The Clean Cut Throat Wound

[Gerry Down]

This medical paper says exit wounds that are shored, such as the way JFKs shirt was held firmly against his throat with the neck tie, can resemble entrance wounds. The paper says:

A special variety of the common wound type is the “shored” or “supported” exit when a firm object is pressed against the body at the site where the bullet emerges. Under such circumstances, the exit wound shows irregularly abraded margins sometimes surrounding a central tissue defect [7, 16]. Therefore, shored exits may resemble entrance wounds.

LINK: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236934203_The_varying_size_of_exit_wounds_from_center-fire_rifles_as_a_consequence_of_the_temporary_cavity/link/00b7d51aae58848a31000000/download

The term "defect" is key here. This is medical lingo for a hole. Normally holes are associated with entrance wounds and not exit wounds:

According to textbooks of forensic pathology, most exit wounds are characterized by the absence of a real hole (no
missing area of skin). This means that the wound usually can be closed by bringing the edges into apposition [14, 16, 19, 30]. Some authors also emphasize the “more irregular nature” of exits compared with entrance wounds [1, 6, 15–17, 19]. Another feature sometimes attributed to bullet exit wounds is their “everted” appearance [7, 17, 27] with “outwardly split margins” [2] or torn edges [27].

LINK: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236934203_The_varying_size_of_exit_wounds_from_center-fire_rifles_as_a_consequence_of_the_temporary_cavity/link/00b7d51aae58848a31000000/download

In other words an actual hole, as in a circular piece of missing skin, is rarely seen with an exit wound EXCEPT in the case of shoring which is the exact scenario that occurred with JFKs throat wound. From this it can be seen how the Parkland doctors were tricked into thinking that what they were looking at must have been an entrance wound in the throat. 

[Bill Brown]

On 3/1/2023 at 5:44 PM, Michael Crane said:

Um,

The back wound that was about 6 inches down from JFK's neck did not transit.

It penetrated less than a fingers depth.

Nice try though  😉

 

"It penetrated less than a fingers depth."

 

Nonsense.

 

This is not how bullets work in the real world.

 

What kind of weapon and/or ammunition do you suppose was used which would result in a bullet penetrating less than three inches into soft tissue?

 

Edited May 31, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Bill Brown]

On 3/1/2023 at 10:27 PM, 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. 

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. 

 

"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."

 

Oswald was wearing only the white T-shirt while waiting up on the sixth floor.  After firing the shots, he wipes the rifle down with the brown arrest shirt as he makes his way across the sixth floor, causing a tuft of microscopic fibers to become lodged in the crevice between the butt plate and the wooden stock.

 

[Bill Brown]

On 3/2/2023 at 10:20 AM, Pat Speer said:

Oh my. The fingerprint-wiping rag bit is just nonsense. You've seen the trigger guard prints. No one wiped the damn rifle, David. If you're gonna have a pet theory---which we all do--you should at least fine tune it to remove the nonsense.

The rifle was not wiped down. Period. 

 

"The rifle was not wiped down. Period."

 

The rifle was not wiped down with 100% effectiveness.  But, still wiped down somewhat.

[Bill Brown]

On 3/2/2023 at 12:26 PM, Michael Crane said:

You can also refer to it as the weight gaining theory.

There was more weight in bullet fragments contained in Governor Connally's wrist than what was lost from Commission number 399.

 

 

"There was more weight in bullet fragments contained in Governor Connally's wrist than what was lost from Commission number 399."

 

This simply is not true.

 

One hundred test bullets from the four lots were weighed.  It was determined (weighed on a precision balance) that the average of these test bullets weighed 160.8 grains.

 

399 weighed 158.6 grains, 2.2 grains of lost weight (assuming for a moment that 399 was the median).

 

Let me ask you, how many grains do you feel were "contained in Governor Connally's wrist"?

 

Edited May 31, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Cliff Varnell]

7 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

"It penetrated less than a fingers depth."

 

Nonsense.

 

This is not how bullets work in the real world.

 

What kind of weapon and/or ammunition do you suppose was used which would result in a bullet penetrating less than three inches into soft tissue?

 

Dart weapons developed for the CIA project MKNAOMI at Ft Detrick, MD.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Pat Speer]

5 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

"The rifle was not wiped down. Period."

 

The rifle was not wiped down with 100% effectiveness.  But, still wiped down somewhat.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the rifle was wiped down, even a little bit. Have you seen the trigger guard prints? They are not smudged. It follows then that the rifle was not wiped down. 

I would think, moreover, that you, as an Oswald-did-it person, would believe it wasn't wiped down, as that would support that Scalice was able to make an ID of the trigger guard prints. Can I take from your belief it was wiped down that you don't put much stock in Scalice's ID? 

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

"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."

 

Oswald was wearing only the white T-shirt while waiting up on the sixth floor.  After firing the shots, he wipes the rifle down with the brown arrest shirt as he makes his way across the sixth floor, causing a tuft of microscopic fibers to become lodged in the crevice between the butt plate and the wooden stock.

 

The fibers weren't lodged in the crevice. They were wrapped around the edge of the butt plate on top of fingerprint powder. That is why the FBI offered that they were snagged and just dangling there until someone, presumably Day, brushed the rifle, and "innocently" wrapped the fibers around the butt plate on top of the powder. 

I think we can agree this was nonsense. 

[Bill Brown]

5 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Dart weapons developed for the CIA project MKNAOMI at Ft Detrick, MD.

 

You're not making sense.  Dart weapons, by their very nature, don't fire bullets.

 

[Bill Brown]

3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

There is no evidence whatsoever that the rifle was wiped down, even a little bit. Have you seen the trigger guard prints? They are not smudged. It follows then that the rifle was not wiped down. 

I would think, moreover, that you, as an Oswald-did-it person, would believe it wasn't wiped down, as that would support that Scalice was able to make an ID of the trigger guard prints. Can I take from your belief it was wiped down that you don't put much stock in Scalice's ID? 

 

We can discuss just how effectively Oswald did or did not wipe down the rifle 'til the cows come home.

 

But, this discussion started because it was suggested that Oswald was not the shooter because the sniper's nest shooter was seen in a light-colored shirt.  The point is that even if the sniper's nest shooter was seen only in a light-colored shirt, it doesn't do anything to suggest that this shooter was not Oswald, since Oswald was indeed wearing a light-colored T-shirt under the brown arrest shirt that day.  It's no huge task to sit up there in the sniper's nest only in the T-shirt and then put on the brown arrest shirt at some point between the sniper's nest and the 2nd floor lunchroom.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

You're not making sense.  Dart weapons, by their very nature, don't fire bullets.

 

You’re begging the question, assuming the wound was created by a standard round.

You asked — “What kind of weapon and/or ammunition do you suppose was used”...

What kind of weapon leaves a shallow wound in soft tissue?

Dart gun.

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

You’re begging the question, assuming the wound was created by a standard round.

You asked — “What kind of weapon and/or ammunition do you suppose was used”...

What kind of weapon leaves a shallow wound in soft tissue?

Dart gun.

 

CV--

Yes...but the wounds to back and throat were obvious and visible. 

The CIAs dart gun---

"When fired into a target, the frozen dart would immediately melt and release its poisonous payload into the victim’s bloodstream. Shellfish toxins, which are known to completely shut down the cardiovascular system in concentrated doses, would spread to the victim’s heart, mimicking a heart attack and causing death within minutes.

All that would be left behind was a tiny red dot where the dart entered the body, undetectable to those who didn’t know to look for it. As the target lay dying, the assassin could escape without notice."

---30---

https://allthatsinteresting.com/heart-attack-gun#:~:text=It had an effective range,payload into the victim's bloodstream.

There seems to be a mismatch between the wounds resulting from the CIA dart gun, and the obvious wounds to JFK's body. 

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

We can discuss just how effectively Oswald did or did not wipe down the rifle 'til the cows come home.

 

But, this discussion started because it was suggested that Oswald was not the shooter because the sniper's nest shooter was seen in a light-colored shirt.  The point is that even if the sniper's nest shooter was seen only in a light-colored shirt, it doesn't do anything to suggest that this shooter was not Oswald, since Oswald was indeed wearing a light-colored T-shirt under the brown arrest shirt that day.  It's no huge task to sit up there in the sniper's nest only in the T-shirt and then put on the brown arrest shirt at some point between the sniper's nest and the 2nd floor lunchroom.

 

We've been through this, but the fact remains that there is NO evidence the shooter was wearing a t-shirt. None of the witesses described such a thing. And none of them noticed the shooter's bare arms. So the facts strongly suggest the sniper was NOT wearing a t-shirt. 

[Cliff Varnell]

 

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

 

There seems to be a mismatch between the wounds resulting from the CIA dart gun, and the obvious wounds to JFK's body. 

Drawing conclusions prior to investigation again, Ben?

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_1_Colby.pdf

You may not realize, Ben, that a lot of different weapons were developed for MKNAOMI.  Some involved shellfish toxin, some involved paralytics.  

Page 169 of Senseney testimony:

pg. 169

<quote on>

Q: ,,,[A]s to the kind of items you experimented with and developed, would it be accurate to say that you worked on and experimented with gadgets for which nobody ever yet has found a use?

Senseney: I think there were some intended uses. For instance, the Special Forces gave us SDR, Small Development Requirements, indicating that they had a military requirement to meet a certain situation.

Q: Was mostly all of your work then done of the basis of these special requirement requests that came either from the Special Forces or some other source?

Senseney: That is true.

Q: Did these requests come from the CIA directly, to your knowledge?

Senseney: No; they sort of rode piggyback on most of these. They sort of rode piggyback on the Army's development and picked off what they thought was good for them, I guess.

Q: But you did not undertake a development or experimental program of a particular weapon until you had some request from the Special Forces to develop the weapons system?

Senseney: There was one item. It was a hand-held item that could fire a dart projectile. It was done only for them; no one else.

<quote off>

pg. 170

<quote on>

Q: Were there frequent transfers of material between Dr. Gordon's office and your office, either the hardware or the toxin?

Senseney: The only frequent thing that changed hands was the dog projectile and its loaders, 4640. This was done maybe five or six in one quantity. And maybe 6 weeks to 6 months later they would bring those back and ask for five or six more. They would bring them back expended, that is, they bring all the hardware except the projectile, OK?

Q: Indicating that they have been used?

Senseney: Correct.

...Q: How much time usually elapsed between the time you gave them these weapons and the time they brought them back to you expended?

Senseney: Usually 5 to 6 weeks.

<quote off>

Ben, your challenge here, as always, is that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Edited June 1, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

Drawing conclusions prior to investigation again, Ben?

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_1_Colby.pdf

You may not realize, Ben, that a lot of different weapons were developed for MKNAOMI.  Some involved shellfish toxin, some involved paralytics.  

Page 169 of Senseney testimony:

pg. 169

<quote on>

Q: ,,,[A]s to the kind of items you experimented with and developed, would it be accurate to say that you worked on and experimented with gadgets for which nobody ever yet has found a use?

Senseney: I think there were some intended uses. For instance, the Special Forces gave us SDR, Small Development Requirements, indicating that they had a military requirement to meet a certain situation.

Q: Was mostly all of your work then done of the basis of these special requirement requests that came either from the Special Forces or some other source?

Senseney: That is true.

Q: Did these requests come from the CIA directly, to your knowledge?

Senseney: No; they sort of rode piggyback on most of these. They sort of rode piggyback on the Army's development and picked off what they thought was good for them, I guess.

Q: But you did not undertake a development or experimental program of a particular weapon until you had some request from the Special Forces to develop the weapons system?

Senseney: There was one item. It was a hand-held item that could fire a dart projectile. It was done only for them; no one else.

<quote off>

pg. 170

<quote on>

Q: Were there frequent transfers of material between Dr. Gordon's office and your office, either the hardware or the toxin?

Senseney: The only frequent thing that changed hands was the dog projectile and its loaders, 4640. This was done maybe five or six in one quantity. And maybe 6 weeks to 6 months later they would bring those back and ask for five or six more. They would bring them back expended, that is, they bring all the hardware except the projectile, OK?

Q: Indicating that they have been used?

Senseney: Correct.

...Q: How much time usually elapsed between the time you gave them these weapons and the time they brought them back to you expended?

Senseney: Usually 5 to 6 weeks.

<quote off>

Ben, your challenge here, as always, is that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

CV--

Other than description (linked to above) that the frozen darts would leave a small, nearly undetectable wound....do you have supplementary descriptions?

Such as, "some of the poisoned frozen darts left wounds the size of bullets?" 

As you speculating there were frozen darts in 1963 that left bullet-hole sized holes, and not very small punctures, in JFK? 

Give that a dart's purpose was to inject a minute amount of poison...were all such darts rather small? Do you know? 

Have you any diagrams or drawings of the purported darts? 

Do you have any descriptions of the wounds to a body produced by the darts...other than the one I provided, which was that the darts produced a very small wound?