Jump to content
The Education Forum

The majic bullet becomes possible...and?


Recommended Posts

In watching the Discovery channel's "....Beyond the Majic bullet", I was impressed by the means to which they went beyond the single bullet THEORY and actually attempted at least some level of scientific validation-an experiment which can be replicated. Let's face it, JC's back wound bore a striking resemblance to the tumbling bullet done in the experiment. I'm not talking about the inability of the bullet to replicate all 7 wounds exactly. The ragged wound on JC's back requires explanation by those who theorize he was hit by a seperate shot.

All of JC's wounds require ALTERNATIVE explanations if one will dismiss the Majic bullet theory, especially if one does not consider the back wound to be one of entrance. I will assume someone with much more ballistic experience will provide some insight. ((On a side note, I'm leaving in a couple hours to pick up a Benelli SBE-II in a couple hours-any of you folks have strong feelings on this shotgun please let me know asap :hotorwot

Oh, secondly, Dale myers tenant of the microphone being out of position may have some relevance but this variable does nothing to discount the impulses picked up on the dictabelt. the logic that an out of position mike rules out the impulses as being those of a rifle flies in the face of logic. Sounds are STILL picked up. Myers does not provide an alternative explanation. D.B. Thomas does. Thank you all. Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jason, I beg to differ. The show was a pathetic joke. I explained why the last time it was on. See the JFK: The Magic Bullet thread... Instead of asking about why was Connally's wound oblong, you should be asking why the tumbling bullet hit two ribs when the real bullet hit one. Answer: the real bullet was not tumbling.

P.S. There are a number of forensics studies that demonstrate how wounds made by guns equipped with home-made silencers will most usually leave oblong wounds. Ask yourself why neither the HSCA nor the creators of the program were willing to discuss this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat, do you by chance have reference to any of these studies? And what do you mean by "home made silencers"? Is there a reason the assassins would have used home-made silencers rather than commercial silencers?

In reading the literature on silencers, one finds that many of the silencers used in hits are home-made. In the early-sixties it would have been even more so. When reading articles on silencers in the forensics journals one finds that home-made crude silencers are quite often more effective than those commercially available. Let's remember that your boy Cubela's silencer was created and designed by...Manuel Artime.

There will be a ton of new leads and ideas in my forthcoming presentation/monstrosity. The article I found that first alerted me to the fact silenced ammunition leaves ovoid entrances was in the Journal of Forensic Sciences in April, 1981, by Menzies, et al. That I seem to be the first researcher to uncover this is unfortunately symbolic of what your pal Russo complains about--most researchers don't research. I would add Russo and Myers to the list of those researchers as well, however. Russo might spend a year sending out letters requesting interviews but he clearly couldn't be bothered to spend one day learning about human anatomy. Similarly, Myers might spend ten years creating a cartoon but only one hour analyzing the wounds.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That I seem to be the first researcher to uncover this is unfortunately symbolic of what your pal Russo complains about--most researchers don't research.

Absolutly right Pat, this fact also relativizes the question of how many shots were fired that day. Maybe some loud bangs (bullets all over the place) to attract the crowd's attension while the actual shooters

using some familiar equipment that was invented long before Mitchell WerBell was born.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jason, I beg to differ. The show was a pathetic joke. I explained why the last time it was on. See the JFK: The Magic Bullet thread... Instead of asking about why was Connally's wound oblong, you should be asking why the tumbling bullet hit two ribs when the real bullet hit one. Answer: the real bullet was not tumbling.

P.S. There are a number of forensics studies that demonstrate how wounds made by guns equipped with home-made silencers will most usually leave oblong wounds. Ask yourself why neither the HSCA nor the creators of the program were willing to discuss this.

Hello Pat, It seems what you are saying is that because of the fact that, in their experiment, the bullet shattered 2 ribs instead of one then their hypothesis is nullified? You also indicated home-made silencers leave oblong wounds. Is it your contention that the "key hole wound" was caused by a bullet fired from a weapon with a home made silencer? Logically speaking Pat, I still wouldn't say this nullified the programs ENTIRE hypothesis line (really there is more than one). Here's why...

In one experiment, the round fired into the gelatinous (simulated tissue) clearly showed a "yaw" effect or "tumble". This occurred between the two simulated figures of Kennedy and JC as well. It's shown in slow motion. The fact that this particular bullet shattered 2 ribs instead of one is a meaningless variable to use to rule out Kennedy and JC being hit by the same bullet because obviously, JC's rib structure cannot be duplicated or completely controlled. I say, they merely made a convincing case for a tumbling bullet between JFK and JC. Beyond the three wounds-your assertion becomes correct. They cannot rule in the majic bullet..they cannot rule it out either however. Jason Vermeer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As well as that, the amount of time a bullet spends in a true ahead position is relatively small at the best of conditions(sans silencer). The planing effect will raise the nose and the spin will turn it. As it yaws it assumes a range of attacks. Depending on which it has at the time of impact determines the hole. This is also complicated by the characteristics of wound ballistics. Even a severely tumbling bullet may quickly (within even three inches travel) assume a dead ahead pose and continue to a small exit hole. Further, it must be remembered that a bullet seldom strikes a surface dead on. In Connally's case for a rear entry certainly not so. Even a bullet that strikes a surface with a dead on attack , if that surface is oblique (as in Connally's case, it will tend to angle into the body causing the beginning of an aspect shift leaving a 'not round' entry hole.

(if you want to look at the bullet in various attack positions in image analyzer, use this lathe profile ( http://files.photojerk.com/yanndee/bulletlatheprofile.jpg ) of a carcano bullet and the grooved (4) texture here ( http://files.photojerk.com/yanndee/bullettexture.jpg )

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a short note..... I am damn proud of you folks for taking the time to look into ballistics/silencers etc. It wasnt long ago that Al Carrier and I was ambushed with questions about ballistics/silencers. Its good to see you folks working hard at this.....

I made a post awhile back about silencers and there capabilities and how they work if anyone cares to dig it up....I havent had much time as of late to keep up with the boards, and feel bad about that, but I feel better that you folks are doing a good job looking into these subjects of the case...

Keep it up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you John as well....interesting graphic. I still maintain that they did make an attempt to control the conditions of their experiment and they were able to get a bullet to tumble and mimic the wound JC received in his back. I do not want to leave the impression I believe in a lone gunman, in fact, since they tested their hypothesis scientifically, it may be of some use to test a muzzled or silenced round as Pat indicated earlier to see if a similar wound could be duplicated. I don't purport to be a ballistics expert but, like Al Carrier, I live in Iowa, grew up in Iowa, and I'd have to say I'm one hell of a shot at long distance. :D Jason.

On a side note, I'm still baffled that few people notice Myers logic flaw in his belief that the out of place microphone necessitates an acoustic misinterpretation. It's a slight of hand. In essence, what he is saying is the following.....

Since the microphone was out of place the matched gunshot impulses on the tape are not gunshot impulses at all.

It's like saying Joe blow had a cassette recorder running during the assassination and picked up the shots...he said he was on the second floor of the records building but video shows him on the third floor...naturally then, his cassette recorder did not record the sound of shots. WHat the?!?!??!! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...