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

[Andrew Mason]

Very controversial. Among many non-ballistic experts.

But among real ballistic experts. Who participate in systematic ballistic experiments with targets embedded in ballistic gel. Who give expert testimony in courts. And who have the respect of the peers. Men like Luke Haag, Michael Haag and Larry Sturdivan find CE-399 quite plausible for being the bullet that wounded JFK and Connally at z-222. I have seen a youtube video of Luke Haag giving a lecture to his fellow peers in the ballistic field.

Is there any ballistic expert, in the U. S., in Canada, in Europe, or anywhere who does not think CE-399 could have caused those wounds? No one on this forum has brought one up.

It is controversial because no one has ever been able to produce a similar bullet fired at 2000 fps that has done the kind of damage done to JFK and JBC looking anything like CE399.

• “It doesn’t make a difference how beautiful your guess is. It doesn't make a difference how smart you are, who made the guess or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.” — Richard Feynman (1964)

I am not aware of any ballistics expert other than Sturdivan who has examined, let alone opined on, the CE399/SBT hypothesis.

[Mitch Todd]

It is controversial because no one has ever been able to produce a similar bullet fired at 2000 fps that has done the kind of damage done to JFK and JBC looking anything like CE399.

• “It doesn’t make a difference how beautiful your guess is. It doesn't make a difference how smart you are, who made the guess or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.” — Richard Feynman (1964)

I am not aware of any ballistics expert other than Sturdivan who has examined, let alone opined on, the CE399/SBT hypothesis.

As noted, Fackler worked with FaAA for the ABA mock trial in the early 1990's. He thought CE399 could have inflicted the wounds attributed to it by the WC and come out looking as it did. Lucien Haag is also considered to be an expert in terminal and wound ballistics both by the courts and in academia.

As for tests, the impact and deformation dynamics involved in a bullet's impact are multivariable and nonlinear. And that's just for one impact. Chaining together several successive impacts increases the variability by orders of magnitude. Given these circumstances, it's silly to think that one or even a handful of test shots will allow you to determine all possible outcomes. Dozens, scores, or even hundreds of tests would be required to really give us a good idea as to what's possible and what's not. I don't foresee that happening anytime soon.   

[Joe Elliott]

This is another example of the fact that you post the same falsehoods over and over again. You post your falsehoods, then someone refutes them, then you fall silent, but then you post them

In WW II, Dr. Dolce was a battlefield surgeon in the Pacific, for three years, so, needless to say, he dealt with hundreds of gunshot victims.

In WW II, Dr. John Lattimer was a battlefield surgeon in Europe. He dealt with hundreds of gunshot victims.

Why shouldn't we go with Dr. John Lattimer's opinion about CE-399 instead of Dr. Dolce?

The truth is, Dr. Dolce was a medical doctor, and in no way a ballistic expert. And I hold this opinion not because he rejects CE-399.
The truth is, Dr. John Lattimer was a medical doctor, and again in no way a ballistic expert. I don't care if he accepts CE-399.

Although, I believe Dr. John Lattimer conducted some reasonably well thought out and scientfic ballistic experiments. But he was definitely, an amateur ballistic experimenter. You have presented no evidence that Dr. Dolce was even that much. Just his fancy title.

It doesn't matter what title the army gives Dr. Dolce. "Chairman of the Army's Wound Ballistic Board". "Supreme Inspector of All Army Latrines". He was not a ballistic expert. He never conducted any expertiments with firearms with ballistic gel. He has no experience in conducting systematic ballistic experiments to see under what circumstances a bullet may end up with minimum damage, moderate damage, major damage or even fragment.


And where is your evidence that Luke Haag was not a ballistic expert?
Why should your opinion carry more weight than than the California Association of Criminalists?

No, they have not. I hope you're not talking about Lattimer's test or the Haags' test. If you are, neither of those tests duplicated the single-bullet theory and CE 399's virtually pristine end state. Lattimer's test has already been destroyed many times. The Haags came on the scene a few years ago. When it comes to the JFK case, they are quacks who have clearly failed to do their homework. Dr. Gary Aguilar discusses just a couple of the problems with the Haags' research:

Oh. And is Dr. Gary Aguilar a ballistic expert? No, just another medical doctor.

When are you going to surprise me bring up someone, let's say, associated with the California Association of Criminalists who supports your postion? And not another damm doctor who can treat a patient but has no clue about what condition a bullet may be found in after striking some human beings?

Find me a real ballistic expert who discredits Mr. Luke Haag.

[Joe Elliott]

It is controversial because no one has ever been able to produce a similar bullet fired at 2000 fps that has done the kind of damage done to JFK and JBC looking anything like CE399.

• “It doesn’t make a difference how beautiful your guess is. It doesn't make a difference how smart you are, who made the guess or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.” — Richard Feynman (1964)

I am not aware of any ballistics expert other than Sturdivan who has examined, let alone opined on, the CE399/SBT hypothesis.

The Nova JFK COld Case video can be seen below:

https://aguilarforensics.weebly.com/firearms--tool-marks/nova-jfk-cold-case-full-video

At 34:39, Luke Haag shows how a bullet can be squeezed to resemble CE-399.
At 35:20, Luke Haag states that there is no reason not to conclude that the SBT as proposed by Specter was incorrect.

So Luke Haag agrees with Larry Sturdivan.

So, I make it at 2 to 0.

Can anyone come up with a real ballistic expert who disagrees? After almost 60 years, not one?

 * * * * *

And I recall a Discovery Channel, from about 15 years ago, that had ballistic gel models of JFK and Connally, with embedded ribs and an array of wrist bones, that produced a bullet that was not greatly dissimilar to CE-399. Bent in two places (not one like CE-399) because it went through two "ribs", not one. But reasonably close.

I don't recall if this experiment was conducted by ballistic experts but it looked pretty reasonable to me. So I don't think one can say that no one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet at 2,000 fps and ended up with anything resembling CE-399.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

The Nova JFK COld Case video can be seen below:

https://aguilarforensics.weebly.com/firearms--tool-marks/nova-jfk-cold-case-full-video

At 34:39, Luke Haag shows how a bullet can be squeezed to resemble CE-399.
At 35:20, Luke Haag states that there is no reason not to conclude that the SBT as proposed by Specter was incorrect.

So Luke Haag agrees with Larry Sturdivan.

So, I make it at 2 to 0.

Can anyone come up with a real ballistic expert who disagrees? After almost 60 years, not one?

 * * * * *

And I recall a Discovery Channel, from about 15 years ago, that had ballistic gel models of JFK and Connally, with embedded ribs and an array of wrist bones, that produced a bullet that was not greatly dissimilar to CE-399. Bent in two places (not one like CE-399) because it went through two "ribs", not one. But reasonably close.

I don't recall if this experiment was conducted by ballistic experts but it looked pretty reasonable to me. So I don't think one can say that no one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet at 2,000 fps and ended up with anything resembling CE-399.

I believe the Discovery Channel special was "Inside the Target Car"? But they only simulated the/a head shot not the back shot. Unless you're thinking of another one? I too vaguely recall another special in addition to the NOVA show duplicating something you mentioned with #399. Either both of us are losing it or neither one of us is. Let's agree to go with the latter explanation.

That "Target Car" can be viewed here: https://archive.org/details/JFKInsideTheTargetCar

[Andrew Mason]

The Nova JFK COld Case video can be seen below:

https://aguilarforensics.weebly.com/firearms--tool-marks/nova-jfk-cold-case-full-video

At 34:39, Luke Haag shows how a bullet can be squeezed to resemble CE-399.
At 35:20, Luke Haag states that there is no reason not to conclude that the SBT as proposed by Specter was incorrect.

So Luke Haag agrees with Larry Sturdivan.

What is required is a ballistics expert who understands the forces applied to a bullet in contacting different target materials at different speeds and different orientations and who has a thorough understanding of physics and strength of materials and can relate that to the actual physical damage that occurred. Sturdivan appears to qualify as such an expert but not the Haags. The only expert who has provided any of that kind of analysis is Sturdivan and I see a number of inconsistencies with his analysis.

It is not difficult to accept that CE399 is consistent with having passed through JFK's neck. The question is whether:

• it entered JBC to the right of his right scapula and struck the fifth rib creating a tunneling wound
• then pulverized the last 10 cm of that rib,
• then exited just under his right nipple,
• then passed through his jacket sleeve and french cuff causing a longish jagged tear in the cuff in only one location about 1 inch above the end of the cuff,
• then struck the distal fourth of the radius causing an oblique wound wound approximately two cm in length with considerable contusions at the margins,
• created a comminuted fracture of the radius with at least 3 bone pieces being broken off the radius (2 x 1 cm + 1 x 3mm)
• then passed through the forearm leaving several small lead flakes in the wound
• then exited on the volar or palm side of the wrist leaving a 1 cm slit 2 cm above the crease of the wrist
• entered the left thigh on an oblique angle along the direction of the femur appearance being consistent with having struck by the butt end of an intact missile.
• having exited the thigh leaving a bullet whose only deformation is a lateral compression on on the butt end

Sturdivan does not explain each step in terms of the force that the bullet would experience in each of those impacts in order to create the damage observed.  For example, he does not identify the pressure required to fracture the radius as it did and relate that to the speed of the bullet and whether at that speed, the bullet would deform if hit nose-on or sideways etc.   He avoids it entirely.  Not only did this bullet fracture the radius, which is the hardest bone in the body, causing a large irregular entry hole in the cuff and leaving flecks of lead in the wound, it did this after obliterating 10 cm of rib.

And I recall a Discovery Channel, from about 15 years ago, that had ballistic gel models of JFK and Connally, with embedded ribs and an array of wrist bones, that produced a bullet that was not greatly dissimilar to CE-399. Bent in two places (not one like CE-399) because it went through two "ribs", not one. But reasonably close.

But did not fracture a radius bone, if I recall correctly.

I don't recall if this experiment was conducted by ballistic experts but it looked pretty reasonable to me. So I don't think one can say that no one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet at 2,000 fps and ended up with anything resembling CE-399.

I can.  No one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet from a Carcano, doing the damage done to the rib and radius of JBC, and having the characteristics remotely similar to those on JBC's wounds and clothing and looking anything like CE399.

And that is entirely apart from the fact that the evidence from the people who were there who said that JFK and JBC were hit by separate bullets.

[John Iacoletti]

Is it really sufficient to argue that CE399 could possibly have gone through both men and caused all those wounds if there is no evidence that it did?