LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

Oswald's first shot at pseudo Z105-110 ricocheted offa the overhead signal arm & the jacket split off into 2 pieces (found in the limo), & the main lead slug (never found) made a hole in the floor of the limo, & some of the lead splatter lodged in/on the top-back of jfk's head (xrays).
I doubt that any FMJ bullet ever left any lead (from the butt of the slug) on the outside of a human head/skull when passing throo the skull (when not tumbling)(ie at shortish range) .
No FMJ bullet ever fragmented when passing throo a human skull (fresh skull or old/ dry skull) when entering & passing throo high up on the skull (when not tumbling)(ie at shortish range).

[Tom Graves]

Oswald's first shot at pseudo Z105-110 ricocheted off the overhead signal arm & the jacket split off into two pieces and were found in the limo.

LOL!

[Mitch Todd]

Sorry, but this is total fiction. Again, no FMJ bullet in the known history of forensic science has deposited a fragment, much less multiple fragments, at/near the entry point when striking a skull.

And you get this bit of wisdom from where, exactly?

[Tim Nickerson]

Where does this come from? Can you point to any experiments that support this?

Why is this scenario not possible?:  The FMJ bullet deforms upon striking the skull.  As the bullet penetrates the skull, the part of the bullet behind the nose compresses into the nose.  The back of the WC 6.5 mm bullet is not enclosed so the compression on the nose can cause bits of lead to spill out of the butt-end as the front part of the bullet passes through the skull. (When the bullet is compressed the temperature of the bullet increases so this lead could be in a softened or possibly a liquid state). These bits of lead don't make it through the hole in the skull created by the bullet nose impact so they end up on the outside surface.

Andrew, there were not two fragments imbedded in the back of the skull. Those who examined the X-rays and said that there was even one fragment there were wrong. The "6.5mm" radio-opaque object seen in the anterior X-Ray view was the 7mm x 2mm lead fragment removed by Humes.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Andrew, there were not two fragments imbedded in the back of the skull. Those who examined the X-rays and said that there was even one fragment there were wrong. The "6.5mm" radio-opaque object seen in the anterior X-Ray view was the 7mm x 2mm lead fragment removed by Humes.

I've already proved in this thread that these claims are erroneous, inexcusably erroneous. It is amazing that you are still repeating them. I guess you're hoping that new readers won't bother to read our previous exchanges in this thread?

You may want to review some actual tests.  Here is a video showing an FMJ bullet going though an iron plate:

What does this test have to do with the subject at hand? You may want to review some tests that are actually relevant, i.e., the WC's wound ballistics test, Lattimer's wound ballistics test, and the Failure Analysis wound ballistics test, all of which proved that FMJ bullets will never deposit fragments at/near the entry point on a skull. Citing a test where an FMJ bullet went through an iron plate has nothing to do with an FMJ bullet entering and exiting a human skull.

And you get this bit of wisdom from where, exactly?

Umm, how about the sources I listed in that same reply, for starters? How about the above-mentioned wound ballistics tests? How about the fact that nowhere in published forensic cases will you find a case where an FMJ bullet deposited a single fragment, much less two or more, at or near the entry point on a skull?

And I notice none of you are tackling the stunning absence of the low fragment trail on the autopsy skull x-rays and the equally stunning absence of any mention of the high fragment trail in the autopsy report, not to mention the autopsy doctors' 1966 five-hour review of the autopsy materials and their failure to note the high fragment trail and their assertion that the materials they reviewed confirmed the autopsy report.

[Tim Nickerson]

I've already proved in this thread that these claims are erroneous, inexcusably erroneous. It is amazing that you are still repeating them. I guess you're hoping that new readers won't bother to read our previous exchanges in this thread?

The red arrow in that right lateral view points to a fragment that appears to be imbedded in the frontal skull bone. Where is that fragment in the anterior view? Where is the 7mm x 2mm fragment in the anterior view?

[Mitch Todd]

MT: And you get this bit of wisdom from where, exactly?

Umm, how about the sources I listed in that same reply, for starters? How about the above-mentioned wound ballistics tests? How about the fact that nowhere in published forensic cases will you find a case where an FMJ bullet deposited a single fragment, much less two or more, at or near the entry point on a skull?

And I notice none of you are tackling the stunning absence of the low fragment trail on the autopsy skull x-rays and the equally stunning absence of any mention of the high fragment trail in the autopsy report, not to mention the autopsy doctors' 1966 five-hour review of the autopsy materials and their failure to note the high fragment trail and their assertion that the materials they reviewed confirmed the autopsy report.

Of your sources, Drs Smith and Fillinger only said that they had not seen it, not that it had never happened in all medical forensic history. Dr Green only said that "it would generally not occur," which implies that it does. Dr Berg was the only one to deliver an unequivocal "No", referencing DiMaio's [Gunshot Wounds. But DiMaio has this to say about the subject:

"In gunshot wounds of the skull, a large fragment of lead may be deposited between the scalp and the outer table of the skull at the entrance site. This piece of lead is sheared off the bullet as it enters. With lead .32 revolver bullets and less commonly with .38 bullets, this fragment often has a “C” or comma-shaped configuration (Figure 11.7). Rarely, the tip of the jacket of a full metal jacketed bullet is so deposited." (DiMaio, Gunshot Wounds:  Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques, 2nd Ed. Ch 11)

That is, Berg's source directly contradicts Berg's position. And says that FMJ bullets do indeed shear off bits on the outer table.

So, I'm still wondering where you got the idea that "no FMJ bullet in the known history of forensic science has deposited a fragment, much less multiple fragments, at/near the entry point when striking a skull."

?