On "cognitive thinking"!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom, I'm pretty well convinced of a shot [headshot-?] occurring after Z-313.

And I'm pretty well convinced that Oswald was the designated "patsy"/"rabbit," the decoy to be chased in order to allow someone to escape.

I think that, based upon West's survey materials, you've made a very logical and persuasive case that JFK was hit by three shots, and the third one was after the point at which the WC contended it occurred.

And I believe we're in agreement that the WC did such a lousy investigative job on Oswald that it probably never could be proved conclusively whether he was a [the-?] shooter.

The Mannlicher-Carcano was only tied to Oswald thru the Hidell alias...and then only after an FBI agent "helped" the folks at Klein Sporting Goods "find" the order blank...the only confirmation that LHO had the rifle was the disputed backyard photos, and Marina's testimony...and the only other time LHO allegedly fired it was during an alleged attempt on the life of General Walker...who just happened to possess a cache of...Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5's!

And the fact that the serial number stampings on the Carcano don't match from one photo to the next would cause an impartial investigator to ask questions, I would suspect.

But I think you've used the WC's own information to dispute their "crime-scene investigation" quite well....as I said, just keep the info coming.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well!

Janet knows, and we must therefore assume that Bill knows also.

Tom

Edited August 1, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Pat Speer]

Tom, I think your theory has a few holes, at least one more than Kennedy's jacket. This second hole in the collar you mention was in fact a piece of cloth removed by the FBI in their testing, and was not a through and through hole. I have never seen anything indicating this hole on the back side of the material corresponds to a hole on the inside.

Secondly, your assertion that the entrance wound was 15mm long by 6mm wide is almost assuredly iincorrect. Dr. Finck, the only one of the doctors with expertise in describing bullet wounds, said the wound was "transversal," heading right to left. Dr. Boswell said the arrow on his drawing reflected that the bullet went sideways and upwards--the upwards part based upon his belief the bullet exited from the large defect. Furthermore, in looking through old articles on military medicine, one finds that the wounds are always measured width by length. I've spent several hours in the UCLA Biomed library looking through Military Surgeon and haven't found any that represent wounds length by width. Even Dr. Rose's autopsies of Oswald and Tippitt reflect that wounds are measured width by length--although Rose himself seems unable to decide what width represents on the human body!! (His drawings are sometimes in disagreement with his descriptions.)

To me this is one of the great cover-ups/misunderstandings of the medical evidence--that the entrance wound was transversal (which matches the wound shown in the autopsy photos on my online seminar). I believe Humes and Boswell transposed Finck's measurements when making the Rydberg drawings, probably out of their basic ignorance, but also quite possibly because they were trying to please Big Brother Specter by making the drawings demonstrate the shots were fired from above and behind. This possibly innocent mistake led to Humes' bogus testimony and the rest is history.

Edited August 1, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom, I think your theory has a few holes, at least one more than Kennedy's jacket.  This second hole in the collar you mention was in fact a piece of cloth removed by the FBI in their testing, and was not a through and through hole.  I have never seen anything indicating this hole on the back side of the material corresponds to a hole on the inside.

Secondly, your supoosition that the entrance wound was 15mm long by 6mm wide is probably incorrect.  Dr. Finck, the only one of the doctors with expertise in describing bullet wounds, said the wound was "transversal," heading right to left.  Dr. Boswell said his arrow on hs drawing reflected that the bullet went sideways and upwards--the upwards part based upon his belief the bullet exited from the large defect. 

Furthermore, in looking through old articles on military medicine, one finds that the wounds are always measured width by length.  Even Dr. Rose's autopsies of Oswald and Tippitt reflect that wounds are  measured width by length--although Rose himself seems unable to decide what width represents on the human body!!  (His drawings are sometimes in disagreement with his descriptions.)  To me this is one of the great cover-ups/FUs of the medical evidence.  The entrance wound was transversal--which matches the wound shown in the autopsy photos as shown on my online seminar.  I believe Humes and Boswell transposed Finck's measurements when making the Rydberg drawings, probably out of their basic ignorance, but also quite possibly because they were trying to please Big Brother Specter by making the drawings demonstrate the shots were fired from above and behind. This mistake led to Humes' bogus testimony, and the rest is history.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Might I recommend that you do as I did long ago and contact Robert Frazier and discuss the subject of the coat with him.

Thereafter, it would be of benefit to thereafter speak with each of the FBI Agents of the Spectrographic section of the FBI lab where the clothing of JFK was examined.

If, and when, you find the only one of these persons to admit to having handled and examined the clothing of JFK, then you just may get a different answer as relates to the examination of the clothing of JFK.

To include that metallic fragments were embedded in the tie when it was X-rayed.

As relates the dimension of the EOP entry wound.

Just in case that you may not be aware of it, there is an autopsy face sheet drawing made by Dr. Boswell which clearly demonstrates "ragged, slanting 15 X 6mm".

In addition to this, there is a drawing made by Dr. Boswell of the skull of JFK in which he drew in the top one-half of the piece of bone which contained this entry wound.

Again, might I recommend that you send copies of these drawings to Dr. Boswell and inform him that he does not know what he is talking about.

He certainly appeared quite competent and knowledgeable during the multitudes of times which I discussed the subject with him.

About the only "probably's" here is that you probably have not done your homework on this subject.

The measurement of the head wound was a major contention by the HSCA who stated that the wound they observed was not that large.

Of course, they also stated that the measurements of the back wound were not as reported as well.

And, I truely love that little "sleight of hand" episode as well.

Tom

P.S. There was no "comparison testing" done on the coat of JFK per the only FBI Agent to physically examine the clothing.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom, I think your theory has a few holes, at least one more than Kennedy's jacket.  This second hole in the collar you mention was in fact a piece of cloth removed by the FBI in their testing, and was not a through and through hole.  I have never seen anything indicating this hole on the back side of the material corresponds to a hole on the inside.

Secondly, your supoosition that the entrance wound was 15mm long by 6mm wide is probably incorrect.  Dr. Finck, the only one of the doctors with expertise in describing bullet wounds, said the wound was "transversal," heading right to left.  Dr. Boswell said his arrow on hs drawing reflected that the bullet went sideways and upwards--the upwards part based upon his belief the bullet exited from the large defect. 

Furthermore, in looking through old articles on military medicine, one finds that the wounds are always measured width by length.  Even Dr. Rose's autopsies of Oswald and Tippitt reflect that wounds are  measured width by length--although Rose himself seems unable to decide what width represents on the human body!!  (His drawings are sometimes in disagreement with his descriptions.)  To me this is one of the great cover-ups/FUs of the medical evidence.  The entrance wound was transversal--which matches the wound shown in the autopsy photos as shown on my online seminar.  I believe Humes and Boswell transposed Finck's measurements when making the Rydberg drawings, probably out of their basic ignorance, but also quite possibly because they were trying to please Big Brother Specter by making the drawings demonstrate the shots were fired from above and behind. This mistake led to Humes' bogus testimony, and the rest is history.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Might I recommend that you do as I did long ago and contact Robert Frazier and discuss the subject of the coat with him.

Thereafter, it would be of benefit to thereafter speak with each of the FBI Agents of the Spectrographic section of the FBI lab where the clothing of JFK was examined.

If, and when, you find the only one of these persons to admit to having handled and examined the clothing of JFK, then you just may get a different answer as relates to the examination of the clothing of JFK.

To include that metallic fragments were embedded in the tie when it was X-rayed.

As relates the dimension of the EOP entry wound.

Just in case that you may not be aware of it, there is an autopsy face sheet drawing made by Dr. Boswell which clearly demonstrates "ragged, slanting 15 X 6mm".

In addition to this, there is a drawing made by Dr. Boswell of the skull of JFK in which he drew in the top one-half of the piece of bone which contained this entry wound.

Again, might I recommend that you send copies of these drawings to Dr. Boswell and inform him that he does not know what he is talking about.

He certainly appeared quite competent and knowledgeable during the multitudes of times which I discussed the subject with him.

About the only "probably's" here is that you probably have not done your homework on this subject.

The measurement of the head wound was a major contention by the HSCA who stated that the wound they observed was not that large.

Of course, they also stated that the measurements of the back wound were not as reported as well.

And, I truely love that little "sleight of hand" episode as well.

Tom

P.S. There was no "comparison testing" done on the coat of JFK per the only FBI Agent to physically examine the clothing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know that Frazier is still living.

I have not spoken with Gallagher; Heilman; or Heiberger for years and do not know it they are still living or not.

Rest assured, Mr. Heiberger and I had some good laughs on this one as well.

Tom

P.S. Helps break the ice when one is a far distant cousin of Melvin, whom they all respected.

Of course, he was the crazy one in the family who committed suicide.

The suicide has nothing to do with the crazy part. Anyone who worked for and put up with JEH was obviously somewhat off.

Edited August 1, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Pat Speer]

Tom, I believe Boswell's drawing of a bone on the sheet with his skull drawing was a bone from the exit defect, the large bone found by Kinney and x-rayed at the autopsy showing a slight amount of metal by a beveled exit. It was from the examination of this bone and this bone only that the doctors were able to determine that the large defect was an exit. It wasn't until 1967, during the bogus so-called military review, that anyone asserted there was beveling on intact bone by the exit, and then only AFTER someone--no one will say who--decided the open-cranium photo was taken from the front, instead of from the rear. None of the doctors make reference to a semi-circular entrance with a bone fragment that completes it until Boswell does so before the HSCA. He is clearly confusing the entrance with the exit. Neither Humes nor Finck have EVER mentioned this and have in fact CONSISTENTLY stated that the entrance defect was a round hole punched through intact occipital bone. We all know that eyewitness testimony is highly unreliable. Dr. Boswell has revealed himself to be the least consistent and least reliable of the autopsy doctors. Why select his statements over Finck and Humes? Don't let the fact that someone was willing to talk to you give extra credence to their statements, Tom. That, in my opinion, is one of the great flaws in JFK "research:" the theory that the guy who talks to the research community must be telling the truth, and the guy who won't talk must be hiding something. This is bunk.

Edited August 1, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom, I believe Boswell's drawing of a bone on the sheet with his skull drawing was a bone from the exit defect, the large bone found by Kinney and x-rayed at the autopsy showing a slight amount of metal by a beveled exit.  It was from the examination of this bone and this bone only that the doctors were able to determine that the large defect was an exit.  It wasn't until 1967, during the bogus so-called military review, that anyone asserted there was beveling on intact bone by the exit, and then only AFTER someone--no one will say who--decided the open-cranium photo was taken from the front, instead of from the rear. None of the doctors make reference to a semi-circular entrance with a bone fragment that completes it until Boswell does so before the HSCA.  He is clearly confusing the entrance with the exit.   Neither Humes nor Finck have EVER mentioned this and have in fact CONSISTENTLY stated that the entrance defect was a round hole punched through intact occipital bone.  We all know that eyewitness testimony is highly unreliable.  Dr. Boswell has revealed himself to be the least consistent and least reliable of the autopsy doctors.  Why select his statements over Finck and Humes? Don't let the fact that someone was willing to talk to you give extra credence to their statements, Tom.  That, in my opinion, is one of the great flaws in JFK "research:" the theory that the guy who talks to the research community must be telling the truth, and the guy who won't talk must be hiding something.  This is bunk.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Along with other documents, which included the autopsy face sheet and copies of X-rays, the following document was mailed to Dr. Boswell in order that we may specifically address it.

The small drawing at the bottom of the attachment is of most concern. In regards to this, Dr. Boswell clearly answered:

1. The drawing was of a piece of bone from the occipital region of the skull.

2. The piece of bone was brought in by either the FBI or SS during the course of the preliminary examination.

3. The piece of bone, when re-inserted into the occipital region of the skull, completed the reconstruction of this area of the skull.

4. That portion of the skull which was initially found to be present contained approximately one-half of the bullet entrance wound into the rear of the skull.

5. That piece of bone, as drawn and depicted, and as brought in during the preliminary stage of the autopsy contained the approximate top one-half of the bullet entry into the skull.

6. When re-inserted into the skull, the WHOLE--HOLE into the skull of JFK was then observed and measured.

7. The "straight line" drawn into the circular section of this piece of bone (the bullet entrance) was drawn to represent the flight path of the bullet coming into and striking the skull.

Had previous "garbage" researchers not spoiled the field, rest assured that I would have liked nothing better than to verify these answers with Dr. Humes and Dr. Finck.

However, Dr. Humes in Florida, would not discuss the JFK matter with anyone again.

And, Dr. Finck, in Switzerland, was of the same opinion.

Just perhaps it has more to do with being able to ask clear, concise, and specific questions than many are aware.

And, in the event you think that the HSCA was not hampered by a few little beauties, then we could discuss the back wound photo which has been utilized in an attempt to represent that none of the autopsy surgeons could even take an accurate measurement.

It is most assuredly another beautiful example of "Sleight-of-hand" work on the part of someone.

Tom

Edited August 1, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Pat Speer]

Along with other documents, which included the autopsy face sheet and copies of X-rays, the following document was mailed to Dr. Boswell in order that we may specifically address it.

The small drawing at the bottom of the attachment is of most concern.  In regards to this, Dr. Boswell clearly answered:

1.  The drawing was of a piece of bone from the occipital region of the skull.

2.  The piece of bone was brought in by either the FBI or SS during the course of the preliminary examination.

3.  The piece of bone, when re-inserted into the occipital region of the skull, completed the reconstruction of this area of the skull.

4.  That portion of the skull which was initially found to be present contained approximately one-half of the bullet entrance wound into the rear of the skull.

5.  That piece of bone, as drawn and depicted, and as brought in during the preliminary stage of the autopsy contained the approximate top one-half of the bullet entry into the skull.

6.  When re-inserted into the skull, the WHOLE--HOLE into the skull of JFK was then observed and measured.

7.  The "straight line" drawn into the circular section of this piece of bone (the bullet entrance) was drawn to represent the flight path of the bullet coming into and striking the skull.

Had previous "garbage" researchers not spoiled the field, rest assured that I would have liked nothing better than to verify these answers with Dr. Humes and Dr. Finck.

However, Dr. Humes in Florida, would not discuss the JFK matter with anyone again.

And, Dr. Finck, in Switzerland, was of the same opinion.

Just perhaps it has more to do with being able to ask clear, concise, and specific questions than many are aware.

And, in the event you think that the HSCA was not hampered by a few little beauties, then we could discuss the back wound photo which has been utilized in an attempt to represent that none of the autopsy surgeons could even take an accurate measurement.

It is most assuredly another beautiful example of "Sleight-of-hand" work on the part of someone.

Tom

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks so much for this post, as it proves my point. The only bone fragments brought to the autopsy by the FBI or SS were the two small fragments and one large fragment that were x-rayed LATE in the autopsy, as per all the testimony regarding the skull fragments. The large fragment was determined to represent a portion of the exit margin. This bone has been interpreted as being frontal bone or parietal bone, but NO ONE who has studied it has ever concluded it was occipital bone. Dr. Boswell's memory is simply wrong, Tom.

If you look at Boswell's own drawing of the EOP entrance, it has two measured bone fragments directly above and to the right of the entrance. These are fragments that broke off when the scalp was peeled back, not fragments that were flown in from Dallas. For one, this drawing was presumably made early in the autopsy when they inspected the skull, before the fragments arrived from Dallas. For two, the measurements fail to match the sizes of th late-arriving fragments. If you look at the famed F8/open cranium photo you will see an entrance, almost exactly where Boswell said it was, and a large opening to its right and above, reflecting the fragments the doctors removed upon reflection of the scalp. No kidding.

Edited August 1, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom, I believe Boswell's drawing of a bone on the sheet with his skull drawing was a bone from the exit defect, the large bone found by Kinney and x-rayed at the autopsy showing a slight amount of metal by a beveled exit.  It was from the examination of this bone and this bone only that the doctors were able to determine that the large defect was an exit.  It wasn't until 1967, during the bogus so-called military review, that anyone asserted there was beveling on intact bone by the exit, and then only AFTER someone--no one will say who--decided the open-cranium photo was taken from the front, instead of from the rear. None of the doctors make reference to a semi-circular entrance with a bone fragment that completes it until Boswell does so before the HSCA.  He is clearly confusing the entrance with the exit.   Neither Humes nor Finck have EVER mentioned this and have in fact CONSISTENTLY stated that the entrance defect was a round hole punched through intact occipital bone.  We all know that eyewitness testimony is highly unreliable.  Dr. Boswell has revealed himself to be the least consistent and least reliable of the autopsy doctors.  Why select his statements over Finck and Humes? Don't let the fact that someone was willing to talk to you give extra credence to their statements, Tom.  That, in my opinion, is one of the great flaws in JFK "research:" the theory that the guy who talks to the research community must be telling the truth, and the guy who won't talk must be hiding something.  This is bunk.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Along with other documents, which included the autopsy face sheet and copies of X-rays, the following document was mailed to Dr. Boswell in order that we may specifically address it.

The small drawing at the bottom of the attachment is of most concern. In regards to this, Dr. Boswell clearly answered:

1. The drawing was of a piece of bone from the occipital region of the skull.

2. The piece of bone was brought in by either the FBI or SS during the course of the preliminary examination.

3. The piece of bone, when re-inserted into the occipital region of the skull, completed the reconstruction of this area of the skull.

4. That portion of the skull which was initially found to be present contained approximately one-half of the bullet entrance wound into the rear of the skull.

5. That piece of bone, as drawn and depicted, and as brought in during the preliminary stage of the autopsy contained the approximate top one-half of the bullet entry into the skull.

6. When re-inserted into the skull, the WHOLE--HOLE into the skull of JFK was then observed and measured.

7. The "straight line" drawn into the circular section of this piece of bone (the bullet entrance) was drawn to represent the flight path of the bullet coming into and striking the skull.

Had previous "garbage" researchers not spoiled the field, rest assured that I would have liked nothing better than to verify these answers with Dr. Humes and Dr. Finck.

However, Dr. Humes in Florida, would not discuss the JFK matter with anyone again.

And, Dr. Finck, in Switzerland, was of the same opinion.

Just perhaps it has more to do with being able to ask clear, concise, and specific questions than many are aware.

And, in the event you think that the HSCA was not hampered by a few little beauties, then we could discuss the back wound photo which has been utilized in an attempt to represent that none of the autopsy surgeons could even take an accurate measurement.

It is most assuredly another beautiful example of "Sleight-of-hand" work on the part of someone.

Tom

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"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."

"I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lying in the seat"

Page 3 of statement of SS Agent Clint Hill, dtd. Nov. 30, 1963.

__________________________________________________________________

"The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car"

WC Testimony of SS Agent Clint Hill

__________________________________________________________________

Anyone who doubts that a portion of the right rear of the skull of JFK was missing/absent when he was taken into the Parkland Emergency room need only read the testimony of all those involved in the treatment of JFK.

This portion of the rear of the skull of JFK WAS NOT blown out/separated from the skull until after the last/third/final headshot which completed the fracturing and fragmentation of the skull in the occipital region.

The "blowout" as so many frontal shot supporters claim was in fact the severe fracturing and fragmentation of the lower portion of the skull as a result of the last shot.

The top/crown portion of the skull was laying over to the right side of the head as a result of the Z-312/313 head shot, therefore, when the final shot struck, it managed to severely fracture and fragment that portion of the skull above the entry wound up to the edge of the skull where the "void" of the skull was now gone due to the skull "cap" section which was already laying over to the right hand side of the head of JFK at the time of impact of the third/last/final shot.

[Pat Speer]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos? And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos?  And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I am not exactly certain as to what you refer as the "exit defect" as seen in the Z-film, it must be assumed that you are speaking of the "skull cap" portion of the crown of the head of JFK which is blown out and laying over on the right hand side of his head with the inner side of the skull exposed and seen in the film.

However, I am aware of the generally accepted fact that when two separate WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets, travelling at approximately 2,000 fps, strike the head of an individual, that there will generally be two separate wounds of entrance.

And, there will generally be two separate wounds of exit.

And, not unlike the HSCA who were slightly confused in regards to the 4-inch separation between the Autopsy/EOP entry and the HSCA/Cowlick entry, confusion as regards the exit wounds and locations of these two separate and distinct bullets has created it's share of confusion as well.

Edited August 7, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos?  And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I am not exactly certain as to what you refer as the "exit defect" as seen in the Z-film, it must be assumed that you are speaking of the "skull cap" portion of the crown of the head of JFK which is blown out and laying over on the right hand side of his head with the inner side of the skull exposed and seen in the film.

However, I am aware of the generally accepted fact that when two separate WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets, travelling at approximately 2,000 fps, strike the head of an individual, that there will generally be two separate wounds of entrance.

And, there will generally be two separate wounds of exit.

And, not unlike the HSCA who were slightly confused in regards to the 4-inch separation between the Autopsy/EOP entry and the HSCA/Cowlick entry, confusion as regards the exit wounds and locations of these two separate and distinct bullets has created it's share of confusion as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As anyone who is evenly faintly aware of the subject matter knows, the HSCA placed the entry wound into the rear of the skull of JFK at some four inches higher than did the autopsy surgeons.

In addition, the HSCA also stated that the size of the wound entry through the skull of JFK was not as reported by the autopsy surgeons.

Personally, I would have thought that this would have raised the "red flag" on this subject.

Nevertheless, here is the HSCA exhibit JFK F-53 which clearly demonstrates the entry wound into the back of the skull of JFK ("A") as marked. (Cowlick Entry)

Of course, this is the HSCA entry wound, not the Autopsy Surgeon entry wound.

(EOP Entry)

One item which the HSCA and others appear to have neglected to inform us of is the bullet EXIT location as also observed in this X-ray.

Located at the position "B" on this X-ray is the metallic residue which scraped off on the inner table of the skull as the bullet which entered at point "A" attempted to exit the skull.

In beginning it's exit at point "B", this bullet left behind it's "tell tale" metallic residue embedded into the inner table of the skull.

When the bullet, as part of it's exiting, removed all of that portion of the skull which is located forward of the forward one-half of the exit location, it left this exact and distinctive "signature" of metallic residue in the skull.

Since there are many more topics to discuss, there will be little served in posting the drawings which demonstrate how the nose of this bullet was literally split apart by it's almost horizontal plane encounter with the skull bone upon exiting. Not to mention how this bullet would have had to have turned/rotated nose downward in order for the bone of the skull to have virtually cut the bullet and copper jacket in half.

It is assumed that this IS NOT the exit wound of the skull to which you refer.

Tom

P.S. Please ignore the lines drawn in which ultimately converge at the back of the skull in the vicinity of the EOP, as these have to do with the other entry wound.

What converging lines?????

Those on this X-ray which converge at a point which is just below the EOP entry into the skull.

That portion which is marked "A" is the "skull cap" section which we see in the Z-film and has been knocked over to the right hand side of the head of JFK after the shot at Z-313.

That portion below and to the left is that portion of skull which was fractured by the EOP entry into the head.

Surely, one would question exactly what kind of impact to the skull could cause the skull to crack into two separate and distinctive pieces.

Not to mention the fact that it would be somewhat difficult for a cowlick entry to have passed through sections of the mid-brain and not have exited in the vicinity of the eyes, nose, or mouth.

And of course, there is also the autopsy surgeons description of the fractures which radiated from the entry wound into the skull.

See any radiating fractures up near the cowlick?

Well, exactly what are all those lines converging on a single point in the vicinity of the EOP.

Now, under the assumption that one accepts the simple fact that there are TWO entrance wounds into the back of the head of JFK, then, obviously there must be two exit wounds.

And it is merely a matter of "connect the dot" to tie in an entry which damaged the upper edge of the occipital lobe of the brain, penetrated and damaged certain portions of the mid-brain, and then exited.

Edited August 7, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos?  And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I am not exactly certain as to what you refer as the "exit defect" as seen in the Z-film, it must be assumed that you are speaking of the "skull cap" portion of the crown of the head of JFK which is blown out and laying over on the right hand side of his head with the inner side of the skull exposed and seen in the film.

However, I am aware of the generally accepted fact that when two separate WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets, travelling at approximately 2,000 fps, strike the head of an individual, that there will generally be two separate wounds of entrance.

And, there will generally be two separate wounds of exit.

And, not unlike the HSCA who were slightly confused in regards to the 4-inch separation between the Autopsy/EOP entry and the HSCA/Cowlick entry, confusion as regards the exit wounds and locations of these two separate and distinct bullets has created it's share of confusion as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As anyone who is evenly faintly aware of the subject matter knows, the HSCA placed the entry wound into the rear of the skull of JFK at some four inches higher than did the autopsy surgeons.

In addition, the HSCA also stated that the size of the wound entry through the skull of JFK was not as reported by the autopsy surgeons.

Personally, I would have thought that this would have raised the "red flag" on this subject.

Nevertheless, here is the HSCA exhibit JFK F-53 which clearly demonstrates the entry wound into the back of the skull of JFK ("A") as marked. (Cowlick Entry)

Of course, this is the HSCA entry wound, not the Autopsy Surgeon entry wound.

(EOP Entry)

One item which the HSCA and others appear to have neglected to inform us of is the bullet EXIT location as also observed in this X-ray.

Located at the position "B" on this X-ray is the metallic residue which scraped off on the inner table of the skull as the bullet which entered at point "A" attempted to exit the skull.

In beginning it's exit at point "B", this bullet left behind it's "tell tale" metallic residue embedded into the inner table of the skull.

When the bullet, as part of it's exiting, removed all of that portion of the skull which is located forward of the forward one-half of the exit location, it left this exact and distinctive "signature" of metallic residue in the skull.

Since there are many more topics to discuss, there will be little served in posting the drawings which demonstrate how the nose of this bullet was literally split apart by it's almost horizontal plane encounter with the skull bone upon exiting. Not to mention how this bullet would have had to have turned/rotated nose downward in order for the bone of the skull to have virtually cut the bullet and copper jacket in half.

It is assumed that this IS NOT the exit wound of the skull to which you refer.

Tom

P.S. Please ignore the lines drawn in which ultimately converge at the back of the skull in the vicinity of the EOP, as these have to do with the other entry wound.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, exactly which of the entry wounds and which of the exit wounds was it that required some clarification?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos?  And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I am not exactly certain as to what you refer as the "exit defect" as seen in the Z-film, it must be assumed that you are speaking of the "skull cap" portion of the crown of the head of JFK which is blown out and laying over on the right hand side of his head with the inner side of the skull exposed and seen in the film.

However, I am aware of the generally accepted fact that when two separate WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets, travelling at approximately 2,000 fps, strike the head of an individual, that there will generally be two separate wounds of entrance.

And, there will generally be two separate wounds of exit.

And, not unlike the HSCA who were slightly confused in regards to the 4-inch separation between the Autopsy/EOP entry and the HSCA/Cowlick entry, confusion as regards the exit wounds and locations of these two separate and distinct bullets has created it's share of confusion as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As anyone who is evenly faintly aware of the subject matter knows, the HSCA placed the entry wound into the rear of the skull of JFK at some four inches higher than did the autopsy surgeons.

In addition, the HSCA also stated that the size of the wound entry through the skull of JFK was not as reported by the autopsy surgeons.

Personally, I would have thought that this would have raised the "red flag" on this subject.

Nevertheless, here is the HSCA exhibit JFK F-53 which clearly demonstrates the entry wound into the back of the skull of JFK ("A") as marked. (Cowlick Entry)

Of course, this is the HSCA entry wound, not the Autopsy Surgeon entry wound.

(EOP Entry)

One item which the HSCA and others appear to have neglected to inform us of is the bullet EXIT location as also observed in this X-ray.

Located at the position "B" on this X-ray is the metallic residue which scraped off on the inner table of the skull as the bullet which entered at point "A" attempted to exit the skull.

In beginning it's exit at point "B", this bullet left behind it's "tell tale" metallic residue embedded into the inner table of the skull.

When the bullet, as part of it's exiting, removed all of that portion of the skull which is located forward of the forward one-half of the exit location, it left this exact and distinctive "signature" of metallic residue in the skull.

Since there are many more topics to discuss, there will be little served in posting the drawings which demonstrate how the nose of this bullet was literally split apart by it's almost horizontal plane encounter with the skull bone upon exiting. Not to mention how this bullet would have had to have turned/rotated nose downward in order for the bone of the skull to have virtually cut the bullet and copper jacket in half.

It is assumed that this IS NOT the exit wound of the skull to which you refer.

Tom

P.S. Please ignore the lines drawn in which ultimately converge at the back of the skull in the vicinity of the EOP, as these have to do with the other entry wound.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, exactly which of the entry wounds and which of the exit wounds was it that required some clarification?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another drawing on the "cowlick" entry which separated the skull cap portion from the top of the head of JFK.

Edited August 7, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos?  And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I am not exactly certain as to what you refer as the "exit defect" as seen in the Z-film, it must be assumed that you are speaking of the "skull cap" portion of the crown of the head of JFK which is blown out and laying over on the right hand side of his head with the inner side of the skull exposed and seen in the film.

However, I am aware of the generally accepted fact that when two separate WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets, travelling at approximately 2,000 fps, strike the head of an individual, that there will generally be two separate wounds of entrance.

And, there will generally be two separate wounds of exit.

And, not unlike the HSCA who were slightly confused in regards to the 4-inch separation between the Autopsy/EOP entry and the HSCA/Cowlick entry, confusion as regards the exit wounds and locations of these two separate and distinct bullets has created it's share of confusion as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As anyone who is evenly faintly aware of the subject matter knows, the HSCA placed the entry wound into the rear of the skull of JFK at some four inches higher than did the autopsy surgeons.

In addition, the HSCA also stated that the size of the wound entry through the skull of JFK was not as reported by the autopsy surgeons.

Personally, I would have thought that this would have raised the "red flag" on this subject.

Nevertheless, here is the HSCA exhibit JFK F-53 which clearly demonstrates the entry wound into the back of the skull of JFK ("A") as marked. (Cowlick Entry)

Of course, this is the HSCA entry wound, not the Autopsy Surgeon entry wound.

(EOP Entry)

One item which the HSCA and others appear to have neglected to inform us of is the bullet EXIT location as also observed in this X-ray.

Located at the position "B" on this X-ray is the metallic residue which scraped off on the inner table of the skull as the bullet which entered at point "A" attempted to exit the skull.

In beginning it's exit at point "B", this bullet left behind it's "tell tale" metallic residue embedded into the inner table of the skull.

When the bullet, as part of it's exiting, removed all of that portion of the skull which is located forward of the forward one-half of the exit location, it left this exact and distinctive "signature" of metallic residue in the skull.

Since there are many more topics to discuss, there will be little served in posting the drawings which demonstrate how the nose of this bullet was literally split apart by it's almost horizontal plane encounter with the skull bone upon exiting. Not to mention how this bullet would have had to have turned/rotated nose downward in order for the bone of the skull to have virtually cut the bullet and copper jacket in half.

It is assumed that this IS NOT the exit wound of the skull to which you refer.

Tom

P.S. Please ignore the lines drawn in which ultimately converge at the back of the skull in the vicinity of the EOP, as these have to do with the other entry wound.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, exactly which of the entry wounds and which of the exit wounds was it that required some clarification?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another drawing on the "cowlick" entry which separated the skull cap portion from the top of the head of JFK.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

After portions of the nose section of this bullet sheared from the bullet nose upon the initial exit attempt with the inner table of the skull, (see Z-313 trails & cerebral tissue), the energy of the bullet would have turned it in a nose down position as the bullet continued to attempt to traverse the brain and skull of JFK.

Since the brain was filled with small lead fragments, this also supports that the tail section of the bullet is what would have had to turn "upwards".

This is further supported by the fact that whatever struck the windshield molding carried adequate velocity to bend this metal molding, and yet no lead was left in this location.

However, that portion of the bullet nose had to continue to pass through the brain and again portions of the skull of JFK, thereby severely reducing it's velocity prior to exiting.

It would appear that this is why the piece of lead which struck the windshield and created only the crack, had an extremely limited velocity to it.

Edited August 9, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis

[Thomas H. Purvis]

And this bullet hit Kennedy at what frame? If it hit him after he was laying down in the seat, why does the exit defect as seen in the Zapruder film right after 312/313 match the autopsy photos?  And why was this covered up, since you say it all traces back to Oswald?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Although I am not exactly certain as to what you refer as the "exit defect" as seen in the Z-film, it must be assumed that you are speaking of the "skull cap" portion of the crown of the head of JFK which is blown out and laying over on the right hand side of his head with the inner side of the skull exposed and seen in the film.

However, I am aware of the generally accepted fact that when two separate WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullets, travelling at approximately 2,000 fps, strike the head of an individual, that there will generally be two separate wounds of entrance.

And, there will generally be two separate wounds of exit.

And, not unlike the HSCA who were slightly confused in regards to the 4-inch separation between the Autopsy/EOP entry and the HSCA/Cowlick entry, confusion as regards the exit wounds and locations of these two separate and distinct bullets has created it's share of confusion as well.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As anyone who is evenly faintly aware of the subject matter knows, the HSCA placed the entry wound into the rear of the skull of JFK at some four inches higher than did the autopsy surgeons.

In addition, the HSCA also stated that the size of the wound entry through the skull of JFK was not as reported by the autopsy surgeons.

Personally, I would have thought that this would have raised the "red flag" on this subject.

Nevertheless, here is the HSCA exhibit JFK F-53 which clearly demonstrates the entry wound into the back of the skull of JFK ("A") as marked. (Cowlick Entry)

Of course, this is the HSCA entry wound, not the Autopsy Surgeon entry wound.

(EOP Entry)

One item which the HSCA and others appear to have neglected to inform us of is the bullet EXIT location as also observed in this X-ray.

Located at the position "B" on this X-ray is the metallic residue which scraped off on the inner table of the skull as the bullet which entered at point "A" attempted to exit the skull.

In beginning it's exit at point "B", this bullet left behind it's "tell tale" metallic residue embedded into the inner table of the skull.

When the bullet, as part of it's exiting, removed all of that portion of the skull which is located forward of the forward one-half of the exit location, it left this exact and distinctive "signature" of metallic residue in the skull.

Since there are many more topics to discuss, there will be little served in posting the drawings which demonstrate how the nose of this bullet was literally split apart by it's almost horizontal plane encounter with the skull bone upon exiting. Not to mention how this bullet would have had to have turned/rotated nose downward in order for the bone of the skull to have virtually cut the bullet and copper jacket in half.

It is assumed that this IS NOT the exit wound of the skull to which you refer.

Tom

P.S. Please ignore the lines drawn in which ultimately converge at the back of the skull in the vicinity of the EOP, as these have to do with the other entry wound.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Now, exactly which of the entry wounds and which of the exit wounds was it that required some clarification?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Another drawing on the "cowlick" entry which separated the skull cap portion from the top of the head of JFK.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

After portions of the nose section of this bullet sheared from the bullet nose upon the initial exit attempt with the inner table of the skull, (see Z-313 trails & cerebral tissue), the energy of the bullet would have turned it in a nose down position as the bullet continued to attempt to traverse the brain and skull of JFK.

Since the brain was filled with small lead fragments, this also supports that the tail section of the bullet is what would have had to turn "upwards".

This is further supported by the fact that whatever struck the windshield molding carried adequate velocity to bend this metal molding, and yet no lead was left in this location.

However, that portion of the bullet nose had to continue to pass through the brain and again portions of the skull of JFK, thereby severely reducing it's velocity prior to exiting.

It would appear that this is why the piece of lead which struck the windshield and created only the crack, had an extremely limited velocity to it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would have thought, that since this was pretty well resolved some 14 or so years ago, that one of these "ballistic experts" would have taken the time to resolve and present exactly what it takes for the skull bone to cut a 6.5mm bullet in to.

Guess not!

It is also worthwhile to note that portion of the torn section of the copper jacket which is somewhat "smooth" as having struck something which rounded the edge.

Edited August 9, 2005 by Thomas H. Purvis