Limo fragment question

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

As I suspected, this thread inevitably turned into a head wound location debate, but this photo is relevant. I think I’ve asked this before, but what are your thoughts on the Edgewood tests that blew the face off and (allegedly) caused large, explosive wounds? I know they didn’t share all of their data, and there are other problems with those tests, but I think they demonstrated that atypical wounding scenarios are at least possible for 6.5mm ammo striking occipital bone. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62296#relPageId=33

That doesn’t explain the EOP to top-of-head to window frame trajectory, but as a proof of concept I think DVP has a point on this. However, as I think you point out on your website, it’s not exactly a slam dunk. The outer gelatin layer on the skulls was removed before taking the photos, so it’s possible the skulls were heavily fragmented - without a large, explosive exit - and the bone fragments came off with the gelatin layer. 

The gelatin block showing the wound profile of an unstable bullet is also interesting (Figure A8). That bullet passed through 13.5 cm of goat meat, lost stability, then created a large temp cavity and curved upward in the subsequent 38cm gelatin block. Presumably, the same type of behavior could occur in a skull with a bullet striking occipital bone.

The tests also showed that 6.5mm FMJ bullets can fragment on impact. The skull photo you provided is clearly of a through-and-through, stable shot to the frontal bone, whereas the JFK shot supposedly entered the thicker occipital bone, and likely broke up on impact. 

I guess my point is that wounding characteristics are highly dependent on bullet stability and fragmentation, and we have reason to suspect that the JFK bullet lost stability and fragmented on impact.

I agree that JFK’s wounds are not typical for that ammunition, but that alone doesn’t really prove the wound was a tangential wound. Edge cases are possible.

This is basically why I asked about the fragment - windshield trajectory. If it could be demonstrated that the required exit trajectory is inconsistent with JFK’s wounds and a shot to the EOP, or even just unlikely, that would be more evidence in support of a tangential strike. The trajectory of a bullet impacting the top of JFK’s head and continuing on to the windshield seems a lot easier to reconcile than an EOP/temp cavity - based scenario, but it’s hard to tell without calculating all the angles, etc. 

I got sucked down this rabbit hole by two things essentially. The first was my realization that no one had successfully explained or even really tried to explain what looked to me like a bullet hole in the mystery photo. The second was my discovery of the HSCA Pathology Panel's report on the history matters website, and my subsequent realization they were blowing smoke. 

One of the things I noticed that had somehow escaped previous scrutiny was their discussion of the fractures on the top of the skull and how they were consistent with the exit of a mostly intact bullet. I was like wtf? This spurred me on to read all sorts of stuff on skull fragmentation and to realize it was directly related to mass and velocity of the projectile. The members of the FPP were undoubtedly aware of this and knew damn well a bunch of fragments could not create the large fractures at the top of the head...so mused that the bullet must have exited while (mostly) intact. That this was the case was supported, moreover, by Baden's many statements afterwards, in which he claimed the fragment supposedly visible on the back of the head on the x-rays was rubbed off from the base of the bullet, and that the bullet did not fully fragment until hitting the windshield strut. He needed to claim this in order to explain the large fractures at the top of the head. 

As far as Olivier's re-enactments...they aligned the skulls as best as they could in hopes the bullet would explode from the top of the head and simulate Kennedy's wound. They failed. They could not get the bullet to exit from where they wanted. The presentation of a skull with the face blown out and the claim it was close enough, moreover, was a scam. They knew full well that a bullet on such a trajectory would explode through the back of the eye sockets and create many secondary missiles and a much larger wound than one would expect on a shot straight through the calvarium. 

I have a book's worth of material on this subject in chapters 16 and 16b. You may want to check it out if you have not already. 

Edited August 15 by Pat Speer

[W. Niederhut]

While we're waiting for Pat Speer to identify the anterior cranial entry wound corresponding to the occipital exit wound, here's another awkward question.

How many Parkland docs described the missing top half of JFK's skull seen in the Bethesda drawings? 🙄

[Pat Speer]

42 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

While we're waiting for Pat Speer to identify the anterior cranial entry wound corresponding to the occipital exit wound, here's another awkward question.

How many Parkland docs described the missing top half of JFK's skull seen in the Bethesda drawings? 🙄

Oh my. 

Large wounds are not necessarily exit wounds. In fact, large wounds of skull AND scalp are presumed to be wounds of both entrance and exit. I wrote what amounts to a book on this in chapter 16b. 

A sample:

Some things are best defined by what they're missing. Accordingly, the evidence that ultimately convinced me the large head wound was tangential in nature was something that was missing: scalp. 

The autopsy protocol describes Kennedy’s large head wound as follows: “There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm in greatest diameter.” And this wasn't a one-time claim. In his 3-16-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, Dr. Humes repeated his claim that scalp was missing. He testified that 1) the large "defect involved both the scalp and the underlying skull...;" 2) "there was a defect in the scalp and some scalp tissue was not available;" and 3) that the largest part of the bullet which broke up on impact "accounted for this very large defect, for the multiple fractures of the skull, and for the loss of brain and scalp tissue..."

There can be no doubt then that Dr. Humes felt scalp was missing, and that Dr.s Boswell and Finck agreed. Or, at least agreed enough to sign the autopsy protocol in which it was described...

And there can be no doubt that Humes never waivered on this, as he told the ARRB there was missing scalp, and when asked how much, replied: "it would be a rough guess. Maybe four or five centi--three or four centimeters, something like that. Probably, because it was all torn, you see, with serrated-- and there were--it wasn't like a punch that was punched out. It was torn apart, you know. So I have a hard time estimating that." 

So a section of scalp was missing. Big deal, you might think. But there's more to this missing scalp than most suspect...

Medicolegal Investigation of Death addresses missing scalp as follows: “A point frequently ignored, or forgotten, in comparing entrance and exit wounds is that approximation of the edges of an entrance wound usually retains a small central defect, a missing area of skin. On the other hand, approximation of the edges of the exit re-establishes the skin’s integrity.” Now, the authors of Medicolegal Investigation of Death were Dr. Russell Fisher, of the Clark Panel, and Dr. Werner Spitz, of the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel. And it follows from this that the report of the HSCA Forensic  Pathology Panel was accommodating Spitz when it critiqued the autopsy report’s assertion scalp was missing as follows: “It is probably misleading in the sense that it describes “an actual absence of skin and bone. The scalp was probably virtually all present, but torn and displaced…” 

Uhh, no... This last line, disturbingly, ignores that Dr. William Kemp Clark, the one Parkland doctor to closely inspect Kennedy’s head wound, shared the observations of the autopsists, and independently observed “There was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue” in a summary of the  reports written by the Parkland staff on the day of the shooting. (Wasn’t this required reading?)

Still, Dr. Clark was but one doctor...

Well, this line in the Panel's report (the one claiming JFK's scalp was "probably virtually all present") also ignores that Dr. Malcolm Perry, the doctor most intimately involved in the efforts to revive Kennedy at Parkland, similarly claimed that "both scalp and portions of skull were absent" when testifying before the Warren Commission on 3-30-64.  

And it also ignores that Dr. James Carrico, the first doctor to inspect Kennedy's wounds at Parkland, confirmed Clark's and Perry's accounts to the HSCA's investigators on 1-11-78. He told them that the large head wound "had blood and hair all around it." All around it, and not above it. And should one suppose Carrico thought the scalp attached to this hair could be pulled back over the wound, he clarified his position on this, once and for all, in an 8-2-97 oral history with the Sixth Floor Museum, when he described the right side of Kennedy's head as having "a big chunk of bone and scalp missing."

 

And that's not even to mention the witnesses claiming to see this hairy scalp on bone left in the limousine...

On 11-30-63, Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, who'd climbed onto the back of Kennedy's limo just after the fatal shot was fired, wrote a report that included an often-overlooked detail. He wrote: "As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lieing in the seat." 

And Hill wasn't the only one to see this hairy fragment. Motorcycle Officer Bobby Joe Dale arrived upon the scene just as the President's body was rushed into the emergency room. He failed to get a look at the President. He did, however, get a look at the back seat of the limo. Here's what he told Larry Sneed, as published in No More Silence (1998): "Blood and matter was everywhere inside the car including a bone fragment which was oblong shaped, probably an inch to an inch and a half long by three-quarters of an inch wide. As I turned it over and looked at it, I determined that it came from some part of the forehead because there was hair on it which appeared to be near the hairline."

And Dale wasn't the only motorcycle officer to make such a statement. When interviewed for the 2008 Discovery Channel program Inside the Target Car, H.B. McClain related: "When I raised her up (he means Mrs. Kennedy)...I could see it on the floor. That's pieces of skull with the hair on it."

Edited August 15 by Pat Speer

[Kevin Balch]

I know those Discovery Channel documentaries such as Beyond the Magic Bullet and Inside the Target Car are intended to reinforce the Warren Commission conclusions but they often do the opposite.

BTMB shows that a shot fired from the 6th floor of the TSBD entering the upper back will exit the chest rather than the throat. That was evident in the trajectory line added by the producers themselves to the slow motion replay as well as the wound locations on the “autopsy sheet” they submitted to an forensic pathologist (who concluded it was two separate shots) which they showed ever so briefly. That’s why they never showed the throat wound on camera. Note that neither the JFK nor the JBC mannequins were clothed and JBC was looking straight ahead contrary to being in the middle of turning his body around when hit.

Nevertheless, I recall from ITTC that there was debris on the windshield of the limo model they used. The Harper fragment was also found well in front of the limo position at frame 313. Unless a dog moved it.

Observing the large visible white mass seen in the Z film, it obviously clears the windshield and it obviously going in an upward and forward direction. We can’t tell if it is moving to the left or right of the limo. Could this be the Harper fragment, the interruptions in the trailing streak caused by variations in reflected light as it tumbles during the time the shutter is open?

From the length of the streak and the shutter opening time, it should be possible to estimate its average velocity and the downrange travel distance for a variety of launch angles. Might also cast a light on what/when hit Teague.

The initial velocity obtained above and an estimate of the loss of brain/skull mass would give an estimate of the momentum carried away by the head explosion and the reaction force on JFK.

Is anyone aware if this has been done?

[Tom Gram]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

I got sucked down this rabbit hole by two things essentially. The first was my realization that no one had successfully explained or even really tried to explain what looked to me like a bullet hole in the mystery photo. The second was my discovery of the HSCA Pathology Panel's report on the history matters website, and my subsequent realization they were blowing smoke. 

One of the things I noticed that had somehow escaped previous scrutiny was their discussion of the fractures on the top of the skull and how they were consistent with the exit of a mostly intact bullet. I was like wtf? This spurred me on to read all sorts of stuff on skull fragmentation and to realize it was directly related to mass and velocity of the projectile. The members of the FPP were undoubtedly aware of this and knew damn well a bunch of fragments could not create the large fractures at the top of the head...so mused that the bullet must have exited while (mostly) intact. That this was the case was supported, moreover, by Baden's many statements afterwards, in which he claimed the fragment supposedly visible on the back of the head on the x-rays was rubbed off from the base of the bullet, and that the bullet did not fully fragment until hitting the windshield strut. He needed to claim this in order to explain the large fractures at the top of the head. 

As far as Olivier's re-enactments...they aligned the skulls as best as they could in hopes the bullet would explode from the top of the head and simulate Kennedy's wound. They failed. They could not get the bullet to exit from where they wanted. The presentation of a skull with the face blown out and the claim it was close enough, moreover, was a scam. They knew full well that a bullet on such a trajectory would explode through the back of the eye sockets and create many secondary missiles and a much larger wound than one would expect on a shot straight through the calvarium. 

I have a book's worth of material on this subject in chapters 16 and 16b. You may want to check it out if you have not already. 

I’m glad you brought up the fracture thing. I remembered something about the HSCA claiming the bullet exited mostly intact, but wasn’t sure why they concluded that. 

It’s been a minute since I read your website so I’ll reread that section again, but if you don’t mind, how did the FPP determine that the skull fractures could not have been caused by an unstable, fragmenting bullet and/or cavitation?

Also, how do we even know that the bullet did not exit (mostly) intact? If the bullet fractured on impact but didn’t break up, and hit the point of maximum yaw right under the inner table of the skull, it seems possible that it could’ve exited mostly intact  and/or while it was breaking apart.

I’ve mentioned this before, but that scenario also provides a possible mechanism for the high fragment trail: drag forces at the point of maximum cavitation  can scatter lead fragments across the plane of the temp cavity and behind it - but behind the inner table would be out into the air, leaving a trail across the top of the skull. My only evidence for this is one FMJ test shot in one wound ballistics study though, so not much to go on…

One of the things I struggle with is how a tangential shot could scatter fragments behind the point of impact, and that applies whether the shot was from the front or behind. It seems physics-defying, but I don’t think I’ve seen any known tangential shot x-rays for comparison. 

I agree with your criticisms of Oliver’s tests. They did indeed fail to get a bullet to blow off the top of the head. However, I do think the tests demonstrated that unstable 6.5mm ammo can cause large wounds. It’s possible, but not at all certain that the large wounds were caused by eye socket bone fragments. Some of the skull photos show large areas of missing bone that are nowhere near the face - but again it’s hard to tell if that bone would’ve really been missing in a real head. 

[W. Niederhut]

The large blow-out fracture in JFK's occipital skull, as seen at Parkland, is almost certainly an exit wound.

A sniper/rifle bullet from a distant source typically causes a small circular entrance wound with an abrasion collar, resembling the apparent entrance wound in JFK's right upper forehead.

Pat Speer is describing a larger, more anterior, skull fracture from Humes' subsequent sham Bethesda autopsy, extending even to the temporal skull area.

What happened to JFK's skull after the assassination team confiscated his body from Parkland?

The Z film clearly shows JFK taking a bullet from the front.   His head snaps violently backward.

It does NOT show JFK taking a bullet in the right temporal-parietal skull, which would have caused an abrupt, violent snapping of his head to the left.

Edited August 15 by W. Niederhut

[Tom Gram]

1 hour ago, Kevin Balch said:

From the length of the streak and the shutter opening time, it should be possible to estimate its average velocity and the downrange travel distance for a variety of launch angles. Might also cast a light on what/when hit Teague.

The initial velocity obtained above and an estimate of the loss of brain/skull mass would give an estimate of the momentum carried away by the head explosion and the reaction force on JFK.

Is anyone aware if this has been done?

Nick Nalli did it for his jet effect paper:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934694/

Nalli rightfully caught a lot of flak for assuming a 2100gm brain mass. He guessed 20 +- 10% of brain mass for the jet, and calculated the mean velocity based on the flying skull fragments in the Z-film. 

Look at Figure 7 (Section 2.2.1). For the alleged jet effect to just stop the forward head snap, Nalli needs a value of ~2.3 cm/Z-frame. To be consistent with the actual Z-film he needs a minimum of ~3.5 cm/Z-frame, and I think that’s being generous. 

At lower masses, lower mean velocities, and steeper elevation angles, the acceleration just isn’t there. I think he realized he didn’t really have enough to work with, so he included a whole section on the neuromuscular reaction theory too. 

That section, (Section 2.2.2) is total nonsense. Nalli bases his theory that there was a second force acting on JFK’s head after the “jet effect” on the alleged lack of recoil or slowdown  between Z315 and Z316. This is based entirely on the 2D position of JFK’s head relative to the back seat. 

Just watch the Zapruder film. It is blatantly obvious that there is no actual “slowdown” or a second force acting on JFK’s head in Z317. JFK is pushed back and as Nalli fails to acknowledge to the left. The head is rotating and moving away from Zapruder’s camera. 

There are plenty of other problems with Nalli’s paper. For example, he totally avoided the actual dynamics of the exit wound and alleged cavitation-induced “jet”. He just assumed it happened and back calculated the spray velocity. There is no physical mechanism provided for the expulsion of mass. Nalli ignored the bullet - inner skull interaction, the pressure wave, cavity collapse, etc. Basically, the only “evidence” Nalli provides that the jet effect could actually happen in the real world is mentioning that Luis Alvarez shot some watermelons… and we all know how that turned out. 

Edited August 15 by Tom Gram

[Tom Gram]

20 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

which would have caused an abrupt, violent snapping of his head to the left.

Ummm… have you looked at Z313-314 lately? JFK’s head snaps violently to the left… 

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

I’m glad you brought up the fracture thing. I remembered something about the HSCA claiming the bullet exited mostly intact, but wasn’t sure why they concluded that. 

It’s been a minute since I read your website so I’ll reread that section again, but if you don’t mind, how did the FPP determine that the skull fractures could not have been caused by an unstable, fragmenting bullet and/or cavitation?

Also, how do we even know that the bullet did not exit (mostly) intact? If the bullet fractured on impact but didn’t break up, and hit the point of maximum yaw right under the inner table of the skull, it seems possible that it could’ve exited mostly intact  and/or while it was breaking apart.

I’ve mentioned this before, but that scenario also provides a possible mechanism for the high fragment trail: drag forces at the point of maximum cavitation  can scatter lead fragments across the plane of the temp cavity and behind it - but behind the inner table would be out into the air, leaving a trail across the top of the skull. My only evidence for this is one FMJ test shot in one wound ballistics study though, so not much to go on…

One of the things I struggle with is how a tangential shot could scatter fragments behind the point of impact, and that applies whether the shot was from the front or behind. It seems physics-defying, but I don’t think I’ve seen any known tangential shot x-rays for comparison. 

I agree with your criticisms of Oliver’s tests. They did indeed fail to get a bullet to blow off the top of the head. However, I do think the tests demonstrated that unstable 6.5mm ammo can cause large wounds. It’s possible, but not at all certain that the large wounds were caused by eye socket bone fragments. Some of the skull photos show large areas of missing bone that are nowhere near the face - but again it’s hard to tell if that bone would’ve really been missing in a real head. 

A couple of points. 

The two bullet frags found in the front section of the limo were the tail and nose of the bullet. There was a large section missing from the middle. These two frags presumably corresponded with the two impacts on the windshield and windshield strut. As the HSCA claimed a slice from this bullet had embedded itself on the back of the head, this would strongly suggest the bullet broke in three pieces or more upon impact. So it makes no sense for the FPP to turn around and claim the bullet exited largely intact. 

As far as the autopsy photos showing a large head wound that is nowhere near the face...that is exactly my point. I read dozens of books and looked at hundreds of autopsy photos and FMJ bullets don't go in small and go out huge...unless they are tangential wounds. I found a photo of a wound like Kennedy's in textbook once and shared it with Dr. Wecht and he agreed that yessiree JFK's head wound appeared to be a tangential wound. 

It's disgusting, but can be viewed here: 

[Johnny Cairns]

10 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

A couple of points. 

The two bullet frags found in the front section of the limo were the tail and nose of the bullet. There was a large section missing from the middle. These two frags presumably corresponded with the two impacts on the windshield and windshield strut. As the HSCA claimed a slice from this bullet had embedded itself on the back of the head, this would strongly suggest the bullet broke in three pieces or more upon impact. So it makes no sense for the FPP to turn around and claim the bullet exited largely intact. 

As far as the autopsy photos showing a large head wound that is nowhere near the face...that is exactly my point. I read dozens of books and looked at hundreds of autopsy photos and FMJ bullets don't go in small and go out huge...unless they are tangential wounds. I found a photo of a wound like Kennedy's in textbook once and shared it with Dr. Wecht and he agreed that yessiree JFK's head wound appeared to be a tangential wound. 

It's disgusting, but can be viewed here: 

I have a problem with anything found in the limousine post Dallas. We just can’t guarantee it’s authenticity unfortunately. 

Edited August 15 by Johnny Cairns

[W. Niederhut]

20 minutes ago, Johnny Cairns said:

I have a problem with anything found in the limousine post Dallas. We just can’t guarantee it’s authenticity unfortunately. 

That, and JFK's mangled head at Bethesda.

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

Ummm… have you looked at Z313-314 lately? JFK’s head snaps violently to the left… 

I'll check it out.

Meanwhile, Tom, perhaps you can use your engineering acumen to identify the anterior cranial entry wound that knocked JFK's head violently backward and to the left, as observed.

Give it the old college try.

Pat won't tell us.

 

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

I'll check it out.

Meanwhile, Tom, perhaps you can use your engineering acumen to identify the anterior cranial entry wound that knocked JFK's head violently backward and to the left, as observed.

Give it the old college try.

Pat won't tell us.

 

Let me be clear because you seem to be having difficulty comprehending what I've been saying. 

There was NO anterior cranial entry wound on the forehead. None was observed at Parkland. None was observed at Bethesda. None has been observed on the A-P x-ray. Michael Chesser--who is not a forensic radiologist or pathologist--thinks he found one on the lateral x-ray taken from the side. He claimed he found a hole in this location, moreover, after being told a bullet entered at this location by Dr. Mantik, who had taken to claiming a bullet entered at this location while misrepresenting the statements of Tom Robinson.

Now...James Jenkins said he remembered Finck noticing some gray on the bone by the ear that he believed marked the entry of a bullet. There may be some truth to this. There are fractures in the area, and the area would have been concealed in the hair and not readily visible at Parkland. 

But you seem convinced you see a bullet hole on the forehead in the right lateral photo, when no one seeing the body at Parkland or Bethesda said they saw such a thing.

 

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Let me be clear because you seem to be having difficulty comprehending what I've been saying. 

There was NO anterior cranial entry wound on the forehead. None was observed at Parkland. None was observed at Bethesda. None has been observed on the A-P x-ray. Michael Chesser--who is not a forensic radiologist or pathologist--thinks he found one on the lateral x-ray taken from the side. He claimed he found a hole in this location, moreover, after being told a bullet entered at this location by Dr. Mantik, who had taken to claiming a bullet entered at this location while misrepresenting the statements of Tom Robinson.

Now...James Jenkins said he remembered Finck noticing some gray on the bone by the ear that he believed marked the entry of a bullet. There may be some truth to this. There are fractures in the area, and the area would have been concealed in the hair and not readily visible at Parkland. 

But you seem convinced you see a bullet hole on the forehead in the right lateral photo, when no one seeing the body at Parkland or Bethesda said they saw such a thing.

 

I'll go with Dr. Michael Cesser's medical opinions over yours any day, Pat.

He's a very knowledgeable, experienced, board-certified neurologist.

(I, myself, was board certified by the American Board of Psychiatry & Neurology in 1989.)

But let's cut to the chase, and skip the gibberish.

Do you actually deny that JFK was hit in the head by a bullet fired from in front of the limo, as anyone can plainly see on the Zapruder film?

Yes or no?

Edited August 16 by W. Niederhut