Q9

[Tim Nickerson]

In fact, he told Bardwell Odum that it appeared to be the same bullet.

No he didn't. That's just what it said in CE2011. Odum denied that he ever had or showed CE399 to anybody. The FBI just made it up to satisfy the WC. Odum's name is not in the chain of custody for CE399.

Tomlinson and Wright both did say that it looked to be the same bullet though.

Again, no they didn't. Shanklin's airtel proves this is false and Tomlinson is on record twice saying that he was shown a bullet only once, by SAC Shanklin, about a week after the assassination. Tomlinson and Wright never told Odum anything of the kind.

If a chain of custody was needed, the one that existed would be perfectly fine. Johnsen placing the bullet in the envelope, sealing it, and attaching a letter to the envelope satisfies his link. Rowley did not open the envelope. He wrote a letter about his link. Elmer Todd confirmed that he received the envelope from Rowley. There is no chain of custody issue except in the minds of out of touch conspiracy theorists. CE-399 would not even need a chain of custody to get admitted in court as evidence. It's a non-fungible item that had been made readily identifiable by both Elmer Todd and Robert Frazier. Either one of their positive IDs would suffice. In fact, Frazier positively identified it during his sworn WC testimony.

Total BS... Todd and Frazier received a bullet in Washington. There is not a shred of evidence that it was that same bullet Tomlinson found on a stretcher at Parkland and Frazier's testimony most certainly did not confirm that it was.

But even if your fairytale story was remotely true, then why did the WC ask the FBI for authentication of several pieces of evidence including CE399? You ran from this question last time. Let's see if you can answer it now!

[Martin Weidmann]

But even if your fairytale story was remotely true, then why did the WC ask the FBI for authentication of several pieces of evidence including CE399?

[John Iacoletti]

But even if your fairytale story was remotely true, then why did the WC ask the FBI for authentication of several pieces of evidence including CE399?

Right?

They must have thought that the authentication of evidence matters.

But then they were somehow satisfied with an anonymously written letter full of hearsay.

[Dan O'meara]

O.P. Wright did not categorically deny that CE-399 was the bullet that he handled on Nov 22, 1963. In fact, he told Bardwell Odum that it appeared to be the same bullet.

Tomlinson, Wright, Johnsen and Rowley couldn't positively identify CE-399 as being the bullet they handled because none of them had placed their mark on it. Tomlinson and Wright both did say that it looked to be the same bullet though.

If a chain of custody was needed, the one that existed would be perfectly fine. Johnsen placing the bullet in the envelope, sealing it, and attaching a letter to the envelope satisfies his link. Rowley did not open the envelope. He wrote a letter about his link. Elmer Todd confirmed that he received the envelope from Rowley. There is no chain of custody issue except in the minds of out of touch conspiracy theorists. CE-399 would not even need a chain of custody to get admitted in court as evidence. It's a non-fungible item that had been made readily identifiable by both Elmer Todd and Robert Frazier. Either one of their positive IDs would suffice. In fact, Frazier positively identified it during his sworn WC testimony.

Gregory testified that it passed through the radius.

Wound ballistics says that the bullet turned around and exited the chest base end forward.

The word tumbling, whether in air or in tissue, gives the impression that the bullet rotates many times, end-over-end, as it penetrates, but the bullet actually seldom makes a complete 360° turn before exiting a target the size of a human body. Most bullets will never make the full circle, no matter how deeply they penetrate. If it stops in the target, the undeformed bullet almost always comes to rest pointed backward.

Sturdivan, Larry M.. JFK Myths: A Scientific Investigation of the Kennedy Assassination (p. 246). Paragon House. Kindle Edition.

Why?

I can make out what looks to be a hole in the radius. There are actually a couple of candidates for a hole on one of the X-Rays.


CE-842 is four fragments. CE-842 was submitted into evidence during Frazier's testimony. CE-842 is proof that Dr. Gregory removed four fragments from Connally.

That is False. You introduced it here three days before I even joined the thread.



https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3681.msg144193.html#msg144193

O.P. Wright did not categorically deny that CE-399 was the bullet that he handled on Nov 22, 1963.

Wrong.
O P Wright categorically denied CE 399 was the bullet he handed to SA Johnsen on the day of the assassination more than once.
Ironically, you have posted a video of Josiah Thompson during which he describes Wright categorically denying CE 399 was the bullet he handled that day - once to Thompson and once in front of other witnesses.

CE-842 is four fragments. CE-842 was submitted into evidence during Frazier's testimony. CE-842 is proof that Dr. Gregory removed four fragments from Connally.

Wrong.
CE 842 is entered into evidence as a single fragment.
It is only referred to as a single fragment.
Gregory never refers to removing four fragments from JBC's wrist and CE 842 is entered into the evidence as a single fragment.

Mr. Specter: Was a fragment of metal brought to you which was identified as coming from the wrist of Governor Connally?
Mr. Frazier: It was identified to me as having come from the arm of Governor Connally.
Mr. Specter: Will you produce that fragment at this time, please?
Mr. Frazier: This one does not have a Commission number as yet.
Mr. Specter: May it please the Commission, I would like to have this fragment marked as Commission Exhibit 842.
(Commission Exhibit No. 842 was marked for identification and received in evidence.)
Mr. Specter: Now, referring to a fragment heretofore marked as Q9 for FBI record purposes, and now marked as Commission Exhibit No. 842, will you describe that fragment for us, please?
Mr. Frazier: Yes, sir; this is a small fragment of metal which weighed one-half a grain when I first examined it in the laboratory. It is a piece of lead, and could have been a part of a bullet or a core of a bullet.


Wound ballistics says that the bullet turned around and exited the chest base end forward.

The word tumbling, whether in air or in tissue, gives the impression that the bullet rotates many times, end-over-end, as it penetrates, but the bullet actually seldom makes a complete 360° turn before exiting a target the size of a human body. Most bullets will never make the full circle, no matter how deeply they penetrate. If it stops in the target, the undeformed bullet almost always comes to rest pointed backward.

I'm not sure if you're offering this passage from Sturdivan as proof the bullet exited JBC's chest base end forward.

Why?

Why do I find it confusing that a 6.5 mm rotating bullet leaves a 5 mm slit?
Why don't you find it confusing?

[Tim Nickerson]

O.P. Wright did not categorically deny that CE-399 was the bullet that he handled on Nov 22, 1963.

Wrong.
O P Wright categorically denied CE 399 was the bullet he handed to SA Johnsen on the day of the assassination more than once.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11653#relPageId=3

Wrong.
CE 842 is entered into evidence as a single fragment.
It is only referred to as a single fragment.
Gregory never refers to removing four fragments from JBC's wrist and CE 842 is entered into the evidence as a single fragment.

CE-842 is four fragments. Gregory never said that he only removed one fragment.

Wound ballistics says that the bullet turned around and exited the chest base end forward.

The word tumbling, whether in air or in tissue, gives the impression that the bullet rotates many times, end-over-end, as it penetrates, but the bullet actually seldom makes a complete 360° turn before exiting a target the size of a human body. Most bullets will never make the full circle, no matter how deeply they penetrate. If it stops in the target, the undeformed bullet almost always comes to rest pointed backward.

I'm not sure if you're offering this passage from Sturdivan as proof the bullet exited JBC's chest base end forward.

 the undeformed bullet almost always comes to rest pointed backward


What part of that don't you understand?

Why do I find it confusing that a 6.5 mm rotating bullet leaves a 5 mm slit?
Why don't you find it confusing?

I'm not a wound ballistics expert.

[Martin Weidmann]

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11653#relPageId=3

Hilarious. Odum never talked to Tomlinson and Wright and never showed them CE399.

Odum's name is also not included in the chain of evidence for CE399. If he ever had the bullet, his name should have been in the chain of custody. All the chain shows is that, in June 1964, CE399 was send to Dallas and then returned.

CE2011, which includes the part you've shown us, is nothing more than a fabrication by some unidentified FBI officer in Washington. The reason why it is clearly false is that the content does not match Dallas SAC Shanklin's airtel.

So, for CE2011 to be correct, Odum must have had CE399 without adding his name to the chain of custody. He must have shown the bullet to Tomlinson and Wright, not producing the usual FD 302 reports, completely forgetting all about the meeting later, and provide incorrect information to his superior, Shanklin.

A likely story....

[Dan O'meara]

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11653#relPageId=3

Did you watch the Thompson video you posted where he reports Wright categorically denying CE 399 being the bullet he handled twice?
Are you aware Odum denied ever handling CE 399 and that he never showed it to anyone?
Are you aware that no FD-302 was ever raised by Odum, confirming his claim he never showed anyone CE 399?
Are you aware the report you posted is completely anonymous?
Are you aware of the suppressed airtel revealing Wright and Tomlinson didn't recognise CE 399 as the bullet they discovered that day?

CE-842 is four fragments. Gregory never said that he only removed one fragment.

Then how do you explain the Frazier testimony you neglected to include in your response.
Particularly where CE-842 is entered into evidence as a single fragment.
How do you explain that?


Mr. Specter: Was a fragment of metal brought to you which was identified as coming from the wrist of Governor Connally?
Mr. Frazier: It was identified to me as having come from the arm of Governor Connally.
Mr. Specter: Will you produce that fragment at this time, please?
Mr. Frazier: This one does not have a Commission number as yet.
Mr. Specter: May it please the Commission, I would like to have this fragment marked as Commission Exhibit 842.
(Commission Exhibit No. 842 was marked for identification and received in evidence.)
Mr. Specter: Now, referring to a fragment heretofore marked as Q9 for FBI record purposes, and now marked as Commission Exhibit No. 842, will you describe that fragment for us, please?
Mr. Frazier: Yes, sir; this is a small fragment of metal which weighed one-half a grain when I first examined it in the laboratory. It is a piece of lead, and could have been a part of a bullet or a core of a bullet.

the undeformed bullet almost always comes to rest pointed backward


What part of that don't you understand?

The part I don't understand is whether this passage specifically relates to Connally's injuries or is it just a generalisation about tumbling bullets.

I'm not a wound ballistics expert.

Or a rocket scientist.