The Head Wound Explained

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton Gray

Was it a "TYPO" ? Or did you actually express that you see JFK's head "fly forward".

Here's what I said exactly, and here I'll repeat it: "It is inarguable that at the moment of impact the head flies violently forward."

When most express something as "flying forward" it has always been my conception that it means a movement with great speed or force ! Do you claim to see JFK's head moving forward with great speed or force ?

I said what I said. I didn't just say it: I provided photos and a diagram. In one frame of film (which just happens to be when brains are flying out of the head) the head inarguably slams forward two or more inches. Depending on whose math you want to use, that would be at a rate of anywhere from a yard to two yards a second. (Maybe someone can do better math than this.) Regardless of the exact math, yes: his head flies foward very abruptly from a generally static position.

If so, how would you express the immediately following rearward movement of that head ?

As something on the top end of the torso, since it clearly and unmistakably and inarguably is the torso that flies back and to the left, not just the head. And that is after the brains eject from the right front of the head. At the earlier instant of the headshot, by contrast, the torso remains essentially stationary and the head, pivoting at the neck, is what jerks forward.

This is so self-evident in the images that I'm a little bored with having to type paragraphs to describe what is right in front of the eyes of anyone who cares to open their eyes and look.

An acceleration so fast that it must have approached Mach III speed ?

That's the torso torquing back and to the left. Are you suggesting he had been shot in the chest with an elephant gun? Because the torso (with the head lolling along by then) not only flips back and left, but lifts in the process and collapses back down onto the seat. And I don't care what speed that takes place. Nerve impulses in myelin sheathing travel at 100 m/s. So what?

Do you actually not accept that the violent rearward movement of JFK's head and body almost makes the prior slight forward movement almost negligible?

Absolutely not. I find dismissal of the forward movement to be its own form of autonomic response: a knee-jerk rejection of anything that might suggest that the head shot came from behind, not out of rational viewing of the data in view, but out of rejection of the CIA-puppet Warren Commission and the nutcase Lone Nutter theories.

It's what's commonly called "prejudice." And I think just such prejudice was and is an important part of the agenda of the Warren Commission and the Lone Nutter nuts.

I suppose that you mean to be saying something valid, but you have certainly lost me, and no doubt most of the forum

I'll wait to get word that you've been elected official spokesperson for "most of the forum."

Meanwhile, I speak strictly for myself. And I've said what I said. I didn't stutter.

Ashton

[Charles Black]

Ashton

Your last post was as circularly illogical as anything that I have ever read. You directly addressed nothing which I asked !

I would invite you to try again but by now I am up to my ears in your foolish BS.

By the way, since you often suggest that somene initiate a thread regarding the absence of a wound in JFK's throat.....I suggest that you do so. If for nothing more than laughs.

You must be a person that revels in typing, as I have never observed anyone that could type so much and express such little meaning.

And frankly, I don't care what you are accustomed to doing or how you are accustomed to expressing yourself. You communicate extremely poorly....or perhaps as I have long thought, you have nothing that is worth expressing to this forum.

Furthermore, no one has appointed me as any kind of a spokesman for this forum. I express my opinions directly and ask for nothing !

Charlie Black

[Ashton Gray]

By the way, since you often suggest that somene initiate a thread regarding the absence of a wound in JFK's throat.....I suggest that you do so. If for nothing more than laughs.

Again you seem to have trouble understanding what I've written in plain English. It seems to be a pattern.

I don't start threads about fictions or "absences." If someone wants to make an assertion in a separate thread that a "throat wound" was present, I'll be happy to discuss it with them, just as I was happy to shred the bizarre CIA fiction of the so-called "Diem cables" in the Watergate forum. (By the way: Pat Speer still, after 7 forum pages in that thread, hasn't, won't, can't answer the simple central question: how many of the alleged "forged cables" does he claim there were. Still sitting there waiting him to answer. Would you like to go take a crack at it? I'd enjoy it very much.)

Meanwhile, there's a sure cure for your not understanding what I write: don't read it.

Ashton

[Dawn Meredith]

Ashton,

I assume for the purpose of this thread that we are proceeding on the assumption that the Zapruder film actually depicts the terrible event within the capabilities of 8mm color film, and that the film has not been altered. There is a great deal of controversy as to whether the film has been altered, which would properly be a subject for another thread.

Well, Erick, you brought the Zapruder film into evidence for what you proffered as "The Head Wound Explained," so I rather think you "opened the door," counselor.

As to the validity of that particular piece of filmaking: despite wondering why you would call it into question now after introducing it as evidence at the outset of your argument, I am painfully aware of the temperature of the debate over whether it is newsreel or cinéma verité. But there already is a very active thread in this forum wherein John Dolva, Frank Agbat, et al. have done, and continue to do, an astounding job of comparing the Zapruder film to the Nix film (and now others) in terms of sync. And I am on record of having said before they began their riveting work that I believed that the Zapruder film and the Nix film shared, I believe I said, "a cruciform concordance"—which confused the hell out of several people, I think, and with sound reason.

I meant only that from my lay observation they did synchronize in ways that could not be faked. They cross. They overlap. They intersect at and around the head shot depicting the same event. We'll see.

Meanwhile, I'm going to continue using the Zapruder film in the discussion you started by calling upon it as evidence for a frontal head shot. To that end, I've made a somewhat longer clip that I include below, after some discussion, to attempt to provide a little more visual context regarding some of the points you raised. I'll put it in the message where I feel it's most pertinent.

Regarding the forward ejecta I pointed out in my first four-frame exhibit, you said:

Pick up a stone and throw it forward like a baseball into water. Some of the water will splash forward of the stone’s impact and some will splash ahead and around the point of impact. Crime scene specialists and forensic scientists will tell you that when an individual is shot, there is ejecta coming backwards out of the wound. That is why, at close range, the shooter will get sprayed with blood and tissue.

Mrs. Kennedy would not have been reaching for a chunk of the President’s head on the trunk of the limo if the shot had come from the rear. Any chunk of tissue would likely have ended up in the front seat rather than on the trunk if the head shot came from the rear.

With all due respect—and not stipulating for a moment that Mrs. Kennedy was on a bone retrieval mission when she climbed onto the back of the limo—you seem to be arguing vigorously against yourself. Convincingly, from here.

Unless I'm badly misunderstanding you, ejecta reasonably could be expected from both the entrance and exit points of a projectile—or, in your "concussion" model of the head explosion, "backwards out of the wound" (unless you are now abandoning the concussion model).

Therefore, your argument on the subject of ejecta alone now supports a hypothesis for the head wound coming from either the front or the rear. Is that correct, or do you want to amend that argument?

Dallas Police Officer Bobby Hargis was on a motorcycle behind and to the left of Mrs. Kennedy when the head shot occurred. He was splattered with blood and brain tissue. This also indicates a shot from the front and to the right.

Hmmm. Well, I'm a bit more simple minded. I observe the motorcade moving in a direction that necessarily would carry Officer Hargis into a cloud of relatively lightweight particles suddenly dispersing into the air in many directions—particularly on a day with wind (which seems to be uniformly left out of the equation). It's also my understanding from the record that Officer Hargis wasn't the only one in the area splattered with blood and brain tissue.

And again we are back to the duality of the ejecta question. You seem to have argued successfully already that Hargis very well could have been hit with ejecta caused by a shot from behind.

As regards the head movement upon the point of impact, remember, the President had already been shot in the upper torso. Undoubtedly he was reacting to that wound when the fatal bullet arrived. It was a natural reaction to the torso wound and the sound of gunfire, to hunch forward, which is what appears to be occurring as the limo appears after passing the Stemmons Freeway sign. The overall head movement is not just backwards, it is also to the left and downward, towards Mrs. Kennedy, which is consistent with a shooter in front and to the right. The head recedes from the camera. This is what appears to be happening from frame 312 to 315.

I'm sorry, but it is here we have to part ways entirely. That is why I'm now including an expansion on the earlier animation, adding more frames before and after. I had hoped to demonstrate in the smaller anim in favor of bandwidth considerations, but allow me to direct your attention to the following series beginning at Zapruder frame 308.

Please note the relatively static position and attitude of JFK's body for five frames prior to the head shot. I assure you that it changes very little prior to that as well, but this will illustrate. There is almost no movement of his body or head at all for five frames. And then there's the head shot. And in the time allowed by ONE frame, Kennedy's head flies forward at least two inches, perhaps more (estimated by head and ear dimensions).

And yes, it most certainly is forward—not "left and downward, towards Mrs. Kennedy," because there is no possible stretching of a human neck in that direction relative to the camera position that ever could account for what is depicted in the violent forward motion of the head, pivoting at the neck. Here is the longer animation:

It is inarguable that at the moment of impact the head flies violently forward. I don't care how many times Oliver Stone had Kevin Costner drone, "Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left." The animation above demonstrates a violent and abrupt forward change in the positioin of the head at the moment of impact, and in the next frame a considerable chunk of ejecta appears to be shot out of the President's head in precisely the direction of the head movement.

And no other thing or person in the moving vehicle exhibits anything even remotely close to the violent sudden forward jerk of John F. Kennedy's head as the right front portion of his forehead explodes outward, to the front.

And only after the head has flown forward, only after the skull has been blown open, only then, in frame 315, does the torso arch "back and to the left," the right arm beginning to flying upward in an uncontrolled, autonomic motion.

Each frame of the Zapruder film is 1/40th of a second. Moving objects will be slightly blurred in each frame. It’s not as photographically accurate as a video tape. A slight, rapid head movement in reaction to the initial impact will not be depicted as accurately as the overall head movement over many film frames. We cannot see what is occurring between each film frame.

Having studied each frame above in excruciating detail, having traced the dark outline of the head and back—discernible even in frame 313 where the obfuscating mist is greatest—I disagree emphatically. But others can look with their own eyes and judge for themselves.

Ashton

Well, I have viewed the slowed down video dozens of times now and seeing it slowed down like this makes it even more difficult for me to tell anything different. Obviously, as we have long known frame 313 is when the president's head is hit. He is clearly seen moving forward PRIOR to 313, and it can be argued that brain matter is going forward, but in this video all that is really clear to me is that the matter is being ejected, period. And then immediately after 313 is the backward motion.

But I conceed that I have zero knowledge of film analysis. On my copy of the Z film it seemed a lot easier to tell when the film is moving at its normal speed. The slowing down allows for the eyes to almost play tricks on what you see or think you see.

But I did look and will be interested in reading the comments of what others see in this slowed- down anim.

As I said, I am open to be shown something new. But I am now sickened and dizzy from viewing this so many times.

Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

Ashton,

I assume for the purpose of this thread that we are proceeding on the assumption that the Zapruder film actually depicts the terrible event within the capabilities of 8mm color film, and that the film has not been altered. There is a great deal of controversy as to whether the film has been altered, which would properly be a subject for another thread.

Well, Erick, you brought the Zapruder film into evidence for what you proffered as "The Head Wound Explained," so I rather think you "opened the door," counselor.

As to the validity of that particular piece of filmaking: despite wondering why you would call it into question now after introducing it as evidence at the outset of your argument, I am painfully aware of the temperature of the debate over whether it is newsreel or cinéma verité. But there already is a very active thread in this forum wherein John Dolva, Frank Agbat, et al. have done, and continue to do, an astounding job of comparing the Zapruder film to the Nix film (and now others) in terms of sync. And I am on record of having said before they began their riveting work that I believed that the Zapruder film and the Nix film shared, I believe I said, "a cruciform concordance"—which confused the hell out of several people, I think, and with sound reason.

I meant only that from my lay observation they did synchronize in ways that could not be faked. They cross. They overlap. They intersect at and around the head shot depicting the same event. We'll see.

Meanwhile, I'm going to continue using the Zapruder film in the discussion you started by calling upon it as evidence for a frontal head shot. To that end, I've made a somewhat longer clip that I include below, after some discussion, to attempt to provide a little more visual context regarding some of the points you raised. I'll put it in the message where I feel it's most pertinent.

Regarding the forward ejecta I pointed out in my first four-frame exhibit, you said:

Pick up a stone and throw it forward like a baseball into water. Some of the water will splash forward of the stone’s impact and some will splash ahead and around the point of impact. Crime scene specialists and forensic scientists will tell you that when an individual is shot, there is ejecta coming backwards out of the wound. That is why, at close range, the shooter will get sprayed with blood and tissue.

Mrs. Kennedy would not have been reaching for a chunk of the President’s head on the trunk of the limo if the shot had come from the rear. Any chunk of tissue would likely have ended up in the front seat rather than on the trunk if the head shot came from the rear.

With all due respect—and not stipulating for a moment that Mrs. Kennedy was on a bone retrieval mission when she climbed onto the back of the limo—you seem to be arguing vigorously against yourself. Convincingly, from here.

Unless I'm badly misunderstanding you, ejecta reasonably could be expected from both the entrance and exit points of a projectile—or, in your "concussion" model of the head explosion, "backwards out of the wound" (unless you are now abandoning the concussion model).

Therefore, your argument on the subject of ejecta alone now supports a hypothesis for the head wound coming from either the front or the rear. Is that correct, or do you want to amend that argument?

Dallas Police Officer Bobby Hargis was on a motorcycle behind and to the left of Mrs. Kennedy when the head shot occurred. He was splattered with blood and brain tissue. This also indicates a shot from the front and to the right.

Hmmm. Well, I'm a bit more simple minded. I observe the motorcade moving in a direction that necessarily would carry Officer Hargis into a cloud of relatively lightweight particles suddenly dispersing into the air in many directions—particularly on a day with wind (which seems to be uniformly left out of the equation). It's also my understanding from the record that Officer Hargis wasn't the only one in the area splattered with blood and brain tissue.

And again we are back to the duality of the ejecta question. You seem to have argued successfully already that Hargis very well could have been hit with ejecta caused by a shot from behind.

As regards the head movement upon the point of impact, remember, the President had already been shot in the upper torso. Undoubtedly he was reacting to that wound when the fatal bullet arrived. It was a natural reaction to the torso wound and the sound of gunfire, to hunch forward, which is what appears to be occurring as the limo appears after passing the Stemmons Freeway sign. The overall head movement is not just backwards, it is also to the left and downward, towards Mrs. Kennedy, which is consistent with a shooter in front and to the right. The head recedes from the camera. This is what appears to be happening from frame 312 to 315.

I'm sorry, but it is here we have to part ways entirely. That is why I'm now including an expansion on the earlier animation, adding more frames before and after. I had hoped to demonstrate in the smaller anim in favor of bandwidth considerations, but allow me to direct your attention to the following series beginning at Zapruder frame 308.

Please note the relatively static position and attitude of JFK's body for five frames prior to the head shot. I assure you that it changes very little prior to that as well, but this will illustrate. There is almost no movement of his body or head at all for five frames. And then there's the head shot. And in the time allowed by ONE frame, Kennedy's head flies forward at least two inches, perhaps more (estimated by head and ear dimensions).

And yes, it most certainly is forward—not "left and downward, towards Mrs. Kennedy," because there is no possible stretching of a human neck in that direction relative to the camera position that ever could account for what is depicted in the violent forward motion of the head, pivoting at the neck. Here is the longer animation:

It is inarguable that at the moment of impact the head flies violently forward. I don't care how many times Oliver Stone had Kevin Costner drone, "Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left." The animation above demonstrates a violent and abrupt forward change in the positioin of the head at the moment of impact, and in the next frame a considerable chunk of ejecta appears to be shot out of the President's head in precisely the direction of the head movement.

And no other thing or person in the moving vehicle exhibits anything even remotely close to the violent sudden forward jerk of John F. Kennedy's head as the right front portion of his forehead explodes outward, to the front.

And only after the head has flown forward, only after the skull has been blown open, only then, in frame 315, does the torso arch "back and to the left," the right arm beginning to flying upward in an uncontrolled, autonomic motion.

Each frame of the Zapruder film is 1/40th of a second. Moving objects will be slightly blurred in each frame. It’s not as photographically accurate as a video tape. A slight, rapid head movement in reaction to the initial impact will not be depicted as accurately as the overall head movement over many film frames. We cannot see what is occurring between each film frame.

Having studied each frame above in excruciating detail, having traced the dark outline of the head and back—discernible even in frame 313 where the obfuscating mist is greatest—I disagree emphatically. But others can look with their own eyes and judge for themselves.

Ashton

Well, I have viewed the slowed down video dozens of times now and seeing it slowed down like this makes it even more difficult for me to tell anything different. Obviously, as we have long known frame 313 is when the president's head is hit. He is clearly seen moving forward PRIOR to 313, and it can be argued that brain matter is going forward, but in this video all that is really clear to me is that the matter is being ejected, period. And then immediately after 313 is the backward motion.

But I conceed that I have zero knowledge of film analysis. On my copy of the Z film it seemed a lot easier to tell when the film is moving at its normal speed. The slowing down allows for the eyes to almost play tricks on what you see or think you see.

But I did look and will be interested in reading the comments of what others see in this slowed- down anim.

As I said, I am open to be shown something new. But I am now sickened and dizzy from viewing this so many times.

Dawn

[Bill Miller]

Obviously, as we have long known frame 313 is when the president's head is hit. He is clearly seen moving forward PRIOR to 313,

Dawn, when you say the President is clearly moving forward before Z313 .... you mean that he is moving forward because the car is moving forward - right? If are saying that the President is moving forward independently from the limo, then I disagree. Below is Z311 and Z312 and I do not see a single change in position of JFK between those frames ... other than the rotation of the limo.

Bill Miller

Z311 and Z312

[Guest Mark Valenti]

To my eyes, JFK's head is forced downward...and then his entire body spasms to his left.

[Michael Hogan]

Dallas Police Officer Bobby Hargis was on a motorcycle behind and to the left of Mrs. Kennedy when the head shot occurred. He was splattered with blood and brain tissue. This also indicates a shot from the front and to the right.

Hmmm. Well, I'm a bit more simple minded. I observe the motorcade moving in a direction that necessarily would carry Officer Hargis into a cloud of relatively lightweight particles suddenly dispersing into the air in many directions—particularly on a day with wind (which seems to be uniformly left out of the equation). It's also my understanding from the record that Officer Hargis wasn't the only one in the area splattered with blood and brain tissue.

And again we are back to the duality of the ejecta question. You seem to have argued successfully already that Hargis very well could have been hit with ejecta caused by a shot from behind.

Officer B. J. Martin was the other motorcyclist splattered with blood and brain tissue. As Josiah Thompson writes:

Officer Martin's partner, riding in the inboard cycle, was even more splattered. "It seemed like his head exploded," testified Officer Bobby W. Hargis, "and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water." (6H294) This debris hit Officer Hargis with such force that he told reporters the next day, "I thought at first I might have been hit." The splash of debris established in his mind the idea that the shot came from the right front.

Obviously, as we have long known frame 313 is when the president's head is hit. He is clearly seen moving forward PRIOR to 313,

Dawn, when you say the President is clearly moving forward before Z313 .... you mean that he is moving forward because the car is moving forward - right? If are saying that the President is moving forward independently from the limo, then I disagree. Below is Z311 and Z312 and I do not see a single change in position of JFK between those frames ... other than the rotation of the limo.

Bill Miller

Z311 and Z312

In his book Six Seconds in Dallas, Thompson discusses the head shots in detail:

THE DOUBLE MOVEMENT

I had gone to the National Archives to test the validity of a new way of viewing the Zapruder film. Developed by Philadelphia attorney Vincent Salandria, this technique consisted of using two slide projectors placed side by side and superimposing their images on the screen. By inserting the 35mm slides of sequential Zapruder frames in alternate projectors, it was possible to isolate the movement of people in the presidential car. For by matching up fixed points on the car, then switching from one projector to the other, one could see with the naked eye any movement occurring between frames. This came to be of great importance in studying the movement of the President's body at Z313....

....Since frame 313 was somewhat indistinct, I decided to try frame 312 as a control frame. I switched between 312 and 313 and found something puzzling: The President's head seemed to move

forward

, not backward. I tried 312 and 314--hardly any change, but perhaps a slight forward movement. When 312 and 316 were viewed, the head could be seen to move quite obviously backward. Again and again I switched between 312 and 313; it was quite apparent that there was a definite forward movement of several inches between these two frame numbers. And it was just as apparent that there was an immediate sharp backward movement in the frames that followed. What I had discovered was a double movement of the President's head separated by only 1/18 second. What could possibly cause such a movement? A nerve/muscle reflex to the first hit from behing? A sudden braking or acceleration of the car? An almost simultaneous impact of two bullets? Before speculating further I knew I needed a very accurate measure of the magnitude of both movements....

.....With the help of Bill Hoffman, a bright young physicist, and the use of a dissecting microscope, I was able to measure with great accuracy the movement of the President's head. After holding steady for some twelve frames, it is suddenly driven forward between frames 312 and 313. Amazingly, in the very next frame, 314, it is already moving backward, a movement it continues in succeeding frames until the President's shoulders strike the seat cushion at Z321. The graphs on the following page suggest the magnitude of this movement.

Its magnitude is substantial. Measured parallel to the axis of the car the President's head has been given a forward acceleration of 69.6 feet per second between frames 312 and 313. One-eighteenth second later, this movement has been reversed and the head has been given an acceleration backward and to the left of 100.3 feet per second. These accelerations are quite large* (a falling body at the earth's surface, for example, accelerates at a rate of 32 feet per second), and what is even more striking is the brevity of the interval in which the movement is reversed. What could cause such a reversal? How could this violent double movement be explained......?

*Large though they may be, they are only

minimum

values. We have every reason to believe that the true acceleration values are perhaps 20 times larger. Our measured values of acceleration are average accelerations for the 56 milliseconds between frames. Since a projectile would pass through the head in 2 or 3 milliseconds (transferring its momentum and accelerating the head in that time interval), our measured values are much too small. Had Zapruder been using a high-speed camera which ran, say, at 1,000 frames per second, we would have been able to arrive at more accurate values. But for purpose of analysis the minimum values are sufficiently large to make the point.

After a study of the eyewitness reports and rejecting other possible causes for the above described movements, Thompson goes on to conclude that the President was hit by two shots at almost the same instant. It is worth noting that Thompson arrived at these conclusions 40 years ago. Whether or not he has changed his mind over the passing years, I don't know.

Edited December 23, 2006 by Michael Hogan

[Ashton Gray]

I have not viewed the film in some time and have never seen it where it did not upset me greatly. I think it would be upsetting for me to view anyone's muder on film. Seeing any form of pain is distressing to me. Worse for me is that he was a president I truly loved. Pretty damn rare. In fact he's the only one I can say this of.

I understand the sentiment completely. None of this is very easy for me, either. It is gore. It is murder most foul. It is difficult to confront. But for me, it just has to be faced.

I recognize and respect that you do not follow the crowd and I am always open to be shown if I am wrong.

Well, I wouldn't wish to see anyone wrong. My wish is that all of us wind up being right in the end. I think most involved in the quest for the truth basically have it right, but have been thwarted in reaching the goal by people with vested interests in keeping people running off on detours down blind alleys. Lord knows how many of those I've explored. That doesn't mean anybody's "wrong" for trying to find out.

But, that said, it was this very backward motion that permitted the earliest critics to see that the WC's conclusions of three shots, from behind by LHO were so misguided.

Assuming for the moment, just for the sake of argument, that the answer to the question of CIA involvement is "yes," then the next assumption has to be—for the informed—that the operation had many layers, many blinds, and many misdirections.

Continuing this paradigm, then it can only be expected that the founder of the CIA—John J. McCloy—and the Patron Saint of CIA—malicious creator of MKULTRA Allen Dulles—would be seated smilingly on the Warren Commission with knives in the backs of commission members. And so it was.

As for the WC "findings" <SPIT!>, I've said before, I'll say again, that if the CIA committed the crime, and if they set up Oswald as a patsy, they set it up to be claimed to have come from the sixth floor window of the TSBD because it was close enough to the truth that they could "sell" it, while also peddling enough controversy to keep it endlessly in foment.

To say that Kennedy's head slams forward as his brains fly out the front of his head is not to say that Lee Harvey Oswald shot the fatal shot, or to say that it came from the sixth floor of the TSBD. Not remotely.

It is to say that the fatal head shot very well may have come from somewhere behind. That's all.

And if it did, then it further is to say that the real perpetrators were smart enough to set their patsy up and plant a gun in a location that had some similarity to where the actual shots came from.

Really, would they do it any other way if they were clever murderers? I'm not suggesting "sane"—just clever as murderers. Would it make even any criminal sense to plot a murder in broad daylight and set up a patsy and plant a gun in the opposite direction from where the actual shots came?

While confronting the movie of the act is bad enough, even worse is trying to think like the scum who did it.

Bottom line, he was killed by the highest level of our government and we have been lied to by this government and the press and our educational insititutions our whole lives. On this we agree.

I think you might be onto something.

Ashton

Edited December 23, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Chris Davidson]

Dallas Police Officer Bobby Hargis was on a motorcycle behind and to the left of Mrs. Kennedy when the head shot occurred. He was splattered with blood and brain tissue. This also indicates a shot from the front and to the right.

Hmmm. Well, I'm a bit more simple minded. I observe the motorcade moving in a direction that necessarily would carry Officer Hargis into a cloud of relatively lightweight particles suddenly dispersing into the air in many directions—particularly on a day with wind (which seems to be uniformly left out of the equation). It's also my understanding from the record that Officer Hargis wasn't the only one in the area splattered with blood and brain tissue.

And again we are back to the duality of the ejecta question. You seem to have argued successfully already that Hargis very well could have been hit with ejecta caused by a shot from behind.

Officer B. J. Martin was the other motorcyclist splattered with blood and brain tissue. As Josiah Thompson writes:

Officer Martin's partner, riding in the inboard cycle, was even more splattered. "It seemed like his head exploded," testified Officer Bobby W. Hargis, "and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water." (6H294) This debris hit Officer Hargis with such force that he told reporters the next day, "I thought at first I might have been hit." The splash of debris established in his mind the idea that the shot came from the right front.

Obviously, as we have long known frame 313 is when the president's head is hit. He is clearly seen moving forward PRIOR to 313,

Dawn, when you say the President is clearly moving forward before Z313 .... you mean that he is moving forward because the car is moving forward - right? If are saying that the President is moving forward independently from the limo, then I disagree. Below is Z311 and Z312 and I do not see a single change in position of JFK between those frames ... other than the rotation of the limo.

Bill Miller

Z311 and Z312

In his book Six Seconds in Dallas, Thompson discusses the head shots in detail:

THE DOUBLE MOVEMENT

I had gone to the National Archives to test the validity of a new way of viewing the Zapruder film. Developed by Philadelphia attorney Vincent Salandria, this technique consisted of using two slide projectors placed side by side and superimposing their images on the screen. By inserting the 35mm slides of sequential Zapruder frames in alternate projectors, it was possible to isolate the movement of people in the presidential car. For by matching up fixed points on the car, then switching from one projector to the other, one could see with the naked eye any movement occurring between frames. This came to be of great importance in studying the movement of the President's body at Z313....

....Since frame 313 was somewhat indistinct, I decided to try frame 312 as a control frame. I switched between 312 and 313 and found something puzzling: The President's head seemed to move

forward

, not backward. I tried 312 and 314--hardly any change, but perhaps a slight forward movement. When 312 and 316 were viewed, the head could be seen to move quite obviously backward. Again and again I switched between 312 and 313; it was quite apparent that there was a definite forward movement of several inches between these two frame numbers. And it was just as apparent that there was an immediate sharp backward movement in the frames that followed. What I had discovered was a double movement of the President's head separated by only 1/18 second. What could possibly cause such a movement? A nerve/muscle reflex to the first hit from behing? A sudden braking or acceleration of the car? An almost simultaneous impact of two bullets? Before speculating further I knew I needed a very accurate measure of the magnitude of both movements....

.....With the help of Bill Hoffman, a bright young physicist, and the use of a dissecting microscope, I was able to measure with great accuracy the movement of the President's head. After holding steady for some twelve frames, it is suddenly driven forward between frames 312 and 313. Amazingly, in the very next frame, 314, it is already moving backward, a movement it continues in succeeding frames until the President's shoulders strike the seat cushion at Z321. The graphs on the following page suggest the magnitude of this movement.

Its magnitude is substantial. Measured parallel to the axis of the car the President's head has been given a forward acceleration of 69.6 feet per second between frames 312 and 313. One-eighteenth second later, this movement has been reversed and the head has been given an acceleration backward and to the left of 100.3 feet per second. These accelerations are quite large* (a falling body at the earth's surface, for example, accelerates at a rate of 32 feet per second), and what is even more striking is the brevity of the interval in which the movement is reversed. What could cause such a reversal? How could this violent double movement be explained......?

*Large though they may be, they are only

minimum

values. We have every reason to believe that the true acceleration values are perhaps 20 times larger. Our measured values of acceleration are average accelerations for the 56 milliseconds between frames. Since a projectile would pass through the head in 2 or 3 milliseconds (transferring its momentum and accelerating the head in that time interval), our measured values are much too small. Had Zapruder been using a high-speed camera wchich ran, say, at 1,000 frames per second, we would have been able to arrive at more accurate values. But for purpose of analysis the minimum values are sufficiently large to make the point.

After a study of the eyewitness reports and rejecting other possible causes for the above described movements, Thompson goes on to conclude that the President was hit by two shots at almost the same instant. It is worth noting that Thompson arrived at these conclusions 40 years ago. Whether or not he has changed his mind over the passing years, I don't know.

Michael, this is very interesting. Something else to ponder is:

Right before the limo reaches the lamp-post, Jackie pulls Jack's elbow/arm down somewhat. I believe she is weighing him down to some extent, as she moves in closer, and is still in this position when the headshot occurs.

According to the film, his head moves downward from 312-313. Then his upper body moves violently backwards /sideways or both in succeeding frames.

A great force has to move him this way.

If we leave out the theory of 2 simultaneous bullets for a moment, would the car accelerating be the only other moving force

to create Jack's backward movement?

Once again I am providing Dr.Costella's movie. I put a white background in, so camera movement is viewable.

For those interested, compare the camera movement to the car and people within.

chris

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Michael, this is very interesting. Something else to ponder is:

Right before the limo reaches the lamp-post, Jackie pulls Jack's elbow/arm down somewhat. I believe she is weighing him down to some extent, as she moves in closer, and is still in this position when the headshot occurs.

According to the film, his head moves downward from 312-313. Then his upper body moves violently backwards /sideways or both in succeeding frames.

A great force has to move him this way.

If we leave out the theory of 2 simultaneous bullets for a moment, would the car accelerating be the only other moving force

to create Jack's backward movement?

Once again I am providing Dr.Costella's movie. I put a white background in, so camera movement is viewable.

For those interested, compare the camera movement to the car and people within.

chris

Since we can't see either of Jackie's hands in motion, it's possible that she contributes to the backward motion of JFK's body.

[Michael Hogan]

If we leave out the theory of 2 simultaneous bullets for a moment, would the car accelerating be the only other moving force

to create Jack's backward movement?

Chris,

According to Thompson, the possibility that "The car suddenly accelerated or decelerated during this time, thus throwing the President either forward or backward can be ruled out by referring both to witness testimony and to the Zapruder film."

"Both Governor and Mrs. Connally indicated that the car did not accelerate until after the head shot (R50). Clint Hill...testified that the car accelerated just after he reached it. "The initial surge was quite violent," Hill remarked, "because it almost jerked me off the left rear stepboard." (2H141). The combined testimony of all these witnesses indicates that the car did not accelerate until some 3 seconds after the President was struck in the head. And the Zapruder film shows conclusively that no acceleration or deceleration occured during this critical period. Any quick acceleration or deceleration would have thrown the other occupants of the car off balance, yet the film shows no such movement--Mrs. Kennedy, the Governor, and Mrs. Connally all remain still relative to the car during this critical period. Furhtermore, using background objects as control points, we can actually measure the velocity of the car from frame to frame. These measurements indicate that during the interval in question the car maintained a fairly constant speed of approximately 10 miles per hour."

(

Six Seconds in Dallas

, p. 92)

Edited December 23, 2006 by Michael Hogan

[Ashton Gray]

Dallas Police Officer Bobby Hargis was on a motorcycle behind and to the left of Mrs. Kennedy when the head shot occurred. He was splattered with blood and brain tissue. This also indicates a shot from the front and to the right.

Hmmm. Well, I'm a bit more simple minded. I observe the motorcade moving in a direction that necessarily would carry Officer Hargis into a cloud of relatively lightweight particles suddenly dispersing into the air in many directions—particularly on a day with wind (which seems to be uniformly left out of the equation). It's also my understanding from the record that Officer Hargis wasn't the only one in the area splattered with blood and brain tissue.

And again we are back to the duality of the ejecta question. You seem to have argued successfully already that Hargis very well could have been hit with ejecta caused by a shot from behind.

Officer B. J. Martin was the other motorcyclist splattered with blood and brain tissue. As Josiah Thompson writes:

Officer Martin's partner, riding in the inboard cycle, was even more splattered. "It seemed like his head exploded," testified Officer Bobby W. Hargis, "and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water." (6H294) This debris hit Officer Hargis with such force that he told reporters the next day, "I thought at first I might have been hit." The splash of debris established in his mind the idea that the shot came from the right front.

...In his book Six Seconds in Dallas, Thompson discusses the head shots in detail:

THE DOUBLE MOVEMENT

........With the help of Bill Hoffman, a bright young physicist, and the use of a dissecting microscope, I was able to measure with great accuracy the movement of the President's head. After holding steady for some twelve frames, it is suddenly driven forward between frames 312 and 313. Amazingly, in the very next frame, 314, it is already moving backward, a movement it continues in succeeding frames until the President's shoulders strike the seat cushion at Z321. ...

After a study of the eyewitness reports and rejecting other possible causes for the above described movements, Thompson goes on to conclude that the President was hit by two shots at almost the same instant. It is worth noting that Thompson arrived at these conclusions 40 years ago. Whether or not he has changed his mind over the passing years, I don't know.

Thanks for all the info you posted, Michael.

Thompson and Hoffman very astutely observed the obvious about the head movement from Z312 to Z313—importantly, "after holding steady for some twelve frames." It's there. It's an instantaneous forward thrust. It's in plain view. It's inarguable. It is anomalous to all other motion of the limo and any of its occupants. And I daresay it is impossible without external force traveling from somewhere in the rear of the limo toward the front of the limo, slamming the head forward that suddenly.

With the benefit of the stabilization techniques developed by John Dolva, I tend to disagree about the head having started its backward motion at Z314; if it does, and their microscopic analysis detected it, it must be in very tiny degrees indeed, but then I was working with fairly low resolution.

Ashton

Edited December 23, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Ashton Gray]

Then his upper body moves violently backwards /sideways or both in succeeding frames.

A great force has to move him this way.

Do you mean that it has to be a great external force?

If we leave out the theory of 2 simultaneous bullets for a moment, would the car accelerating be the only other moving force

to create Jack's backward movement?

I'm going to state here what seems extremely simple to me, and entirely consistent with what I see: a shot from the rear and somewhat to the left goes through JFK's skull, slamming his head forward, blowing out the right front of his skull, sending ejecta forward and downward.

The last autonomic response of the hopelessly compromised nervous system is to resist the forward and downward thrust, convulsing the muscles to counter that momentum, causing the torso to jerk back and up—at which point all motor controls have been lost, the right arm flopping upward as a result of the now backward momentum, the torso continuing the direction of instantaneously initiated resistance until it falls to rest.

I'm including here, inline, an even longer anim set at .02 second intervals between frames. It's large. I don't know if it will make things difficult in the forum, and if so I may have to convert it to a .mov so it's a separate attachement. I haven't put graphics over it, but what I described above is exactly what I see. I have seen and heard nothing that convinces me that any external force at all was needed to create the backward motion, nor have I seen or heard any description of an external force that could, as an external force to the head, cause any such extreme motion of the entire torso.

That isn't to say I won't. But so far I haven't. Here's the anim:

Ashton

[Chris Davidson]

Then his upper body moves violently backwards /sideways or both in succeeding frames.

A great force has to move him this way.

Do you mean that it has to be a great external force?

If we leave out the theory of 2 simultaneous bullets for a moment, would the car accelerating be the only other moving force

to create Jack's backward movement?

I'm going to state here what seems extremely simple to me, and entirely consistent with what I see: a shot from the rear and somewhat to the left goes through JFK's skull, slamming his head forward, blowing out the right front of his skull, sending ejecta forward and downward.

The last autonomic response of the hopelessly compromised nervous system is to resist the forward and downward thrust, convulsing the muscles to counter that momentum, causing the torso to jerk back and up—at which point all motor controls have been lost, the right arm flopping upward as a result of the now backward momentum, the torso continuing the direction of instantaneously initiated resistance until it falls to rest.

I'm including here, inline, an even longer anim set at .02 second intervals between frames. It's large. I don't know if it will make things difficult in the forum, and if so I may have to convert it to a .mov so it's a separate attachement. I haven't put graphics over it, but what I described above is exactly what I see. I have seen and heard nothing that convinces me that any external force at all was needed to create the backward motion, nor have I seen or heard any description of an external force that could, as an external force to the head, cause any such extreme motion of the entire torso.

That isn't to say I won't. But so far I haven't. Here's the anim:

Ashton

Officer B. J. Martin was the other motorcyclist splattered with blood and brain tissue. As Josiah Thompson writes:

Officer Martin's partner, riding in the inboard cycle, was even more splattered. "It seemed like his head exploded," testified Officer Bobby W. Hargis, "and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water." (6H294) This debris hit Officer Hargis with such force that he told reporters the next day, "I thought at first I might have been hit." The splash of debris established in his mind the idea that the shot came from the right front.

I would think that a shot from the rear would spray most of the matter out the front.

Kennedy is hit in the throat and starts to lean forward. As he is leaning forward, Jackie puts her arm on his elbow bringing him downward some more. He gets shot in the back of the head sending his head downward for 1 frame.

Why wouldn't his momentum keep sending him downward?

I'm not a hunter, but other's have suggested when shot in the head, you drop.

chris