The Clean Cut Throat Wound

[Pat Speer]

6 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

The HSCA FPP read alot of forensic pathology books between them and they upheld the SBT - a bullet passing through JFKs neck and exiting his throat.

I'm deferring to their expertise as it looks to me like JFK and Connally clearly react at the same time on the Zapruder film. So I see no reason to contradict the HSCA FPP findings.

Once again, you just don't know. The FPP signed off on the SBT under the proviso JFK was hit while behind the sign in the Z-film. For the SBT to work, they concluded, JFK would have to have been leaning sharply forward to an extent not shown in the film. So they said he must have leaned forward while behind the sign... Only...Only... No one bothered to tell them that the photography panel had concluded he was hit before going behind the sign. So they actually did not sign off on the HSCA's version of the SBT. Oops. 

This is similar to the WC's gambit with Brennan. He ID'ed Oswald as the man on hr sixth floor under the proviso he was not wearing the dark brown shirt whose fibers were found on the rifle. The WC ignored him and pretended that both were true--that he ID'ed Oswald and that Oswald was wearing the shirt Brennan insisted was not the shirt worn by the shooter.

It's called a whitewash. 

[Gerry Down]

6 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Once again, you just don't know. The FPP signed off on the SBT under the proviso JFK was hit while behind the sign in the Z-film. For the SBT to work, they concluded, JFK would have to have been leaning sharply forward to an extent not shown in the film. So they said he must have leaned forward while behind the sign... Only...Only... No one bothered to tell them that the photography panel had concluded he was hit before going behind the sign. So they actually did not sign off on the HSCA's version of the SBT. Oops. 

JFK had quiet a hunched back. So he would not have had to have been leaning forward to make the SBT work but simply be sitting up normally in the seat as seen in the Z film.

[Gerry Down]

1 hour ago, Michael Crane said:

That's what happens when you get cheap sawzall blades.

Or put too much force on the tool.

[Tom Gram]

14 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

The HSCA FPP read alot of forensic pathology books between them and they upheld the SBT - a bullet passing through JFKs neck and exiting his throat.

I'm deferring to their expertise as it looks to me like JFK and Connally clearly react at the same time on the Zapruder film. So I see no reason to contradict the HSCA FPP findings.

It looks like Pat already replied, but the HSCA SBT conclusion was contingent on JFK leaning sharply forward and getting shot behind the sign, which he wasn’t in Z224. Do you agree with the findings of the FPP that the back wound was at or below the level of the throat wound? 

In other words, the actual findings of HSCA FPP are totally incompatible with the modern SBT, which is why most if not all lone assassin theorists today claim that the FPP was wrong about the location of the back wound. 

So you can’t really have it both ways. By deferring to the expertise of the HSCA you are really saying the opposite of what you think you are saying - that the SBT is extremely unlikely if not total nonsense. To really support the SBT you have to defer to non-experts in forensic pathology like Posner, Lattimer, and Myers. There’s nothing wrong with that, and people like DVP are well aware of this conundrum, but the point is that you can’t really use the findings of FPP to support your argument here. 

 

[Michael Crane]

Pat,

It's like we're playing poker with cards face up,and Dave & Gerry keep raising with seven deuce off suit.

[Gerry Down]

5 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

It looks like Pat already replied, but the HSCA SBT conclusion was contingent on JFK leaning sharply forward and getting shot behind the sign, which he wasn’t in Z224. Do you agree with the findings of the FPP that the back wound was at or below the level of the throat wound? 

In other words, the actual findings of HSCA FPP are totally incompatible with the modern SBT, which is why most if not all lone assassin theorists today claim that the FPP was wrong about the location of the back wound. 

So you can’t really have it both ways. By deferring to the expertise of the HSCA you are really saying the opposite of what you think you are saying - that the SBT is extremely unlikely if not total nonsense. To really support the SBT you have to defer to non-experts in forensic pathology like Posner, Lattimer, and Myers. There’s nothing wrong with that, and people like DVP are well aware of this conundrum, but the point is that you can’t really use the findings of FPP to support your argument here. 

 

I try to take everyone's opinion on board while not necessarily agreeing with everything any one person or panel concludes.

I think JFKs hunched back has created alot of confusion as to the exact height of the back wound in relation to the throat wound.

[David Von Pein]

41 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

This is similar to the WC's gambit with Brennan. He ID'ed Oswald as the man on [the] sixth floor under the proviso he was not wearing the dark brown shirt whose fibers were found on the rifle. The WC ignored him and pretended that both were true--that he ID'ed Oswald and that Oswald was wearing the shirt Brennan insisted was not the shirt worn by the shooter.

It's called a whitewash.

I believe Oswald was probably wearing only his white T-shirt when he shot JFK. (With Oswald's brown shirt sitting on the floor or on top of a box in the Sniper's Nest during the actual shooting.)

And, therefore, via such a shirt scenario, Howard Brennan would be correct about Oswald not wearing the brown "arrest" shirt at the moment of the shooting itself.

 

Edited March 2, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Pat Speer]

15 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

I try to take everyone's opinion on board while not necessarily agreeing with everything any one person or panel concludes.

I think JFKs hunched back has created alot of confusion as to the exact height of the back wound in relation to the throat wound.

If you looked at the Lattimer drawing you would realize how ridiculous it is. He has the bullet enter inches below the shoulder line--at the level of JFK's chin. 

Can you find us a picture where JFK's shoulder line is inches above his chin, halfway up the back of his skull? Of course not. 

[Micah Mileto]

3 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

 

The HSCA said that was just an artifact???

[David Von Pein]

52 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

By deferring to the expertise of the HSCA you are really saying the opposite of what you think you are saying - that the SBT is extremely unlikely if not total nonsense. To really support the SBT you have to defer to non-experts in forensic pathology like Posner, Lattimer, and Myers. There’s nothing wrong with that, and people like DVP are well aware of this conundrum, but the point is that you can’t really use the findings of FPP to support your argument here.

Yes, Tom, I agree with you about LNers not really being in agreement with the HSCA when it comes to some of the details associated with the SBT. I'm certainly not in agreement with the HSCA on multiple things. Such as:

1.) The HSCA's Z190 timing for the SBT, which is totally Ludicrous. (Especially when taking into account the very low position of JFK's arms almost two full seconds later, at Z224.)

2.) The HSCA's "leaning forward" status of JFK during the SBT timeframe --- Ludicrous (and provably wrong, per the Zapruder Film).

3.) The HSCA's determination that JFK's back wound was actually anatomically LOWER on Kennedy's body than the throat wound --- Wrong (and I would say provably wrong, as I discuss here).

But....

When all was said and done....and after ALL of the evidence was examined by the HSCA (including the medical evidence)....the House Select Committee did still conclude that Bullet CE399 did, indeed, go through the bodies of both President Kennedy and Governor Connally.

So the HSCA definitely got the final conclusion correct, but they certainly arrived at that conclusion in some very strange ways.

 

Edited March 2, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Ron Bulman]

42 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

(With Oswald's brown shirt sitting on the floor or on top of a box in the Sniper's Nest during the actual shooting.)

From a clean cut throat wound to Oswald's shirt, where did you get this Dave?

[David Von Pein]

5 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

From a clean cut throat wound to Oswald's shirt, where did you get this Dave?

From Pat Speer's post at the top of this page, here.

 

[Ron Bulman]

51 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

With Oswald's brown shirt sitting on the floor or on top of a box in the Sniper's Nest during the actual shooting.)

No, I meant this part Dave.  It's not mentioned in Pat's post, quote it if you can, I missed it.  Never read about Oswald's brown shirt on the floor or on top of a box while he was shooting. 

So, he was warm, took his shirt off to shoot, then took time to put it back on before hiding the gun and running down the stairs?  No brown shirt ever found there I've read of.  Cite please. 

[David Von Pein]

37 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Never read about Oswald's brown shirt on the floor or on top of a box while he was shooting. 

So, he was warm, took his shirt off to shoot, then took time to put it back on before hiding the gun and running down the stairs?  No brown shirt ever found there I've read of.  Cite please. 

It's just my own theory of what I think happened. It's not really the type of thing you can "cite" for.

I think Oswald shot JFK while wearing only his white T-shirt. (And there are a few witnesses who said the 6th-Floor sniper had on "light colored" clothing, which would be helpful to the "T-shirt" theory.)

I think Oswald then used his brown shirt as a fingerprint-wiping rag as he raced to the northwest corner of the sixth floor after the shooting (although, yes, he missed the prints on the trigger guard). And that, IMO, is how the fresh fibers from his brown shirt got wedged under the butt plate of the rifle.

Oswald then dumped the rifle amongst the book stacks near the northwest stairwell, and as he went down the stairs, he hurriedly put his brown shirt on, but leaving it untucked and unbuttoned as he entered the second-floor lunchroom.

Hence, Officer Marrion Baker testified in this manner concerning the brown item of clothing he saw Oswald wearing when they were together in the lunchroom on November 22nd:

"I assume it was a jacket, it was hanging out." -- Marrion L. Baker [3 H 257]

 

Edited March 2, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Charles Blackmon]

10 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

They probably would have dissected the back wound too but for Dr. Burkley giving too many orders.

Well there you go! Somebody with power and authority was directing the autopsy. The three doctors did what they were ordered including not making an attempt to explore a bullet path from the back wound to the throat. The single bullet theory remains nothing more than conjecture.