The Head Wound Explained

[Bill Miller]

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.

Those actions happen in the same frame. Sit as JFK was and have someone tap you on the head from the front and you will experience the same motion. The more violent the hit - the more violent the reaction.

Bill Miller

[Chris Davidson]

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.

Those actions happen in the same frame. Sit as JFK was and have someone tap you on the head from the front and you will experience the same motion. The more violent the hit - the more violent the reaction.

Bill Miller

Bill, what actions happen in the same frame?

313 head moves down

314 right shoulder starts moving upward

315 right shoulder continues upward and head moves backward

316 same motion continues

317 looks as though he is pretty much upright.

chris

[John Dolva]

consider the five blind men and the elephant, they are all of them correct. What we are looking for is a unifying theory.

For each frame, if Kennedy's head was in the same pose, as it traverses the field of view more of what is hidden by him comes into view. This contributes to an illusion that he may move forward (Bill explains this). At the same time the limo descends, so more of what is hidden comes into view above his head/body. None of this means his posture has changed. These are measurable events and need to be subtracted from a final analysis of how his head has moved.

It's easy to forget that we are looking at a three dimensional space where movements towards and away from the camera may only be seen by studying dimensions. If Kennedy's head had remained as it was in 312 during 313 and then there was a change to 314, we would see that he has neither moved back or forward, but rather directly away from Zapruder, swivelling at the seat. If nothing else it tells us something about how far away Jackie was sitting.

_____________

Now, 313.

Firstly, Kennedy before 313 and after 313 is a different person. Before 313 he is alive and his muscles more or less work as he wants them to. We can see that the limo is decelerating before the headshot. This is automatically compensated for by anyone who has had the experience of travewlling in a car, to the point it's forgotten, until you try to drink a full cup of hot coffee while someone is driving. Then you are sharply reminded that cups of coffee don't think.

After 313 Kennedy is more like the cup of coffee.

Look at the back seat of the limo. Zapruder is tracking Kennedy, he has no idea that in 313 what is seen will be seen, he continues to track. Yet the rear seat is a smear. Yet Kennedy's outline is less so.

One explanation is that the Limo has sharply braked and Kennedy's body continues to move forward. This is why the 312 outline of Kennedy's head fits snuggly into 313 when 312 is rotated at the waist.

The bullet has hit Kennedy before frame 313. The skull bones are shattered and the explosive cavitation is well under way. The explosive cavitation is at its peak roughly 20 times the volume of the missile. This must go somewhere. In this instance, the scalp tears and bulges out. So the outling of Kennedy's head must be discerned not from what one sees but from some reliable reference point.

The lower lobe of his ears may do.

Here one can see again that while his head has expanded(explosive cavitation) and moved forward(braking) it has moved away from Zapruder. As there is thereafter no further room to move in this direction, as Jackie is in the way, she deflects him into the available space.

Edited December 23, 2006 by John Dolva

[Ashton Gray]

I've had enough tea. Thanks for the party.

He was hit by 15 shots from the front, all into the same hole in the head. Except, of course, for the throat shot.

His head did not go forward, but sideways in a mobius circle—like Linda Blair on crack.

All 15 outdoor shooters (all on the grassy knoll) were invisible policemen who went up in the rapture.

And God bless us everyone.

Ashton Gray

[John Dolva]

God Bless you too, and a merry season as well

(emoticon that sticks its tounge out)

I think Thompso comes close in seeing front and back shot aftermaths, he just can't bring himself to see it's just one shot from the right, and a movement in 3D, from behind, Zapruder, behind the Newmans etc etc etc.

[Charles Black]

This I hope will be my final post in this thread.

When someone tells me that he sees JFK's head "flying forward" ... regardless of which speed that you view this in....there is something seriously wrong with that viewers perception. It makes no sense to argue with anyone who denies such perfectly visible evidence.

I can understand those who disagree with my theory of the Z film being altered. But I can't understand anyone claiming to see what Ashton proclaims to see.

In the eyes of those persons with whom I have viewed this film, and it has been many....that we have agreed that JFK's head makes a slight movement forward at appx. Z 312. What should be even more obvious to ANYONE watching this film, is that the rearward motion which follows, is extremely fast and violent, as his torso "bounces", as a result of this rapid rearward movement, off of the back seat cushion to an upright position, which is followed by the downward slip, probably with Jackies help, into Jackies lap. Immediately after this, we KNOW that Clint Hill mounts the vehicle and the wound "which he notices", is the absence of the rear of JFK's head.

We know that the Connally's were spattered with tiny particles of brain matter which should be expected of back spatter of a shot entering from the front. We know that a motorcycle policeman was struck with considerable force by bone and brain matter ejected from the rear of the President's head wound which agent Hill had described. It was also reported by those in the SS follow up car, that the windshield of their car was also hit by flying brain matter.

You dont have to be a physicist or a wound ballistician to deduct that as a result of a shot from a forward position, backspatter covered the Connallys.....and that this shot evulsed the rear of JFK's head, created a gaping opening as reported by nearly all Parkland personnel and a great many at Bethesda. SA Clint Hill also noticed a portion of skull that had been separated from JFK's skull to be lying in the back seat. Typical frontal entering bullet wound....small entrance wound in the front followed by a massive blow out of the rear of the head. A wound so large that medical personnel gazed "INTO" it !

This is the same wound which was reported by Jerrol Custer and others at Bethesha including FBI Special Agents Siebert and Oneil.

Since what I have stated immediately above, has been generally accepted by most students of the JFK assassination......I remain unable to even slightly consider Ashton's theories of a violently forward movement of JFK's head and his "assumptions" which to his thinking, support his further "speculations". One would have to be blind to accept Ashton's conclusions....not only blind, but blind and gullible !

Charlie Black

[John Dolva]

The motor cyclists rode into a spreading cloud of blood and debris. As well, some of the illusion of where this cloud went is from the limo moving away from it, and hence the cameras following. As welll there were gusts to 17 mph driving matter east.

[Charles Black]

Hello Ashton

I am truly happy that you enjoyed the "Tea Party"

It gave me a very warm and fuzzy feeling during this season, to realize your Christian nature, when you mentioned those 15 unidentified policemen shooters who were joyously lifted by the rapture.

I feel very strongly that their "unidentified" families also experienced great relief at this joyous time.

Now that I have sensed your truly Christian inner feelings, I take this opportunity to wish you and your family a very joyous Christmas.

Charlie Black

[Bill Miller]

Those actions happen in the same frame. Sit as JFK was and have someone tap you on the head from the front and you will experience the same motion. The more violent the hit - the more violent the reaction.

Bill Miller

Bill, what actions happen in the same frame?

Chris, I am talking about the initial shockwave that drives the President's right shoulder rearward at the same instant that his head rocks forward. Many times I have posted about the rotation of the limo as it traveled left to right across Zapruder's field of view. This gives an illusion that the limo is rotating counter clockwise - simple angle changes that represent perspective. An example of this particulr occurrence could be compared to a lunar eclipse where the sun (Jackie) gets blocked out by the moon (JFK) and as the limo passes with each frame - more of Jackie should appear from behind the President.

Watch the clip below showing what happens between Z311 and Z312. Pay close attention to the horizontal plane as the crease in Jackie's jackets inner forearm moves out and down from behind JFK's back as the President is rotating away from the camera. Also note the sun spot on Jackie's chest that also disappears behind the President during the same natural occurrence. Study them for they will be important in my next example .... (see below)

Now watch what happens between Z312 and Z313. Instead of the natural occurence of the President rotating away from the camera which would cause the same effects as what I just pointed out about the two prior frames (Z311 and Z312) running in conjuntion with each other - JFK's head goes forward and his shoulder is driven backwards. Al Carrier, upon consulting some experts, once explained this occurence in a more technical way than I was able to do it, but what it boiled down to was the instantaneous absorbtion of the initial shockwave as it passed through the President's body from a bullet hitting the top portion of JFK's head on a downward trajectory from the front. (see below)

If you paid close attention to the two places I mentioned in the prior clip and tracked them in this clip, you will have noticed that the sun spot on Jackie's coat continued on its natural path, but the crease in her coat sleeve actually lost ground due to JFK's shoulder being driven backwards. Had JFK's shoulder remained stationary, then the natural roatation of the limo through Zapruder's field of view would have caused that crease in Jackie's forearm to continue coming out from behind the President's back, but all that was momentarily reversed upon the President's body absorbing that initial shock as the shoulder was driven rearward. This occurence happens in one frame just as the bone plate was suspended in midair for that one frame. With the head driven forward as far as it could go - the shoulder going backwards and the head forward at the same instant caused a type of whiplash effect and is why the 35th President of the United States was seen moving back and to the left in the next fraction of a second. Try the same thing with your own body and I think you too, will see how this could naturally happen.

I hope these examples have offered a better insight into what I have been saying for the past several years.

Bill Miller

Edited December 23, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Terry Mauro]

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

************************************************

"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."

What the hell is that suppose to mean??? ..."explodes outward, toward the front."

Am I missing something, here? Because, it has always been my observation that the frame being shown is the one following that which JFK had been hit in the throat anteriorly [between the vertical distance encompassing the cricoid cartilage (Adam's Apple), directly above the entrance wound, and the suprasternal notch, directly below it]. If I remember correctly, this frame occurs in that sequence following the frame in which both of JFK's arms are extended outward, laterally from his throat, which he seems to be clutching with both hands.

I am still waiting for anyone, someone, to present me with the physical evidence of anything remotely resembling what one would consider to be an "exit" wound, emanating from anywhere on the "anterior" portion of JFK's body, no matter how cleverly concealed, or cosmetically altered.

[Erick A. Bovik]

Dawn’s cousin Howard Tattrie, who has not studied the case, but has knowledge and experience with 8 mm cameras had some comments on the film which I have extracted from his emails, omitting personal comments:

I saw it mentioned that the film was running at 18fps. Is that known for sure to be true? I remember hearing somewhere (not there) that the camera was a Bell and Howell 8mm. The most common fps for 8mm was 16 fps. Then in the early sixty's (but I'm not sure what year it was) some camera's started running at 18fps, (not sure if Bell and Howell was one of them) unless they were sound, and then they ran at 24 fps. I was just wondering what he had, because change happened in early 60's and because Kennedy was shot in '63 I'm wondering if Zapruder had a new camera, or one he'd been using for a while it may have been running at 16 fps. Previously some of them even ran at 12 fps. Ugh!

I've got many old 8mm as well as super-8 sound films and the 8mm is terrible for clarity, even in an editor.

I also noticed the four frames that somebody put up. I think his name was Ashton. He mentions, and shows the head going forward. But what he doesn't mention and no one that I read mentioned ( I didn't read them all, maybe somebody did) is the fact that also in those four frames you can tell that either Zapruder was moving backwards, or he had a zoom lens and was zooming out. That would have to be taken into consideration for any movement in the frame, of Kennedy's head. You can see, not only the seat of the car "zooming" out, but also a green border comes into the frame from something. Not sure what that is, because I don’t think it can be the car because the car was black wasn't it?

Anyway, just wondered about those things.

I did continue to look at more of the postings after I sent the email. Someone else (I'm not sure who it was, I can't remember the name) seemed to want to contradict this Ashton guy and posted a piece of the film that was a couple or three more frames than the one that Ashton posted. After watching the longer bit, I'm not really sure if the motion I saw was a "zoom out" or if it's just the jittery movement of the camera. Because in the second bit, the camera does back off in the same spot as with the first one, but then moves back in. There's also a lot of sideways movement as well, in the whole thing. So I'm thinking that this might be just "jitter". I'm pretty sure that Zapruder wasn't on a tripod, but was shooting hand-held, so there would be a bit of movement anyway, depending on how expert he was at holding the camera steady. Also not sure if the frames that they show there are complete frames or if they've been cropped just to show John and Jackie. If they're full frames then the movement is from the camera, but if they're cropped then the movement could be from a "lazy" crop. Not sure.

In any case I think that when either Ashton, or whoever did the other one, draws a line around Kennedy's head to show movement, they should also draw a line around some other outline in the frame, to show how the movement of the head corresponds to the movement in the rest of the scene. Because the rest of the scene is in movement as well. Either in, out, or to the side.

I still wonder about the speed of the film, and if people know that the camera really was running at the 18fps, as an absolute known fact, or is it just assumed that it was. That little difference in fps could mean a whole huge difference in what is seen in the film, considering what I read there about the ballistics and how things were moving at the "speed of sound" or higher.

I don't really know anything about the film other than I've seen it on TV a couple times. Never have looked at it frame by frame or anything like that except for what I saw there. I do know that from editing my own films (an 8mm editor allows you to view the film frame by frame because they were hand cranked. I still have one.) things are seen in an editor (frame by frame) that you don't always see in the regular viewing of the film in a projector. And some of them are weird to say the least. Actions that you look at in an editor sometimes seem to have no relation to what your watching.

I just went back to that JFK post and found that Ashton put up a much longer piece of film. ( yes, I admit it's fascinating stuff.) In the new one, the movement I was seeing in the first four frames definitely just looks like a "rocking" back and forth. So maybe there's no zoom after all. (that's part of the problem of just viewing a small number of frames.) However that doesn't discount the fact that there is movement of the whole frame.

What I was thinking though is this.

The people of the "conspiracy" persuasion see demons everywhere when it comes to the JFK assassination. However...........think about this..............what's this, almost 2007..........that's almost 44 years, and still there's the back and forth..............the shot came from the back......"no, I don't see that".........the shot came from the front...."no absolutely not"........etc etc. All kinds of theories and conspiracies and still there's arguing back and forth. I just can't see how the Warren Commission can be faulted for whatever their final outcome was, when the people who think they were wrong (and I notice that on that problem, Ashton and everybody else is in agreement) 44 years later, still cannot arrive at a final consensus!

However, it certainly is fascinating reading to see everybody's different outlooks and views. I just don't see why some people have a "pet" theory and don't like others point of view, when in fact nobody can really agree on pretty well anything except that the Warren Commission got it wrong. Well geez, ya think? How long did they have to come up with their "verdict"? Certainly not 44 years, and it still goes on!

I'm reading those posts and I find myself thinking "yea, that makes sense....", and then I'll read another one with another view and I think "yea, that makes sense too". So I end up with it being very fascinating reading but can't really decide what to believe. But then it looks like no one else can either.

[Charles Black]

Merry Christmas all :

For some reason I am having extreme difficulty in loading "this Particular thread". I therefore expect this to be my last attempt to post on "this"

thread.

I am going to use this as an excuse to somewhat broaden the original topic. I am doing this only, that some who might be interested, may better understand, "my views" on the shootings....not only the "headshot /headshots".

In that many of you will think my ideas quite bizarre, I believe them, and must therefore state such. This is "out of the box" speculation, and I have no PROOF to substantiate it. I also, due to my problem posting in this thread, will "probably" not be able to respond to some of the ridicule which I foresee !

I am not placing the following in necessarily their order of occurrence.

A) JFK is struck in the throat by either 1) a shot from the North knoll or 2) by a sound supressed

handgun, concealed by "an Elm Street spectator". Concealed in possbly a camera, a hat, a womans purse...or several other possible concealments. 3) A glass fragment from a windshild shot from either position. I feel that he is DEFINITELY indicating throat trauma, and throat trauma only, as Zapruder captures him emerging from behind the sign.

JFK is struck in the back as reportedly seen by Secret Service follow up (unable to determine Z frame). I believe this to be a shallow wound as reported, and may have been the source of CE399 "magic bullet".

C) JFK may have been struck in Posterior head by a small caliber (.22cal) bullet in the time frame approximating Z311.

D) JFK was struck at the hairline, above the right eye by either rifle fire from the knoll, or again by a heavy caliber concealed and sound supressed handgun, wielded by an Elm Street spectator.

I think that Connally was most likely not struck by any of the bullets which struck JFK and that he was struck by two separate bullets.

I feel that there were three or four bullets which contacted JFK, and two which struck JBC. I feel that there were three misses. Probably a total of nine shots fired from four and even possibley five separate shooters.

I feel that the possibly two "ELM STREET SHOOTERS"

had the easiest escape scenario as they blended into the crowd with their concealed and "silenced" handguns.

This brings me to my final unsupported theory.

The Z film was partially altered, thru possibly frame excision, because "A" shooter was captured (probably one of my proposed Elm Street shooters).

This excision was "known by the conspirators" to create what appears to be a very strange wound reaction by JFK. However, it had to be done immediately or destroy the entire film. They could not show another "shooter" and maintain their lone nut, deranged, Cuban sypathizer story !

As I stated, I may not be able to answer your counters in this thread....tho I could in another.

"...And to all a goodnight" !

"Crazy" Charlie Black

[Frank Agbat]

Dawn’s cousin Howard Tattrie, who has not studied the case, but has knowledge and experience with 8 mm cameras had some comments on the film which I have extracted from his emails, omitting personal comments:

I saw it mentioned that the film was running at 18fps. Is that known for sure to be true? I remember hearing somewhere (not there) that the camera was a Bell and Howell 8mm. The most common fps for 8mm was 16 fps. Then in the early sixty's (but I'm not sure what year it was) some camera's started running at 18fps, (not sure if Bell and Howell was one of them) unless they were sound, and then they ran at 24 fps. I was just wondering what he had, because change happened in early 60's and because Kennedy was shot in '63 I'm wondering if Zapruder had a new camera, or one he'd been using for a while it may have been running at 16 fps. Previously some of them even ran at 12 fps. Ugh!

...

Zapruder's camera has been examined, test, etc, etc, nearly endlessly. I think it is safe to say that it operated at 18.3 frames per second. The Nix camera operated at 18.3.

I'm currently looking into the Muchmore camera, but the rated "normal" rate on it was 18fps. The Bronson camera operated at 12fps.

[Charles Black]

Merry Christmas all :

For some reason I am having extreme difficulty in loading "this Particular thread". I therefore expect this to be my last attempt to post on "this"

thread.

I am going to use this as an excuse to somewhat broaden the original topic. I am doing this only, that some who might be interested, may better understand, "my views" on the shootings....not only the "headshot /headshots".

In that many of you will think my ideas quite bizarre, I believe them, and must therefore state such. This is "out of the box" speculation, and I have no PROOF to substantiate it. I also, due to my problem posting in this thread, will "probably" not be able to respond to some of the ridicule which I foresee !

I am not placing the following in necessarily their order of occurrence.

A) JFK is struck in the throat by either 1) a shot from the North knoll or 2) by a sound supressed

handgun, concealed by "an Elm Street spectator". Concealed in possbly a camera, a hat, a womans purse...or several other possible concealments. 3) A glass fragment from a windshild shot from either position. I feel that he is DEFINITELY indicating throat trauma, and throat trauma only, as Zapruder captures him emerging from behind the sign.

JFK is struck in the back as reportedly seen by Secret Service follow up (unable to determine Z frame). I believe this to be a shallow wound as reported, and may have been the source of CE399 "magic bullet".

C) JFK may have been struck in Posterior head by a small caliber (.22cal) bullet in the time frame approximating Z311.

D) JFK was struck at the hairline, above the right eye by either rifle fire from the knoll, or again by a heavy caliber concealed and sound supressed handgun, wielded by an Elm Street spectator.

I think that Connally was most likely not struck by any of the bullets which struck JFK and that he was struck by two separate bullets.

I feel that there were three or four bullets which contacted JFK, and two which struck JBC. I feel that there were three misses. Probably a total of nine shots fired from four and even possibley five separate shooters.

I feel that the possibly two "ELM STREET SHOOTERS"

had the easiest escape scenario as they blended into the crowd with their concealed and "silenced" handguns.

This brings me to my final unsupported theory.

The Z film was partially altered, thru possibly frame excision, because "A" shooter was captured (probably one of my proposed Elm Street shooters).

This excision was "known by the conspirators" to create what appears to be a very strange wound reaction by JFK. However, it had to be done immediately or destroy the entire film. They could not show another "shooter" and maintain their lone nut, deranged, Cuban sypathizer story !

As I stated, I may not be able to answer your counters in this thread....tho I could in another.

"...And to all a goodnight" !

"Crazy" Charlie Black

[Ashton Gray]

I am not placing the following in necessarily their order of occurrence.

Or, more importantly, in a thread where they are on-topic.

Ashton Gray