The slump

[Pat Speer]

While creating my on-line database of witness statements I came to realize that there were two "slumps", in that some people described Kennedy's lean to the left after he was first hit as a slump and some people described Kennedy's falling over in the seat after the head shot as a slump.That's why I presented the shot descriptions in context. When one reads the descriptions in context, including the location of the witness in relation to the limo at the time of the shot, the shooting scenario is not nearly as confusing as some like to make out (so they can bs people into believing whatever they want them to believe). In fact, it's one of the best arguments for conspiracy, seeing as so many witnesses heard the last two shots bang-bang. 

 

Edited May 21 by Pat Speer

[Chris Bristow]

3 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

I disagree. If Don Roberdeau’s drawing is anything close to accurate, a shot from the knoll would have have made a fairly sharp left turn (~70 degrees) to exit the right rear of the head. The force on the left half of the brain and skull would have been pretty large. Even if the bullet fragmented, there would be substantial damage to the left half of the brain. A shot from the south knoll sort of solves the problem but introduces the problems of shooting through the windshield, Greer or the Connallys.

In my judgement, the head shot was off-center and oblique leaving a large entrance wound. Think of the Apple logo. It traveled forward along the right side of the skull and it exited around the right temple, blew out material along the right side of the skull in a cloud which was quickly dispersed back and to the left by the combined force of a west-southwest wind and the relative wind from the southwest direction of travel of the limo. Larger fragments of brain tissue and skull not as much affected by the wind were carried forward by the momentum transferred from the incoming bullet.

Then again, maybe Greer or Nellie Connally did it.

I think the Roberdeau map is correct in terms of the direction of Elm at frame 313 and the knoll angle to it.  It shows JFK's head turned about 25 degrees to the left of the limos direction at 313 which is also accurate. Although I think JFK's head was at the middle of the bench seat I still agree with the basic angle of the knoll to JFK.
 The Roberdeau map denotes an entry wound at the right temple area but Dr Clark's estimation of a tangential wound is different. His tangential strike would hit just behind JFK's right ear at the mastoid protuberance and chip out the occipital parietal area. It would not create a separate exit wound. The exit is at the other side of the occipital chunk knocked out by the angular strike at the mastoid. His theory may have been an attempt to explain why there was no separate entry and exit wound. His idea that the neck  wound was the entry for the  occipital exit is, I think , a separate  assumption as that occipital wound would not be tangential.

The south knoll theory does not have the bullet passing through the windshield. the south knoll proposed trajectory passes just behind Greer and in front of the side window. JFK having leaned over to place his head in the middle of the bench seat and turned 25 degrees left lines up that shot to his right temple and exiting in the right O.C.
 The documentary "Inside The Target Car" showed the south knoll shot coming through the windshield but that was based on JFK sitting straight up, not leaning at a good 40 angle over to his left as seen in Muchmore and Moorman. the same documentary tried to show JFK and Jackie aligned in such a way as to have Jackie in the line of sight from the grassy knoll. That is one of the biggest lies ever promoted by the LN side thanks to Gary Mack.(That was a short tangential rant because I find his propaganda to be some of the worst BS I have ever seen.)

  The head shot being "Off angle" could maybe cause a larger entrance wound. But if so it contradicts the official WC report and autopsy results and photographs that show there was no large wound in the back of the head at all. Are you is disagreement with the official story? It sounds like you have a different take on the head wound.
   The direction of the debris going towards Hargis does not seem consistent with the wind to me. The wind from the southwest was heading northeast. It does not seem to push the debris to Hargis unless the wind gusted directly east for a moment. But Hill's and Moorman's coat show a northeast wind at the headshot. 
   Hargis noted something striking him hard enough that he thought he might have been "Hit" himself. While it is likely he also rode into a cloud of blood after 313, his being "hit" suggests something more than, and prior to, his riding into the cloud of blood/debris after the initial impact. His recollection would indicate debris continuing from the grassy knoll direction and hitting him immediately after the 313 shot since it hit him with enough force that he thought he was "Hit" too.
 

[Eddy Bainbridge]

Two headshots, straight through. One rear entry, one frontal. As opposed to contortions of bullet track, bizarre rearward bouncing head, and weakly supported tangential wounds? Take your pick.

[Denise Hazelwood]

On 5/19/2024 at 6:39 AM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Abraham Zapruder described JFK slumping in a TV interview. Dan Rather describes something similar. I can't see what they are describing. Is there a catalogue of slump witnesses?

I didn’t make a list of witnesses specific to the slump, but I did notice that most of them (Clint Hill is the one who comes most readily to mind) about JFK “slumping” and falling to his left after the 1st shot, not the (last) head shot. I contend that the “slump” and (decorticate posture) “chest grab”and then fall to his left were effects from the first (head) shot, occurring just after the limousine had turned onto Elm. In Altgens 6 we see that the limousine had only progressed a few car lengths down Elm and JFK is already in the “chest grab” with Jackie’s hand on his arm, and by the shadows can see that this occurred before the limousine passed Brehm and his son and not much past the shadow of the tree on the north side of the street. I have more to say about the Altgens 6 position in my “Shot 2” article that I will post soon.

[Kevin Balch]

7 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:

The south knoll theory does not have the bullet passing through the windshield. the south knoll proposed trajectory passes just behind Greer and in front of the side window. JFK having leaned over to place his head in the middle of the bench seat and turned 25 degrees left lines up that shot to his right temple and exiting in the right O.C.
 The documentary "Inside The Target Car" showed the south knoll shot coming through the windshield but that was based on JFK sitting straight up, not leaning at a good 40 angle over to his left as seen in Muchmore and Moorman. the same documentary tried to show JFK and Jackie aligned in such a way as to have Jackie in the line of sight from the grassy knoll. That is one of the biggest lies ever promoted by the LN side thanks to Gary Mack.(That was a short tangential rant because I find his propaganda to be some of the worst BS I have ever seen.)

Here is a screenshot from the recreation of a south knoll shot from Inside the Target Car. Had JFK been in the actual position he was just prior to 313, Greer, the windshield or perhaps Nellie Connally would have been in the way. Possibly spectators on the infield.

 

[Paul Bacon]

This may be old news to some, but it's a bit of a revelation to me that came, last week, regarding the "fatal" wound.

I've always been of the mind that the shot hit the forehead above the right eye and went straight thru the back of the head.  The problem was that, with the position of JFK's head as seen in the Z film at that moment, I couldn't figure out a trajectory from the South Knoll or the North Knoll that could do it, considering the position of JFK's head at that moment.  I thought, maybe there were frames removed that would have shown a different head position, making a shot like that from the grassy knoll conceivable. 

In spite of the possibility that, that could still be true, I think the better hypothesis, as Dr. Clark suggested at some point, is that the shot made a tangential wound across the back of the head.  As Clark said, the wound in the occipital/parietal, could have been of both entrance and exit. 

Bang, problem solved.  JFK was slumped, head down and turned to the left, exposing the back of the head to the grassy knoll.

I remember some years ago when reading James Files' "story" he said something that struck me.  He said, as he was about to take the shot from behind the fence, a bullet came from the rear and knocked JFK's head forward just a split second before he pulled the trigger.  His shot, he said, was aimed at the center of the head.  Even a blind squirrel gets some nuts...

A tangential shot to the back of the head, from the grassy knoll, can explain a lot of things:  the force of the spray and matter hitting Hargis, debris on the trunk of the limo, debris in the follow up car, bullet slug in the infield, and so on.

As I said, it's a revelation to me.

[Chris Bristow]

11 hours ago, Kevin Balch said:

Here is a screenshot from the recreation of a south knoll shot from Inside the Target Car. Had JFK been in the actual position he was just prior to 313, Greer, the windshield or perhaps Nellie Connally would have been in the way. Possibly spectators on the infield.

 

That Target Car image was taken from 16 degrees to the side. They are standing at a point along the parking lot fence that confirms the line of sight to the limo shown through the scope.
  There are two adjustments needed. Gary Mack is standing about 25 ft west(3 parking spaces) of the Sherry Fiester south knoll theory. Her position adds 5 degrees to the LOS. Second, As Fiester has pointed out the limo in 312 is crooked in the street by 4 degrees. (Maybe from Greer looking over his right shoulder and pulling the wheel to the right.) I get 6 degrees using Z's lines of sight through the limo. I'll compromise and say it's 5 degrees. That modifies Gary Mack's south knoll angle to the limo by 10 degrees total.
Lastly, Moorman and Muchmore can be used to determine JFK's head position at 313. JFK is leaning by around 40 degrees. His head is at or very close to the center of the bench seat. The Gary Mack south knoll recreation has him almost straight up, not at the center.
  Those 3 changes line up the shot coming in just behind Greer and in front of the side window.
Nellie has turned sideways in her seat and is scooted forward and leaning a bit to her left at 313. She seems to be out of the trajectory of the south knoll shot with it passing just behind her head based on 313 and the Moorman photo. But it is close.

 If you look at the position JFK and Jackie are in for the south knoll recreation and compare that to the position Gary Mack put them in for the grassy knoll recreation they are very different. For the Grassy knoll Mack has placed JFK much further to his left and his head is tucked up against Jackie's left shoulder. That puts Jackie's head in the line of sight and so later they claim she would have been hit too, making the grassy knoll shot impossible. I found that to be very dishonest.
The Muchmore line of sight though the gap between their heads continues directly to the theorized GK shooter's position. Muchmore, a GK shooter position and the gap between their heads are all on the same line of sight proving a GK shooter would see an 8 to 10" gap between their heads. The Muchmore head shot image alone is proof JFK's head was nowhere near Mack's recreation. Jackie was never in the line of sight as there was a very large gap between their heads. 
 So Mack completely misrepresented JFK's head position for the GK 313 shot and now I see he completely changed that position for the south knoll recreation.

Edited May 22 by Chris Bristow

[Chris Bristow]

6 hours ago, Paul Bacon said:

This may be old news to some, but it's a bit of a revelation to me that came, last week, regarding the "fatal" wound.

I've always been of the mind that the shot hit the forehead above the right eye and went straight thru the back of the head.  The problem was that, with the position of JFK's head as seen in the Z film at that moment, I couldn't figure out a trajectory from the South Knoll or the North Knoll that could do it, considering the position of JFK's head at that moment.  I thought, maybe there were frames removed that would have shown a different head position, making a shot like that from the grassy knoll conceivable. 

In spite of the possibility that, that could still be true, I think the better hypothesis, as Dr. Clark suggested at some point, is that the shot made a tangential wound across the back of the head.  As Clark said, the wound in the occipital/parietal, could have been of both entrance and exit. 

Bang, problem solved.  JFK was slumped, head down and turned to the left, exposing the back of the head to the grassy knoll.

I remember some years ago when reading James Files' "story" he said something that struck me.  He said, as he was about to take the shot from behind the fence, a bullet came from the rear and knocked JFK's head forward just a split second before he pulled the trigger.  His shot, he said, was aimed at the center of the head.  Even a blind squirrel gets some nuts...

A tangential shot to the back of the head, from the grassy knoll, can explain a lot of things:  the force of the spray and matter hitting Hargis, debris on the trunk of the limo, debris in the follow up car, bullet slug in the infield, and so on.

As I said, it's a revelation to me.

If not for the possibility of a tangential shot chipping out the O.C wound, the GK theory would be dead.

[Pat Speer]

20 hours ago, Paul Bacon said:

This may be old news to some, but it's a bit of a revelation to me that came, last week, regarding the "fatal" wound.

I've always been of the mind that the shot hit the forehead above the right eye and went straight thru the back of the head.  The problem was that, with the position of JFK's head as seen in the Z film at that moment, I couldn't figure out a trajectory from the South Knoll or the North Knoll that could do it, considering the position of JFK's head at that moment.  I thought, maybe there were frames removed that would have shown a different head position, making a shot like that from the grassy knoll conceivable. 

In spite of the possibility that, that could still be true, I think the better hypothesis, as Dr. Clark suggested at some point, is that the shot made a tangential wound across the back of the head.  As Clark said, the wound in the occipital/parietal, could have been of both entrance and exit. 

Bang, problem solved.  JFK was slumped, head down and turned to the left, exposing the back of the head to the grassy knoll.

I remember some years ago when reading James Files' "story" he said something that struck me.  He said, as he was about to take the shot from behind the fence, a bullet came from the rear and knocked JFK's head forward just a split second before he pulled the trigger.  His shot, he said, was aimed at the center of the head.  Even a blind squirrel gets some nuts...

A tangential shot to the back of the head, from the grassy knoll, can explain a lot of things:  the force of the spray and matter hitting Hargis, debris on the trunk of the limo, debris in the follow up car, bullet slug in the infield, and so on.

As I said, it's a revelation to me.

You may be interested to know that, as detailed in Chapter 16b of my website,  I studied the wound ballistics literature for years before coming to the realization the large head wound was a tangential wound. I then went through each part of the bullet's journey, from scalp to skull, to dura to brain and so on, and found that the wounds described were far more suggestive of a tangential wound than a through and through wound, with a separate entrance and exit. After coming to this conclusion, moreover, I got in touch with Dr. Wecht and he agreed with me that the large head wound was most probably a tangential wound. Around that time, I began sharing this info with some of those working with Tink Thompson on his most recent book, and was led to believe much of my research would be incorporated into a 2023 presentation at the Wecht Conference. 

But alas, those involved were too busy and too comfortable to learn anything new, so the new material was s-canned at the last minute. 

Now, to be clear, I proposed this tangential wound came from behind, and those with whom I was working were gonna propose it came from the front. But to me that was of little import, seeing as the large head wound's being a tangential wound made an orphan of the EOP entrance and proved there'd been two head shots, and thus a conspiracy. 

In any event, here is the photo of a tangential wound I'd discovered which I shared with Dr. Wecht, that led him to agree JFK's wound was quite similar.

(I was just gonna post a link because it's horribly gruesome, but I couldn't get that to work. So here it is. SKIP AHEAD if you have a weak stomach.)

 

 

Edited May 22 by Pat Speer

[Paul Bacon]

Thanks Pat.  Very interesting.  

Apparently, Google thinks it's too gruesome as well.  I was denied access to the photo, 403 error--"forbidden".  Probably just as well :>)

[Pat Speer]

4 hours ago, Paul Bacon said:

Thanks Pat.  Very interesting.  

Apparently, Google thinks it's too gruesome as well.  I was denied access to the photo, 403 error--"forbidden".  Probably just as well :>)

I went back and put it in the post. I think you'll agree that the wound is quite similar to JFK's wound. 

Now, here is what was presented in the first ballistics study for the rifle as a typical head wound for a bullet entering and exiting the calvarium without hitting anything in between at the approximate distance as JFK was struck. IOW, this is what the Parkland doctors should have saw, if the shooting was as purported...

(Note this is one of the images I was told would be in the 2023 presentation, but was cut at the last minute.)