Low trajectory shot to the chrome trim

[John Dolva]

Ok, thank's for that Bernice. So there are indeed two sets of cracks. That's why they seem made at different times as some are interrupted by others which presumably would be the older ones. Nevertheless : How do you know they pushed it out with their feet? The screen seems to be within a clean edged frame that has been removed from the main frame. ie clean edge indicates no dampening/sealing compond to dislodge. I know that in standard vehicles the pushing out with feet is a standard technique with little regard for the glass as it's usually removed because it's unusable anyway. It's very hard but not impossible to push out a frame held by the usual gunk without breaking it, Ive done it. If there are preexisting cracks, which may or may not be seen in a photo, then either way it's highly likely that they will grow no matter how careful you are.

Here it looks like they didn't have to contend with the gunk. So are the cracks preexisting. and made more visible and extended by the removal or are they created by the removal? Who says they pushed it out with the feet?

The crate it was in shows careful packing with wads of foam and a broad tight strap, which indicates a desire to preserve the windshield. Was the same care taken when removed?

EDIT:: Bernice, you're probably right. I've had a closer look at the edges in the crate and it looks very much like they've duc-taped around the wind shield, presumably to cover the sticky gunk. So the remaining question is really were they preexisting cracks or weaknesses caused by something, in this instance the chrome trim damage.

Edited January 15, 2007 by John Dolva

[Bernice Moore]

Ok, thank's for that Bernice. So there are indeed two sets of cracks. That's why they seem made at different times as some are interrupted by others which presumably would be the older ones. Nevertheless : How do you know they pushed it out with their feet? The screen seems to be within a clean edged frame that has been removed from the main frame. ie clean edge indicates no dampening/sealing compond to dislodge. I know that in standard vehicles the pushing out with feet is a standard technique with little regard for the glass as it's usually removed because it's unusable anyway. It's very hard but not impossible to push out a frame held by the usual gunk without breaking it, Ive done it. If there are preexisting cracks, which may or may not be seen in a photo, then either way it's highly likely that they will grow no matter how careful you are.

Here it looks like they didn't have to contend with the gunk. So are the cracks preexisting. and made more visible and extended by the removal or are they created by the removal? Who says they pushed it out with the feet?

The crate it was in shows careful packing with wads of foam and a broad tight strap, which indicates a desire to preserve the windshield. Was the same care taken when removed?

EDIT:: Bernice, you're probably right. I've had a closer look at the edges in the crate and it looks very much like they've duc-taped around the wind shield, presumably to cover the sticky gunk. So the remaining question is really were they preexisting cracks or weaknesses caused by something, in this instance the chrome trim damage.

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

John:

Here is a letter and a doc...for now, I keep running out of attachment space, as we all do...

Edited January 15, 2007 by Bernice Moore

[Robin Unger]

"No Direction Indicated."

Of course not, it doesnt lead back to the snipers nest and we can't have that now can we.

[Robin Unger]

Rowley Testimony.

[John Dolva]

Thank you Bernice. I see you've had to remove the images so I'll describe what I saw. The window was pushed out with feet and cracks appeared. It's not known whether they were due to preexisting weaknesses or cracks. However the drawing of the screen showed (unlike the photos) one crack from the fragment/bullet strike extending diagonally across the possible crack of the feet pushing, so it's unlikely that the cracks from that extends across that and therefore not from the chrome strike. Yet it's not conclusive as there are errors in the drawing and in the verbal description which casts doubt on the features that do seem correct.

[Jack White]

You folks apparently are unfamiliar with the work of researcher Doug Weldon

re the windshield(s).

What is the point of discussing OLD information when new research is available?

Jack

[Trygve V. Jensen]

Can anyone tell me when this photo was taken? And if it is the Lincoln used on the 22nd?

Since members are forced to delete their attachments, it is not always easy to know if the photos have been posted before, and therefore irrelevant. If this is the case now, I apologize for the inconvenience. I am just trying to find a clear photo of the Lincoln between 1961 and November '63.

[Bernice Moore]

Trygve: It was taken at Brocks air force base, Nov.21/63 arrival at Fort Worth......Here is another taken by Cecil Stougton..

Jack I agree they have not read Dougs research....

B..

[Trygve V. Jensen]

Thanks for the info Bernice.

Edited January 17, 2007 by Trygve V. Jensen

[Thomas H. Purvis]

To me this image appears to show a " FULL ON BULLET STRIKE " to the chrome trim.

I see the perfect shape of a dent which appears to be produced from the NOSE of a bullet, it also appears that the shot was fired from a low trajectory bending the chrome trim UPWARD.

I don't see how it is physically possible to do this from the sixth floor of a building !

Robin;

We probably have the same barber also!

Dug this out of my Second Shot/aka Z313/aka only shot/bullet to fragment file.

Based on the available evidence it would appear that the dent in the chrome rim was created by the base of the bullet which struck at Z313 and was cut in half due to the manner in which it encountered the skull of JFK upon exiting.

Not that I would expect your (or for that matter most) to believe it.

[Jack White]

Trygve: It was taken at Brocks air force base, Nov.21/63 arrival at Fort Worth......Here is another taken by Cecil Stougton..

Jack I agree they have not read Dougs research....

B..

The air force base in Fort Worth was Carswell Air Force Base.

I think BROOKS air force base may have been in San Antonio.

Jack

[Thomas H. Purvis]

To me this image appears to show a " FULL ON BULLET STRIKE " to the chrome trim.

I see the perfect shape of a dent which appears to be produced from the NOSE of a bullet, it also appears that the shot was fired from a low trajectory bending the chrome trim UPWARD.

I don't see how it is physically possible to do this from the sixth floor of a building !

Robin;

We probably have the same barber also!

Dug this out of my Second Shot/aka Z313/aka only shot/bullet to fragment file.

Based on the available evidence it would appear that the dent in the chrome rim was created by the base of the bullet which struck at Z313 and was cut in half due to the manner in which it encountered the skull of JFK upon exiting.

Not that I would expect your (or for that matter most) to believe it.

In event one will dedicate themselves to a resolution of exactly how the bullet at Z313 impact was so severely fragmented, they may also find the answers to varying fragments having left the head of JFK at varying angles and velocity.

In that, it is entirely understandable as to how the base of this bullet exited the head of JFK and is most probably responsible for the dent in the chrome.

[Robin Unger]

To me this image appears to show a " FULL ON BULLET STRIKE " to the chrome trim.

I see the perfect shape of a dent which appears to be produced from the NOSE of a bullet, it also appears that the shot was fired from a low trajectory bending the chrome trim UPWARD.

I don't see how it is physically possible to do this from the sixth floor of a building !

Robin;

We probably have the same barber also!

Dug this out of my Second Shot/aka Z313/aka only shot/bullet to fragment file.

Based on the available evidence it would appear that the dent in the chrome rim was created by the base of the bullet which struck at Z313 and was cut in half due to the manner in which it encountered the skull of JFK upon exiting.

Not that I would expect your (or for that matter most) to believe it.

In event one will dedicate themselves to a resolution of exactly how the bullet at Z313 impact was so severely fragmented, they may also find the answers to varying fragments having left the head of JFK at varying angles and velocity.

In that, it is entirely understandable as to how the base of this bullet exited the head of JFK and is most probably responsible for the dent in the chrome.

From the HSCA SECRET SERVICE FILE.

SA Hickey said that the "fire cracker " shot, sounded like it came from his RIGHT at STREET level.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=168

[Thomas H. Purvis]

To me this image appears to show a " FULL ON BULLET STRIKE " to the chrome trim.

I see the perfect shape of a dent which appears to be produced from the NOSE of a bullet, it also appears that the shot was fired from a low trajectory bending the chrome trim UPWARD.

I don't see how it is physically possible to do this from the sixth floor of a building !

Robin;

We probably have the same barber also!

Dug this out of my Second Shot/aka Z313/aka only shot/bullet to fragment file.

Based on the available evidence it would appear that the dent in the chrome rim was created by the base of the bullet which struck at Z313 and was cut in half due to the manner in which it encountered the skull of JFK upon exiting.

Not that I would expect your (or for that matter most) to believe it.

In event one will dedicate themselves to a resolution of exactly how the bullet at Z313 impact was so severely fragmented, they may also find the answers to varying fragments having left the head of JFK at varying angles and velocity.

In that, it is entirely understandable as to how the base of this bullet exited the head of JFK and is most probably responsible for the dent in the chrome.

From the HSCA SECRET SERVICE FILE.

SA Hickey said that the "fire cracker " shot, sounded like it came from his RIGHT at STREET level.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=168

Robin;

Threw this together quickly just so that those who are actually searching for answers have some idea as to the how/why for various reported sounds.

The leaves and limbs of the live oak tree would have decreased the ordinary "crack" of the rifle, down to a baffelled sound such as a loud firecracker/cherry bomb.

Additionally, the updraft of winds striking the building would have also created considerable effect on the sound waves as well.

Perhaps we should seek the services of a true Sound Engineer to go over the sounds and echo's of Dealy Plaza.

Personally, I would expect almost exactly what Hickey stated as I would expct that the loudest sound would have been the bouncing of the shock waves off the sidewalk/street directly under the sixth floor window and these reflected shock waves to have been picked up in his hearing.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

To me this image appears to show a " FULL ON BULLET STRIKE " to the chrome trim.

I see the perfect shape of a dent which appears to be produced from the NOSE of a bullet, it also appears that the shot was fired from a low trajectory bending the chrome trim UPWARD.

I don't see how it is physically possible to do this from the sixth floor of a building !

Robin;

We probably have the same barber also!

Dug this out of my Second Shot/aka Z313/aka only shot/bullet to fragment file.

Based on the available evidence it would appear that the dent in the chrome rim was created by the base of the bullet which struck at Z313 and was cut in half due to the manner in which it encountered the skull of JFK upon exiting.

Not that I would expect your (or for that matter most) to believe it.

In event one will dedicate themselves to a resolution of exactly how the bullet at Z313 impact was so severely fragmented, they may also find the answers to varying fragments having left the head of JFK at varying angles and velocity.

In that, it is entirely understandable as to how the base of this bullet exited the head of JFK and is most probably responsible for the dent in the chrome.

For the chrome dent, one may want to look closely at the longer edge of CE569 since it most assuredly did not get this smooth, bent back portion of the copper jacket as a result of any skull or flesh encounter.

Not to mention the critical importance of the other portion of the edge of the copper jacket.