The Fundamental Problem

[Royell Storing]

Well, there's no evidence that anything other than the fragments CE-567 & 569 plus the other smaller fragments inside the limo and on the curb were recovered. Also, I'm not sure the curb was actually chipped. On page 116 of the WCR it says "mark".

     If a bullet fragment struck the curb without chipping the curb and then struck Tague in the face, that Fragment should have remained intact and then be recovered. If on the other hand you're saying Tague was Directly struck by a bullet fragment, that makes the distance traveled by that fragment even more Unbelievable. You sight "no evidence" of fragments being found outside the Limo yet you seem willing to accept the Tague Hokum which also has "no evidence" of Any bullet fragment what-so-ever. A "mark" on a curb is Not Evidence. It is Speculation as is a 2nd Shooter/4th Shot.

[Oscar Navarro]

     If a bullet fragment struck the curb without chipping the curb and then struck Tague in the face, that Fragment should have remained intact and then be recovered. If on the other hand you're saying Tague was Directly struck by a bullet fragment, that makes the distance traveled by that fragment even more Unbelievable. You sight "no evidence" of fragments being found outside the Limo yet you seem willing to accept the Tague Hokum which also has "no evidence" of Any bullet fragment what-so-ever. A "mark" on a curb is Not Evidence. It is Speculation as is a 2nd Shooter/4th Shot.

I didn't say or even imply any of the stuff you claim I said. What I said there's no evidence other than that found inside the limo or on the curb, the smudge of lead scraped of by the FBI for analysis. And I don't accept the "Tague Hokum". That's been the whole premise of my discussion. As to the mark on the curb it is evidence of something causing that mark. But of what and from were is the question. You and I both agree that a second shooter/4th shot is speculation.

[Royell Storing]

I didn't say or even imply any of the stuff you claim I said. What I said there's no evidence other than that found inside the limo or on the curb, the smudge of lead scraped of by the FBI for analysis. And I don't accept the "Tague Hokum". That's been the whole premise of my discussion. As to the mark on the curb it is evidence of something causing that mark. But of what and from were is the question. You and I both agree that a second shooter/4th shot is speculation.

       Specifically What do you Think: (1) Struck Teague on the face?, and (2) Where did that object which struck Tague in the face go? 

[Tim Nickerson]

*Exact* location isn?t known. C7 is a proposed inshoot. Bullet didn?t hit spine, take it you didn?t understand Thomas? explanation (which?using my superhuman precognitive powers I predict?you?ll claim you did and/or it didn?t make sense or something else that makes you out to be the smart one).

I believe that it entered at about the level of C7 and exited at about C7.

Also only like 4 of the Parkland staff actually said the throat wound was an entry; the vast majority said their observations were conclusive enough (others did say they thought it would turn out to be one).

I think that three of those four later admitted that the wound could have been an exit wound.

[Tim Nickerson]

I would not expect all  fragments to remain inside the limo as all of the fragments found did not make up the weight for one 6.5mm WCC 160/61 grain bullet. What puzzles me is what I've already stated; the fragments found inside the limo did not have enough force to brake the windshield or penetrate the chrome molding on the windshield but had enough momentum to at least create a smudge on the concrete near where Tague was standing and that one was able to make a small scratch to Tague's cheek. I'll add that it seems to me that the fragment that created the scratch to the cheek had to have been very small, too small for it to have travelled the distance between the limo and Tague. By this I'm not eliminating the possibility of it happening it's just that it's difficult to accept it as happening. I think there's a better explanation that has not surfaced because the evidence has not been found.

Oscar,

Why would the fragment that struck Tague have had to been small? The fragments that struck the windshield and chrome piece did so with considerable force,

[Tim Nickerson]

    Thanks for the correction. Since I never have personally measured off the distance I went the conservative route. That Great Distance when No Other Fragment allegedly even left the confines of the Limo is hard to fathom. If you give this some serious thought, the distance this alleged fragment traveled is Greater than the Total Length of Houston St that the JFK Limo traveled down after turning right off of Main. And to top All of that off, this alleged Fragment then just Disappeared. ALL of this is Total Bunk.

You're welcome. I used the Robert West survey map of 1964. You can download it from the Robert Cutler collection at the Baylor University site. It's among several maps. Most of which Cutler marked on himself.

I have no problem accepting that a fragment traveled that far and struck Tague on the cheek and was never found. I think it's unlikely that it hit the curb first. The curb was not  chipped. It had a lead smear on it. That's all. You believe that the Tague strike was from a 4th Shot by a 2nd shooter. So, I'll direct your question to Oscar towards you.

What do you Think: (1) Struck Tague on the face?, and (2) Where did that object which struck Tague in the face go?

[Dillon Rankine]

larry Sturdivant said that in his book JFK Myths. I believe Haag said that did not necessarily have to have disintegrated and that the hole left on the pavement would have been quickly covered up by the passing of vehicles. At least that's how I remeber it. If this were to be the case it would be a better explanation for the Tague wound than for a fragment of the third shot theory, IMHO. It  also better explains the lead smudge on the concrete. This part; smudge vs chipped concrete is one that deserves clarity. Was it a smudge or chipped concrete?

The Haags conducted an expeirment which found most of the street shot would have disintegrated with only a narrow range of upward flying shards of concrete and/or metal. The Tague hit, they concluded in a peer reviewed paper, was most probably caused by fragment from the headshot.

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-shot-that-missed-jfk-new-forensic.html?m=1

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/the-shot-that-missed