bone on a trajectory from the snipers nest to JFK’s position at Z312 - which based on the contour of the skull and JFK’s left and forward lean seems like it could create the “up and left” entrance trajectory noted at autopsy - have exploded out the top of JFK’s head? I guess it’s a probability question - like even though it's much more likely that JFK’s wounds were caused by a tangential strike, is there a non-zero probability, however tiny, that Sturdivan could be correct in his basic premise of an EOP entrance and explosion out the top of the head? 

Where does Sturdivan give this theory - Is it the book "The JFK Myths"?

Edited August 29, 2022 by Gerry Down

[Pat Speer]

50 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

Where does Sturdivan give this theory - Is it the book "The JFK Myths"?

Yes, and perhaps in some online articles. Although he supported the cowlick entrance in his HSCA testimony, he later changed his mind about this--in part due to the prodding of John Canal and Chad Zimmerman (who were at that time quite active on the alt.assassination.JFK newsgroup moderated by John McAdams, of which I was also a member.) 

As a result Sturdivan's book is at odds with his previous testimony and discusses the head shot under the presumption the bullet entered near the EOP. 

if you find this shocking, moreover, get ready for another shock. Although John Lattimer conducted numerous tests and wrote numerous articles under the presumption the bullet entered at the cowlick entrance, he was, much as Sturdivan, swayed by Canal, and he also changed his mind in the end. 

So, much as CT-land is a confusing mess, LN-land is also confusing. Many if not most of the LNs currently writing online will cite Lattimer and Sturdivan ad nauseam, but fail to acknowledge they both ended up claiming the evidence supported an EOP entrance. This is toxic to their claims to authority--that all the experts agreed etc etc etc. I mean you can't cite the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel as unquestioned authorities while simultaneously citing the findings of Lattimer and Sturdivan--who ended up claiming the HSCA FPP was full of doo-doo. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Pat Speer

[Gerry Down]

5 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Yes, and perhaps in some online articles. Although he supported the cowlick entrance in his HSCA testimony, he later changed his mind about this--in part due to the prodding of John Canal and Chad Zimmerman (who were at that time quite active on the alt.assassination.JFK newsgroup moderated by John McAdams, of which I was also a member.) 

As a result Sturdivan's book is at odds with his previous testimony and discusses the head shot under the presumption the bullet entered near the EOP. 

if you find this shocking, moreover, get ready for another shock. Although John Lattimer conducted numerous tests and wrote numerous articles under the presumption the bullet entered at the cowlick entrance, he was, much as Sturdivan, swayed by Canal, and he also changed his mind in the end. 

So, much as CT-land is a confusing mess, LN-land is also confusing. Many if not most of the LNS currently writing online will cite Lattimer and Sturdivan ad nauseam, but fail to acknowledge they both ended up claiming the evidence supported an EOP entrance. This is toxic to their claims to authority--that all the experts agreed etc etc etc. I mean you can't cite the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel as unquestioned authorities while simultaneously citing the findings of Lattimer and Sturdivan--who ended up claiming the HSCA FPP was full of doo-doo. 

Good to know they came to their senses eventually. The cowlick is a total red herring.

[Tom Gram]

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

I believe it's possible for a bullet to be deflected upon entrance and curve upwards before exploding from the skull. But such a bullet would almost certainly leave fragments on the bullet path, and a large permanent cavity within the brain connecting entrance and exit. Neither of these were found in this case. The medical evidence indicates that all the fragments were towards the top of the head if not on the outside of the top of the head. And the damage to the brain (which if I recall Sturdivan neglects) does not support such a scenario. 

There's also this. It's been awhile but some of this is coming back to me. The large fractures at the top of the head indicate the impact or exit of an intact bullet, not a fragmented bullet. Explosions of fragmented bullets (or shotgun pellets) create large holes but not large fractures. 

So this creates a conundrum for Sturdivan supporters... If the bullet broke up upon impact low on the back of the skull, and then exploded from the top of the skull, how is it that all the bullet fragments are at or on the outside of the skull by the exit, and how is that the skull fractures at the supposed exit are much greater than the skull fractures at the supposed entrance?  (Answer: it isn't.)

The evidence is clear that an impact occurred at the supposed exit.

Thanks Pat. The bullet fragments in the X-ray are one of the most compelling bits of evidence supporting your theory IMO, and Sturdivan’s explanation of blood flow leakage or whatever doesn’t really cut it. My only question there would be if the bullet only broke up later in the wound track by the exit, could that possibly account for the scattering of fragments across the top of the head? The argument would be that since the largest temporary cavity occurs at the point of maximum yaw i.e. immediately after the bullet splits into fragments, and if that breakage occurred later in the wound track near the exit - which is a reasonable assumption for FMJ bullets - the fragments were driven across the top of the head by cavitation. This is pure speculation but it at least sounds like a better explanation than Sturdivan’s.  

I’ll have to review the section of your website on the skull fractures. In the Sturdivan scenario there would be multiple fragment exits, and it sounds like that type of exit is incompatible with the type of fractures seen on the X-ray. My question would be whether or not different types of fracture patterns are seen in exit wounds that occur within the temporary cavity as opposed to after. I’m curious about this because of the quote from the wound ballistics article in my first comment:

The exit wound associated with a high energy round producing a temporary cavity will vary with the length of the wound tract and whether the exit point occurs within or after the temporary cavity 

The argument would be that the exit occurred within the temporary cavity, since the bullet only broke up late in the wound track by the top of the head, and that such an explosive exit is not inconsistent with the skull fractures - assuming my wild speculation here has some merit. 

To be clear, my questions here are only to illustrate the types of arguments I’d expect to see from lone assassin theorists. I have no clue if such cavitation induced fragment scattering or skull fracture patterns are even possible - but it’s the type of thing I’d research if I was trying to test the viability of Sturdivan’s theory. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Tom Gram

[Pat Speer]

20 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

Thanks Pat. The bullet fragments in the X-ray are one of the most compelling bits of evidence supporting your theory IMO, and Sturdivan’s explanation of blood flow leakage or whatever doesn’t really cut it. My only question there would be if the bullet only broke up later in the wound track by the exit, could that possibly account for the scattering of fragments across the top of the head? The argument would be that since the largest temporary cavity occurs at the point of maximum yaw i.e. immediately after the bullet splits into fragments, and if that breakage occurred later in the wound track near the exit - which is a reasonable assumption for FMJ bullets - the fragments were driven across the top of the head by cavitation. This is pure speculation but it at least sounds like a better explanation than Sturdivan’s.  

I’ll have to review the section of your website on the skull fractures. In the Sturdivan scenario there would be multiple fragment exits, and it sounds like that type of exit is incompatible with the type of fractures seen on the X-ray. My question would be whether or not different types of fracture patterns are seen in exit wounds that occur within the temporary cavity as opposed to after. I’m curious about this because of the quote from the wound ballistics article in my first comment:

The exit wound associated with a high energy round producing a temporary cavity will vary with the length of the wound tract and whether the exit point occurs within or after the temporary cavity 

The argument would be that the exit occurred within the temporary cavity, since the bullet only broke up late in the wound track by the top of the head, and that such an explosive exit is not inconsistent with the skull fractures - assuming my wild speculation here has some merit. 

To be clear, my questions here are only to illustrate the types of arguments I’d expect to see from lone assassin theorists. I have no clue if such cavitation induced fragment scattering or skull fracture patterns are even possible - but it’s the type of thing I’d research if I was trying to test the viability of Sturdivan’s theory. 

The large fractures at the supposed exit are a problem for the "bullet broke up within the skull" scenario. Upon rereading the HSCA FPP's report for the millionth time, ti finally dawned on me that they were claiming that the fractures were too large to have come from a highly fragmented bullet, and that the fractures would have to have come from a fragment the size of the two fragments found in the front area of the limo. IOW, they claimed those two bullet fragments exited intact and broke apart after hitting the windshield strut. While this is pretty dumb, IMO, the icing on the cake was that this meant the large disc-like fragment they proposed was on the back of the skull did not derive from the middle of the bullet, as seemed obvious (due to the fact the two fragments found in the front area were the nose and base of the bullet.) I then realized there was a method to Dr. Baden's madness. He had made numerous claims over the years that the fragment on the back of the head had simply leaked or rubbed off the bottom of the bullet. Well, he needed to claim as much to have the two fragments found in the limo exit intact, and he needed them to exit intact to explain the large fractures at the supposed exit. 

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

[Tom Gram]

35 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

The large fractures at the supposed exit are a problem for the "bullet broke up within the skull" scenario. Upon rereading the HSCA FPP's report for the millionth time, ti finally dawned on me that they were claiming that the fractures were too large to have come from a highly fragmented bullet, and that the fractures would have to have come from a fragment the size of the two fragments found in the front area of the limo. IOW, they claimed those two bullet fragments exited intact and broke apart after hitting the windshield strut. While this is pretty dumb, IMO, the icing on the cake was that this meant the large disc-like fragment they proposed was on the back of the skull did not derive from the middle of the bullet, as seemed obvious (due to the fact the two fragments found in the front area were the nose and base of the bullet.) I then realized there was a method to Dr. Baden's madness. He had made numerous claims over the years that the fragment on the back of the head had simply leaked or rubbed off the bottom of the bullet. Well, he needed to claim as much to have the two fragments found in the limo exit intact, and he needed them to exit intact to explain the large fractures at the supposed exit. 

Oh what a tangled web we weave...

Thanks again Pat. I don't mean to bug you, but I'm still curious about if there is any difference in expected fracture patterns of exit wounds of fragmented bullets occurring within the temporary cavity vs. after, and whether or not the FPP considered both cases when concluding that the skull fractures had to have been caused by a fragment the size of the two limo fragments.

I'm not defending Sturdivan by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a supporter of your medical theories, but a cautious one, and I always try to do my due diligence and attempt to assess the probabilities of various scenarios when studying the case. If the Sturdivan-compatible hypotheticals in my last comment are possible under certain conditions, it'd be something to consider, but I have no freaking clue at all if they are. If the scenarios are not possible, or at least very unlikely, it'd be additional evidence in support of your theory, so I figured you might be interested - or may have already looked into it. 

I don't know where to find discussion of the effects of temporary cavities on skull exit wounds, but I'm sure someone at some point has done a relevant study. I've noticed that a lot of new wound ballistics research has come out in the last twenty years or so using advanced imaging tech, but most of it is expensive to access unless you are a student, which is a massive pain in the ass.  I'll try to track down the footnotes for that quote I posted when I get the time, and maybe go down the rabbit hole a bit. 

Edited August 29, 2022 by Tom Gram

[Pat Speer]

5 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

Thanks again Pat. I don't mean to bug you, but I'm still curious about if there is any difference in expected fracture patterns of exit wounds of fragmented bullets occurring within the temporary cavity vs. after, and whether or not the FPP considered both cases when concluding that the skull fractures had to have been caused by a fragment the size of the two limo fragments.

I'm not defending Sturdivan by any stretch of the imagination. I'm a supporter of your medical theories, but a cautious one, and I always try to do my due diligence and attempt to assess the probabilities of various scenarios when studying the case. If the Sturdivan-compatible hypotheticals in my last comment are possible under certain conditions, it'd be something to consider, but I have no freaking clue at all if they are. If the scenarios are not possible, or at least very unlikely, it'd be additional evidence in support of your theory, so I figured you might be interested - or may have already looked into it. 

I don't know where to find discussion of the effects of temporary cavities on skull exit wounds, but I'm sure someone at some point has done a relevant study. I've noticed that a lot of new wound ballistics research has come out in the last twenty years or so using advanced imaging tech, but most of it is expensive to access unless you are a student, which is a massive pain in the ass.  I'll try to track down the footnotes for that quote I posted when I get the time, and maybe go down the rabbit hole a bit. 

I have a a wide-ranging discussion of the effect of high-velocity bullets on a skull at the end of Chapter 13a, in a section entitled Blasts from the Present. These are the modern views. In chapter 13b I go back to the beginning of the field of wound ballistics and discuss the history of wound ballistics associated with the presumed assassination rifle. 

In any event, I just went back and re-read a lot of Blasts from the Present, and the tests therein described indicated that the fractures created by a temporary cavity happen immediately, even before the exit of a bullet. So the large skull fractures associated with the temp cavity would be the same if the bullet exited during the point of maximum cavitation or after. I think it makes sense to assume, moreover, that a bullet exiting after the point of maximum cavitation would create smaller fractures upon exit. But I don't recall any testing along these lines.

I think a big part of the confusion comes from Olivier and Sturdivan's testing of the M-16. They got it in their head and pushed upon the public that a high-velocity bullet will explode the skull at a mid-point in its trajectory through the skull. While this was true, it led many of those studying the JFK case to assume this explosion would create massive fractures...separate from the entrance fractures. But this wasn't true. Skulls exploding as a result of a large temporary cavity inevitably reveal a spider web of fractures leading back to the entrance.  No such pattern was noted on Kennedy's skull. This was so problematic to a nouveau EOP entrance LN doctor named Peter Cummings that he told Fox on the 50th that there actually was a spider web pattern of fractures deriving from the EOP entrance on Kennedy's skull.

Well, this would have been news to the autopsy surgeons, who measured the fractures on the skull, and reported that the fractures at exit were far longer than at entrance...

There was, of course, no mention of this during Cummings' segment...

 

 

 

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

8 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

PS: Numerous witnesses said they saw brain matter in the limo, or dripping from his head in the operating room. It only makes sense that some of this was in his hair. If I recall the morticians said they cleaned brain matter from the hair. Still, why do you raise this issue? 

1. Mostly that the tangential wound comparisons are not really equal.  Even though they are both tangential wounds of the skull, the left on shows a horizontal wound and JFK's is a vertical wound.

2. You claim there are bullet fragments that were found in the car that are from the head shot.  As you can see in the video below, it seems to me that most or all of the bullet ended exiting JFK and landing somewhere on the grassy area of the north side of Elm street.  Why do you claim that the bullet fragments found in the car are from the head shot?

https://www.rigcolocation.com/jfk/frontmenu_g000008.mp4