Dale Myers and his World of Illusion

[Bob Ness]

39 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

We can also suspect JFK's back wound was created by CE 399, which had been undercharged for silencing purposes. 

We can also speculate it was a misfire, yes? Certainly possible I would think.

[Tom Gram]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

We can also suspect JFK's back wound was created by CE 399, which had been undercharged for silencing purposes. 

That or Gerry Hemming is right and the round was intentionally undercharged and fired into JFKs back to create a pristine bullet. 

[Sandy Larsen]

8 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

That or Gerry Hemming is right and the round was intentionally undercharged and fired into JFKs back to create a pristine bullet. 

 

You mean that maybe the shooter intentionally undercharged and fired the bullet into JFK's back in order to create a pristine bullet? Why would the shooter want to create a pristine bullet?

 

[Tom Gram]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

You mean that maybe the shooter intentionally undercharged and fired the bullet into JFK's back in order to create a pristine bullet? Why would the shooter want to create a pristine bullet?

 

So the round could be linked to Oswald’s rifle. It could have been done with C2766 or a sabot and a different gun. That was Hemming’s theory anyway. I know he’s not exactly captain credible but it’s an interesting thought IMO. 

[Sandy Larsen]

11 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

So the round could be linked to Oswald’s rifle. It could have been done with C2766 or a sabot and a different gun. That was Hemming’s theory anyway. I know he’s not exactly captain credible but it’s an interesting thought IMO. 

 

Yeah, thanks. It's an interesting theory.

 

[Paul Cummings]

I asked Brian Edwards about the "meat shot" this weekend at the conference and specifically what Hemming said. Edwards indicated the shot was meant to kill Kennedy but also to immobilze JFK because of his back brace. 

[Steve Roe]

17 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

1. The WC's re-enactment proved that a shot fired from the TSBD or Dal-Tex and just missing the president's head would have hit Connally in the armpit. 

2. Bullets are not always found at a crime scene. Connally's cufflink was never found, and roughly half of the exploded bullet was never found, so we know that possibility exists. We can also suspect JFK's back wound was created by CE 399, which had been undercharged for silencing purposes. 

Pat, is this really your alternative explanation why the SBT was fantasy?

1. The Secret Service reenactment was filmed from the TSBD sniper window and not the Dal-Tex. Surely you don't believe a sniper was firing from the Dal-Tex, do you? If so, where from? Where does it line up with? 

2. Now let's address your argument that CE399 had been "undercharged". We know the FBI tied that bullet to Oswald's MC to the exclusion of all others. There was an exhaustive study with test bullets to verify the tooling marks. So that rifle found on the 6th floor did fire CE399. Ok, now if I understand you right (correct me if I'm wrong), you claim the CE399 was not a "through and through" shot, in the back and out the throat. If that's the case, you are at odds with Dr. Cyril Wecht and his fellow HSCA panel members that did say it was "back-out the throat". Wecht challenges the SBT because he did not believe that shot did not go and hit the Governor. It just disappeared. Therefore, in Wecht's view, CE399 was not the bullet that hit the President in the back, because it was found. And he further complicates himself stating there was no way CE399 could have caused all the Governor's wounds. Crazy? I'm sure you have your own views on Dr. Wecht. 

Undercharge bullet? Although it could be a remote possibility, I find it entirely unlikely. Why? Look at the President's reaction on the first shot that hit him. He raises his arms up to around the neck area (he did not grab his throat), and he slumps to his left onto Jackie. He appears to be somewhat motionless after slumping until the fatal head shot. Would that be consistent with a shallow back wound as you profess? I don't think so. 

Unless someone reloaded CE399, removing gun powder from the shell, the Olin Western round nose bullets were reliable and deadly fully charged. I don't understand why anyone would do that and for what reason? Makes no sense, unless you have this elaborate conspiracy of faceless-nameless people trying to frame Oswald by ensuring the bullet is found. What if they missed? Big stretch of the imagination in my opinion. 

Here's Dr. Werner Spitz's conclusions to the Church Committee. 

 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32022#relPageId=1&search=Western_CE399

[Michael Griffith]

1 hour ago, Steve Roe said:

Pat, is this really your alternative explanation why the SBT was fantasy?

1. The Secret Service reenactment was filmed from the TSBD sniper window and not the Dal-Tex. Surely you don't believe a sniper was firing from the Dal-Tex, do you? If so, where from? Where does it line up with? 

2. Now let's address your argument that CE399 had been "undercharged". We know the FBI tied that bullet to Oswald's MC to the exclusion of all others. There was an exhaustive study with test bullets to verify the tooling marks. So that rifle found on the 6th floor did fire CE399. Ok, now if I understand you right (correct me if I'm wrong), you claim the CE399 was not a "through and through" shot, in the back and out the throat. If that's the case, you are at odds with Dr. Cyril Wecht and his fellow HSCA panel members that did say it was "back-out the throat". Wecht challenges the SBT because he did not believe that shot did not go and hit the Governor. It just disappeared. Therefore, in Wecht's view, CE399 was not the bullet that hit the President in the back, because it was found. And he further complicates himself stating there was no way CE399 could have caused all the Governor's wounds. Crazy? I'm sure you have your own views on Dr. Wecht. 

Undercharge bullet? Although it could be a remote possibility, I find it entirely unlikely. Why? Look at the President's reaction on the first shot that hit him. He raises his arms up to around the neck area (he did not grab his throat), and he slumps to his left onto Jackie. He appears to be somewhat motionless after slumping until the fatal head shot. Would that be consistent with a shallow back wound as you profess? I don't think so. 

Unless someone reloaded CE399, removing gun powder from the shell, the Olin Western round nose bullets were reliable and deadly fully charged. I don't understand why anyone would do that and for what reason? Makes no sense, unless you have this elaborate conspiracy of faceless-nameless people trying to frame Oswald by ensuring the bullet is found. What if they missed? Big stretch of the imagination in my opinion. 

Here's Dr. Werner Spitz's conclusions to the Church Committee. 

 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32022#relPageId=1&search=Western_CE399

We need to start by dealing with the fact that we now know that the back wound had no exit point and that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a bullet exiting the throat. The HSCA suppressed evidence that the back wound had no exit point. We learned this when the ARRB released autopsy-related HSCA interview files and other evidence. So any discussion on JFK's non-fatal wounds needs to start by acknowledging this fact.

The back wound was shallow and did not penetrate the chest cavity. The autopsy doctors firmly established this at the autopsy by probing the wound extensively. One of the medical technicians who witnessed the probing could see the end of the probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. After the prolonged probing, Dr. Finck turned to Sibert and O'Neill and informed them that the back wound had no exit point. 

Dr. Wecht was apparently unaware of any of this evidence, though I suspect that Baden was aware of it and that he was one of the ones who arranged for this evidence to be sealed. 

Edited November 21, 2022 by Michael Griffith

[Denny Zartman]

@Michael Griffith is right: the back wound was shallow. The single bullet theory ends there.

[Matthew Koch]

56 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said:

@Michael Griffith is right: the back wound was shallow. The single bullet theory ends there.

At the 16 minute mark Francis O'neil says no point of exit at the autopsy 

 

[Tom Gram]

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Undercharge bullet? Although it could be a remote possibility, I find it entirely unlikely. Why? Look at the President's reaction on the first shot that hit him. He raises his arms up to around the neck area (he did not grab his throat), and he slumps to his left onto Jackie. He appears to be somewhat motionless after slumping until the fatal head shot. Would that be consistent with a shallow back wound as you profess? I don't think so. 

That’s only if you assume the first shot that hit JFK was at Z224. I’m sure you are aware that the Z-film shows JFK reacting to something at Z190 - since it was compelling enough to convince the HSCA. JFK’s visible reaction at Z190-207 is consistent with a shallow wound to the back. 

[David Von Pein]

6 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

the back wound was shallow.

Not only do the autopsy surgeons disagree with the above comment (via the autopsy report which was signed by all THREE autopsy doctors!), but the 1968 Clark Panel disagrees as well. Let's have a gander....

"The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." --From Clark Panel Report

Replay (for emphasis)....

"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds..."

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

 

 

Edited November 21, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Pat Speer]

10 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Pat, is this really your alternative explanation why the SBT was fantasy?

1. The Secret Service reenactment was filmed from the TSBD sniper window and not the Dal-Tex. Surely you don't believe a sniper was firing from the Dal-Tex, do you? If so, where from? Where does it line up with? 

2. Now let's address your argument that CE399 had been "undercharged". We know the FBI tied that bullet to Oswald's MC to the exclusion of all others. There was an exhaustive study with test bullets to verify the tooling marks. So that rifle found on the 6th floor did fire CE399. Ok, now if I understand you right (correct me if I'm wrong), you claim the CE399 was not a "through and through" shot, in the back and out the throat. If that's the case, you are at odds with Dr. Cyril Wecht and his fellow HSCA panel members that did say it was "back-out the throat". Wecht challenges the SBT because he did not believe that shot did not go and hit the Governor. It just disappeared. Therefore, in Wecht's view, CE399 was not the bullet that hit the President in the back, because it was found. And he further complicates himself stating there was no way CE399 could have caused all the Governor's wounds. Crazy? I'm sure you have your own views on Dr. Wecht. 

Undercharge bullet? Although it could be a remote possibility, I find it entirely unlikely. Why? Look at the President's reaction on the first shot that hit him. He raises his arms up to around the neck area (he did not grab his throat), and he slumps to his left onto Jackie. He appears to be somewhat motionless after slumping until the fatal head shot. Would that be consistent with a shallow back wound as you profess? I don't think so. 

Unless someone reloaded CE399, removing gun powder from the shell, the Olin Western round nose bullets were reliable and deadly fully charged. I don't understand why anyone would do that and for what reason? Makes no sense, unless you have this elaborate conspiracy of faceless-nameless people trying to frame Oswald by ensuring the bullet is found. What if they missed? Big stretch of the imagination in my opinion. 

Here's Dr. Werner Spitz's conclusions to the Church Committee. 

 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32022#relPageId=1&search=Western_CE399

1. The trajectory from the upper floors and roof of the Dal-Tex building is nearly identical to that of the sniper's nest. These areas were within Canning's trajectory cones. I believe Myers included them as well. The trajectory is so similar in fact that the WC published an exhibit purporting to show the sniper's nest view that was actually taken from the perspective of the Dal-Tex. We should also recall that a number of SBT simulations purporting to point back to the TSBD actually pointed to the Dal-Tex.

2. I have spoken to Wecht about the SBT and he acknowledges the possibility the bullet did not transit. His claim is that a full velocity bullet would have transited, and may very well have been deflected out of the car, But he doesn't pretend we know the bullet transited. 

3. The President's movements circa Z-224 are not consistent with a minor impact on his back. But neither are they consistent with a bullet transiting his throat. His rapid arm movements and subsequent slump are instead indicative of an injury to the cerebellum. As a consequence I suspect he was first hit on the back around Z-190, that he was then hit low on the back of the head by the same burst striking Connally, and that he subsequently was struck at the supposed exit on the top of his skull by a tangential shot. I know you won't let yourself be convinced, and that's fine. But if you actually dig through the weeds and read about wound ballistics, etc, this scenario makes 100x as much sense as the crap we were fed by the likes of Spitz and Baden. 

4. As far as why someone would use a subsonic round, well, that is explained quite nicely in the CIA's Manual on Assassination. Not only was the use of such a round an option, it was recommended. 

Edited November 22, 2022 by Pat Speer

[Pat Speer]

8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Not only do the autopsy surgeons disagree with the above comment (via the autopsy report which was signed by all THREE autopsy doctors!), but the 1968 Clark Panel disagrees as well. Let's have a gander....

"The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." --From Clark Panel Report

Replay (for emphasis)....

"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds..."

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

 

 

Yes, David, we know. They said there was a track visible on the unenhanced x-ray. Lattimer saw the same thing. And so did Sturdivan. But guess what? You can see this for yourself and the wound track doesn't start at the back wound location.  It starts well above that, and is in fact evidence for a missile descending the neck from the skull. The HSCA FPP realized this, moreover, and decided they needed to explain it away. So they added a bit about the air in the neck tissues representing air that backed up in the neck when Kennedy's tie blocked its exit.

I think we can agree, David, that that was total horse-puckey. 

Edited November 22, 2022 by Pat Speer

[James DiEugenio]

Nice comments, by Pat, Mike, Tom, Matt and Denny.

Far from being the Single Bullet Fact, I agree that it never happened.

 

Thanks for keeping this up while I was away.  I was in Dallas for the CAPA conference, which I will be talking about on BOR tomorrow night.  And then I did Valuetainment with Patrick Bet-David.  Who, pleasantly, knows the case pretty well.

Edited November 23, 2022 by James DiEugenio