Clothing Examination--JFK's Shirt

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://cuban-exile.com/photo/jfk-new/comm-exhb887-mndc01.jpg

illustrates the 'deception'. The photo is taken so one cannot easily see depth. Most clues are obscured.

However it's possible to project the wall edges so that the length of the left shoe is known and thus the tip of the right shoe identified.

His left elbow is placed to the right side of the knee and then the left wrist is bent back so his left forearm gets around the front pipe. This means (look at shadow of nose on rear pipe and shadow of gun/camera assembly on front pipe) that his left eye looks at the pipe so his shoe knee forearm left forehead are up close to the pipes. Look at the location of the rifle butt. To lean into the rifle and hold it in this location for this shot is impossible,

ie the evidence is not evidence at all.

Why would they need to contort, remove box, ignore pipes in order to prove a shot was possible from here when, if it was possible without all this deception, why bother?

Does it mean that the only way to justify a shot from here one needs to do this and therefore there was never a shot from here?

The rifle is "Jacked up" in order to get a completely clear line-of-sight which clears the tree limbs.

This is the photo which I had seen, yet did not register until such time as Mr. West informed me that "no one could have accurately fired that rifle the way they had it jacked up".

After which, this to date overlooked item of evidence also registered.

It was after this discussion that I knew full well that Mr. West was not a party to the games being played, and informed him as to the "why?" of the jacked up firing position.

After which, Mr. West at first laughed, and then informed me as to having observed the cutting of the tree limbs.

With this "jacked up" firing position and the "adjusted position" in which they were actually aiming at an aiming point on the JFK stand-in which was some 10-inches higher than was JFK during the actual shooting, and then making Z208 equal Z210 by pushing the re-enactment vehicle slightly farther down the road until the line of sight came in, the WC was able to completely pull the wool over a lot of peoples eyes.

Not to mention making of re-enactment photo's which did not show the tree limbs as a potential intereference.

One could, if they so desired, blame many for not understanding exactly what the WC/aka Specter & Company were up too.

However, unless one has experience with "slicky boy" lawyers, they would all most probably only continue to be confused as to what the "Jacked Up" firing position; the "Adjusted Position; (which effectively moved the vehicle two frames of the film farther down Elm St) and the 10-inch higher elevation aiming point, all have in common.

Tree limbs are the "common denominator"/common ground!

[Ashton Gray]

In the anim below, the photo of the back of JFK's shirt was overlaid on the autopsy photo of the back wound, and a good faith effort was made to get the shirt situated in a reasonable approximation of correct size relative to the body, with attention to JFK's right shoulder and the neck line. The effort was hampered, of course, by the somewhat twisted position of JFK's body and the angle of his neck, but it is believed that the experiment is completely within acceptable tolerances for what is being demonstrated:

Ashton Gray

[John Dolva]

Ashton, I estimate you've slightly oversized the shirt. There are rulers on all relevant photos plus the stripes themselves for spacing.

Then there are around the bullet hole area a number of matching blood patterns on the shirt and the back that help locating the shirt on the back

___________

Tom, that's good. However the factoring out of the pipes and the boxes seems perpetuated. The vertical is just one of the misalignment.

"His left elbow is placed to the right side of the knee and then the left wrist is bent back so his left forearm gets around the front pipe. This means (look at shadow of nose on rear pipe and shadow of gun/camera assembly on front pipe) that his left eye looks at the pipe so his shoe knee forearm left forehead are up close to the pipes. Look at the location of the rifle butt. To lean into the rifle and hold it in this location for this shot is impossible" because of the pipes.

one has to :"Remember too that the pipe is up against the corner of the box this box is on. So, the sniper here would have the left shoulder behind the pipe. The WC reconstruction not only ignored the box but also the pipes and basically produced a sniper location that was impossible, in order to prove the shots came from here in the way they suggested. Cameras can easily create the illusion that there is no pipe there. In fact to take these photos the camera just has to be beside the pipes. The viewer of the photos, because the pipes are out of frame gats the feeling that there are no pipes. They're there, they're solid and immovable and the sniper must take them into account in order to shoot through this window.

So, from this location, the sniper would have to move to the right, forward and up in order to take this shot. Then the succeeding shots are not just a matter of raising the rife, but also to pan to the right and up. There the right edge of the window frame and the lower edge of the window comes into play."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/...-1168821438.jpg

Edited January 15, 2007 by John Dolva

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Ashton, I estimate you've slightly oversized the shirt. There are rulers on all relevant photos plus the stripes themselves for spacing.

Then there are around the bullet hole area a number of matching blood patterns on the shirt and the back that help locating the shirt on the back

___________

Tom, that's good. However the factoring out of the pipes and the boxes seems perpetuated. The vertical is just one of the misalignment.

"His left elbow is placed to the right side of the knee and then the left wrist is bent back so his left forearm gets around the front pipe. This means (look at shadow of nose on rear pipe and shadow of gun/camera assembly on front pipe) that his left eye looks at the pipe so his shoe knee forearm left forehead are up close to the pipes. Look at the location of the rifle butt. To lean into the rifle and hold it in this location for this shot is impossible" because of the pipes.

one has to :"Remember too that the pipe is up against the corner of the box this box is on. So, the sniper here would have the left shoulder behind the pipe. The WC reconstruction not only ignored the box but also the pipes and basically produced a sniper location that was impossible, in order to prove the shots came from here in the way they suggested. Cameras can easily create the illusion that there is no pipe there. In fact to take these photos the camera just has to be beside the pipes. The viewer of the photos, because the pipes are out of frame gats the feeling that there are no pipes. They're there, they're solid and immovable and the sniper must take them into account in order to shoot through this window.

So, from this location, the sniper would have to move to the right, forward and up in order to take this shot. Then the succeeding shots are not just a matter of raising the rife, but also to pan to the right and up. There the right edge of the window frame and the lower edge of the window comes into play."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/...-1168821438.jpg

Tom, that's good. However the factoring out of the pipes and the boxes seems perpetuated. The vertical is just one of the misalignment.

The "move to the left" scenario has nothing more to do with anything other than making the maximum effort to move the rifle as far to the left as possible in order to obtain a photographic alignment in which the back entry wound of JFK could be made to align with the shoulder entry wound of JBC.

Had the rifle been positioned over towards the right, where the boxes were actually located, then the non-alignment would have been even worse than it is.

This also has to do with the shell/pea game as to what photo of the boxes is truly the position as originally found.

Most have not even taken the time to delve into this subject adequately enough to know exactly which of the multiple photographs is/was the correct position of the boxes.

Vertical alignment (raising rifle elevation; aiming at target which is actually 10-inches higher than was JFK, pushing vehicle approximately 2 additional frames of the z-film farther down Elm St.)

All done to avoid the tree limbs.

Horizontal alignment ( rifle position was moved as far left in the window as possible in order to attempt to decrease the cross angle of fire to the extent that it could appear that a bullet striking JFK in the upper back could have gone through him and thereafter struck JBC in the shoulder.

Mr. West could not understand the exact reasoning why the WC made/had him shoot in all vertical angles to the top of the head of the JFK-stand in and then subtract the angular distance as would be due to the 10-inch height difference.

One would think it much simpler to just aim at the correct elevation, and determine the angle and distance one single time.

But! NOPE! Can not be allowed to change the position of the rifle!

Of course, after I informed Mr. West about this, he also fully understand why he and his survey personnel had been playing the survey here----subtract there game.

Vertical & Horizontal! Any other? That is all that us old survey trained personnel are aware of.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Ashton, I estimate you've slightly oversized the shirt. There are rulers on all relevant photos plus the stripes themselves for spacing.

Then there are around the bullet hole area a number of matching blood patterns on the shirt and the back that help locating the shirt on the back

___________

Tom, that's good. However the factoring out of the pipes and the boxes seems perpetuated. The vertical is just one of the misalignment.

"His left elbow is placed to the right side of the knee and then the left wrist is bent back so his left forearm gets around the front pipe. This means (look at shadow of nose on rear pipe and shadow of gun/camera assembly on front pipe) that his left eye looks at the pipe so his shoe knee forearm left forehead are up close to the pipes. Look at the location of the rifle butt. To lean into the rifle and hold it in this location for this shot is impossible" because of the pipes.

one has to :"Remember too that the pipe is up against the corner of the box this box is on. So, the sniper here would have the left shoulder behind the pipe. The WC reconstruction not only ignored the box but also the pipes and basically produced a sniper location that was impossible, in order to prove the shots came from here in the way they suggested. Cameras can easily create the illusion that there is no pipe there. In fact to take these photos the camera just has to be beside the pipes. The viewer of the photos, because the pipes are out of frame gats the feeling that there are no pipes. They're there, they're solid and immovable and the sniper must take them into account in order to shoot through this window.

So, from this location, the sniper would have to move to the right, forward and up in order to take this shot. Then the succeeding shots are not just a matter of raising the rife, but also to pan to the right and up. There the right edge of the window frame and the lower edge of the window comes into play."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/uploads/...-1168821438.jpg

Then there are around the bullet hole area a number of matching blood patterns on the shirt and the back that help locating the shirt on the back

At least, you appear to be paying full attention John.

I did not take the time to "Point" out the blood stain outline on the back of the JFK back wound photo merely due to having nothing better to do in life.

It, not unlike many other items of evidence, happens to also be a part of the EEI (Essential Elements of Information).

And, anyone interested in the FACTS should at least take the time to evaluate this information prior to launghing off into "THE SHIRT THAT DIDN'T FIT" scenario's.

It is so simple to distract most!--------Exactly how many caught the "blood" arrow and it's significance??????

Too busy looking at the hole were'nt we!

Specter & Company were masters at this art.

[Frank Agbat]

Ashton,

I'm not prepared to offer an opinion on the sizing and rotation of the shirt. However, one though comes to mind EVERY TIME I see that damn picture with the ruler in it... Just what the hell are they measuring in that picture? Measurements are usually taken in a "from" and "to" orientation. Where is the "from"? The EOP? And just what is the "to"? It certainly has the look that they are measuring something other than the back wound.

Tom,

A few inches in either direction for that gun -- which is both too high AND too close to the pipes -- extrapolated over a fair distance can produce a noticeable error. It might be "visually acceptable" when the re-enactment pictures are viewed, but not necessarily accurate.

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton,

I'm not prepared to offer an opinion on the sizing and rotation of the shirt. However, one though comes to mind EVERY TIME I see that damn picture with the ruler in it... Just what the hell are they measuring in that picture? Measurements are usually taken in a "from" and "to" orientation. Where is the "from"? The EOP? And just what is the "to"? It certainly has the look that they are measuring something other than the back wound.

I feel yer pain.

Worse than that: I keep wondering why they used rulers that have no discernible markings on them, at least the way the prints were made.

On the sizing and rotation of the shirt: having spent a good deal of time trying different sizes and rotations, I feel confident that what's depicted is within reasonable tolerances. I'm happy to try other things with it, and of course the same photos are available to anyone who has any kind of image editor and wants to try their own hand at it. But it is what it is.

Ashton

[John Dolva]

Select only the white of the ruler and equalize. Youll see the cm markings. The whole shirt photo has a two foot ruler. So it's a simple matter of resizing the shiry. Then for fine resize take the closeup photo of the bullet hole with the one inch marking and resize to the ruler. Then space the lines on the full shirt to match the closeup spacing to fine tune the resizing. I think you'll find that the shirt in the animation is oversized by a few percent, sufficient to make a difference.

Rulers are for scaling, a matchbox or coin would do except you'd then have to know its dimensions, so of course a ruler is used in these photos. They don't necessarily measure anything at the time. They also help in roughly orientating the photo as they tend to be in the vertical or horizontal. Also the markings/writing on them help in checking whether the photo has been flipped.

Tom, the shirt-blood back-blood match is a result of my earlier work, so of course it's something I can see. (You yourself informed me at the time that it was original and had not been done before.)

The correct sniping position, where the pipes and boxes are actually included as factors, moves the line of fire even further away from any possible branch interference.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Ashton,

I'm not prepared to offer an opinion on the sizing and rotation of the shirt. However, one though comes to mind EVERY TIME I see that damn picture with the ruler in it... Just what the hell are they measuring in that picture? Measurements are usually taken in a "from" and "to" orientation. Where is the "from"? The EOP? And just what is the "to"? It certainly has the look that they are measuring something other than the back wound.

Tom,

A few inches in either direction for that gun -- which is both too high AND too close to the pipes -- extrapolated over a fair distance can produce a noticeable error. It might be "visually acceptable" when the re-enactment pictures are viewed, but not necessarily accurate.

And, as with the Z-position re-enactment photo's, sufficient numbers were taken that eventually those which were "close" were utilized, and have to date mystified researchers as to the WHY? of such erroneous photographs.

Hopefully, the "WHY"? mystery (answer) just may lead to a much better understanding as to all that Specter & Company were up to with their games.

"Close" counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and precision fire with artillery.

It is not acceptable for the impact point of a 6.5mm Carcano bullet.

ALL line-of-sight/site photo's from the TSDB, as taken during the WC Re-enactment, are in fact taken at a point (on the JFK Stand-in) which in reality represents a point which is 10-inches higher above the pavement than was JFK at that exact same position on the street.

And, they are ALL taken from the "Jacked Up" rifle position.

That should tell someone exactly what it is all about!

[William Kelly]

Any discussion of JFK's shirt must include Arlen Spector's analysis, and fascination, as detailed in his bio, of visiting the New York City taylor shop where it was sold.

BK

[John Dolva]

I take Tom's research on the bullet entering base first seriously. There were some issues regarding scaling and orientation. Once resolved what remains is indeed indications that exist separately of any individuals opinion that supports the idea. The side step into where the shot came from is preparation for another matter.

It seems to me that there was no branch there that could be in the way, so I'd like to have Tom state clearly where the shot was taken from. I think it's very clear it could not have been from where the WC suggests. So, as the shot did happen, perhaps from his window, could we ignore the WC deception and focus on what did indeed happen?

____________

Ashton, I've redone the shirt/back sizing and am satisfied that the oversizing you have is significant. Also it looks like you have cloned on a slice of shirt to hide the top right shoulder, could you confirm whether you did this, or used a different shirt photo?. Also there are definite blood patterns on the shirt and on the back that do line up, they help to determine exactly how the shirt lay over the body at any particular skin area, so the twisting of his body need not be a hindrance to determining this at the bullet hole area.

[John Dolva]

"could we ignore the WC deception and focus on what did indeed happen?"

I suggest this(image) as a more honest position, or at least one that takes the height of the boxes and the position of the pipes into consideration.

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton, I've redone the shirt/back sizing and am satisfied that the oversizing you have is significant.

Okay. Can you post your results?

Also it looks like you have cloned on a slice of shirt to hide the top right shoulder, could you confirm whether you did this, or used a different shirt photo?

Of course not. The top right shoulder is covered by someone's hand. I silhouetted the three hands and the ruler and put them on a separate layer so they could be shown above the shirt as they would be if the shirt were actually on the body.

The pathologists have the body "torqued," which you can see better if you run (referring to Photoshop) Levels or Shadow/Highlight on the base autopsy photo and brighten it up considerably. The shirt also was shot flat—not on a human form. All of these pose difficulties in getting any "exact match" everywhere. Something close (at least visually) could be attained with a hell of a lot of work, using Warp and Liquefy on the shirt, too much of which could start majorly compromising the shirt image itself and the relationships of the "hot" area at issue: the bullet hole in the shirt relative to the major visible points of the torso—right shoulder line and neck line—and the several dark spots on the torso, any of which might or might not be a bullet hole in the body.

The point of the exercise for me was to get a close enough approximation of the "ride" of the shirt, and then look to find out where the bullet hole in the shirt fell in relation to the several dark spots visible on the back. And where you see it is where it kept aligning. In moving the shirt at various sizes and rotations and torques around the back, I found it impossible to "force" the hole in the shirt to line up with the large top dark spot without doing gross distortions of the shirt. It became ridiculous to me and a waste of time. The situation simply became obvious: the nearest reasonable alignment always was in very close proximity to the indicated small dark spot on the torso.

My purpose was to find out for myself an answer to several questions that have bothered me ever since I first saw that autopsy photo of the back:

1. Why the visual ambiguity of several spots that could be holes?
   
2. Which "hole"?
   

It's been my experience in life that it's always a good idea to find the right hole. YMMV.

In fact, it surprised me that I couldn't find any record of anyone having already done this fundamentally simple comparison.

I've answered the question for myself, to my own satisfaction, and thought I would post the results of my findings for others to consider. Based on what I kept seeing while going through the exercise, I personally don't believe that any amount of further fiddling around is going to change the result to any useful significant degree. So while I'm all for a workable and justifiable level of accuracy for each exercise, I don't need busy-work.

Ashton

Edited January 15, 2007 by Ashton Gray

[John Dolva]

Q: "Also it looks like you have cloned on a slice of shirt to hide the top right shoulder, could you confirm whether you did this, or used a different shirt photo?"

A: "Of course not. The top right shoulder is covered by someone's hand..."

OK? The shirt photo in the gif is different from the HSCA one, can you provide a full photo of it or a link to it so I can show what I mean re resizing.

[Ashton Gray]

Q: "Also it looks like you have cloned on a slice of shirt to hide the top right shoulder, could you confirm whether you did this, or used a different shirt photo?"

A: "Of course not. The top right shoulder is covered by someone's hand..."

OK? The shirt photo in the gif is different from the HSCA one, can you provide a full photo of it or a link to it so I can show what I mean re resizing.

I'll try to do even better than that. Here is the original anim I did and at first was going to upload, with the HSCA shirt in all its pristine, totally "flat" glory. This was my first effort in the series:

That is exactly what I discovered when I first assayed to perform this excrutiatingly simple and obvious test, with the collar line being where I thought it approximately correct, taking into account considerable differences in the angles of photography of the torso and shirt.

I then further tried numerous experiments to visually mold the extremities of shirt to conform as naturally as possible to the torso to see how that would affect the crucial relationships. After a great deal of experimentation, I found that the shirt hole at issue never strayed more than what appears to be about 1/4" (relative to real-world body size, not literally 1/4" on the image) from the apparent hole in the body indicated by the white arrow. I took what I felt was my best good-faith effort approximating such conformity to the body, including "perspective" down the length of the back, and uploaded that. I believe the anim I first uploaded earlier in this thread is much more true to life than the "flat" shirt demonstrated above, but take your pick. Or, choose option C: "None of the above."

Either way, flat or conformed, it was utterly impossible for me to find any reasonable configuration of the shirt that brought the shirt hole anywhere near the larger dark "hole" higher up on the torso. This resolved long-outstanding questions for me, so I posted the results.

I get the clammy idea that once again I find myself in the curious position of addressing the most simple, obvious, fundamental, and what to my mind should have been primary comparisons of freely available data, and coming up with simple results that somehow clash violently with views that approach religious faith so closely that I'm sometimes hard pressed to discern a difference.

It's never my intention. It wasn't my intention with the alleged "throat shot," but damned if I was going to come down the aisle to kneel at the alter before I had put it to my own real-world test. And the faith came up wanting.

I've invited you to post your own results on such a test. I would love to see someone find a way to conform that shirt to make the shirt hole fit the higher, larger purported "hole" in the torso. I spent enough time with it personally that I don't believe its going to happen, but anybody and everybody else in the world is encouraged to stand there between those two rabbit holes in the back of the torso for the rest of eternity for all I care, scratching their heads and wondering. I don't have a dawg in the fight.

As for me, it's a resolved issue and I'm moving on.

Ashton

Edited January 16, 2007 by Ashton Gray