If a CT could come to accept the "SBT," would he or she remain a CT?

[Tim Nickerson]

You guys are like Flat Earthers after being shown satellite photos of the Earth. Knott Lab is one of the most prestigious, recognized forensic engineering and digital reconstruction firms in the country. They've worked on numerous high-profile cases. That's why they were chosen to do the SBT trajectory analysis.

But, oh boy, when the news came out that Knott had debunked the SBT, you guys not only rejected and misrepresented their detailed analysis but started smearing them as incompetent, sloppy, etc., etc.

And, again, Dr. Robert Piziali, who supervised the Failure Analysis trajectory study, admitted under cross-examination that JFK's Z225 reaction proves he must have been by no later than Z221. That admission alone blows to pieces the silly Z224-lapel-flip SBT.

BTW, Dr. John Lattimer, another devout WC apologist, also admitted that JFK's Z225 reactions proves he must have been hit by no later than Z221. If memory serves, Lattimer said Z220 was the moment of the hit.

You guys can't even accept facts when they come from your own experts.

And, FYI, Knott Lab, after creating the first exact digital replica of Dealey Plaza from a laser scan of the plaza, enabling them to measure point to point anywhere in the plaza, matched images from the scene and the Zapruder film using photogrammetry. With a photogrammetric process known as match moving, using every available film and photo of the shooting, they synced key Zapruder frames into the digital replica of the plaza, something that had never been done before. The match moving enabled Knott's experts to identify the correct locations of Kennedy and Connally in the vehicle and, crucially, in relation to the TSBD's sixth-floor window, and to establish their positions frame by frame throughout the shooting.

Where can one read the Knott study? Not a synopsis of the study or a video synopsis of it, but the actual full study itself. What generation copy, or copies, of the Zapruder film did they use? Did they use the Betzner and Willis photos? If so, what generation copies were they? How far inboard of JFK did they determine Connally to be? Did they factor in the right rotation of Connally when concluding that the SBT could not work? It seems that they did not. In a video synopsis of theirs, they say that they found a significant angle difference between the entry/exit points on JFK and Connally.

[Tim Nickerson]

MG: The only forensic engineering and digital reconstruction firm that has analyzed the SBT trajectories, the prestigious Knott Laboratory ...The Knott SBT trajectory analysis dwarfs all previous analyses in sophistication and data volume

Not true. Failure Analysis Associates was (and still is, under the name Exponent) performed a trajectory study in 1994 for the ABA mock trial. It was scientifically superior to the amateurish, half-finished mess that KL did. At the very least, FaAA understood that they needed to account for uncertainties in the exact position of the bodies and the locations of the wounds. The only way that the KL study surpassed the others is in the sheer volume of data. But that's because of the tool they used to get topographic data; the great majority of the data generated is useless to this particular task.

I'm not familiar with the particulars of the FAA study done for the SBT trajectory. However, I suspect that it does not reach the gold standard of the study done by the ITEK Corp in 1976. The ITEK film analysis placed Connally's face 6.4" +/- 2.2" inboard of Kennedy. They had the original Zapruder film at their disposal, as well as a first generation copy. They also had high quality copies of the Betzner and Willis photos. Among their team were those with experience in photographic science, special photographic processing, photo interpretation, image analysis, coherent optical image processing, photogrammetry, and digital image processing. When factoring in the approximate 30 degrees right rotation of Connally, the SBT lateral angle of trajectory fits well beyond the reach of those trying to destroy the SBT.

Knott does not state how far inboard that they determined that Connally was. Nor are they specific on what materials they used for their study. They only say that he was not 6" to 10" inboard and that they used 25 historic photographs and 7 frames of the Zapruder film. What copy of the film they used is not revealed by them. Nor are we told what the historic photographs are. They have not made their full study available. All we have is worthless claims that lack any real support.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=60448#relPageId=47

[Mitch Todd]

This is laughable nonsense. If Knott Lab's study had confirmed the SBT, we both know you'd be singing a very different tune.

BTW, Dr. Robert Piziali, who oversaw the Failure Analysis study, admitted under cross-examination that JFK's Z225 reaction proves he could not have been hit later than Z221.   

This is just so much nonsense. FYI, the amount of data is crucial in any trajectory analysis. The Knott Lab study was far more sophisticated than the Failure Analysis study on several counts, starting with the fact that Knott did a laser survey of Dealey Plaza and constructed an exact digital replica of the plaza. That's kind of, sort of, important for any trajectory analysis of the SBT, don't you think? The technology to create that replica didn't even exist in 1994.

Knott Lab focused on the key, crucial issue of JFK's and Connally's positions. They were aware of the questions about the location of JFK's back wound, but they proved that no matter which location you choose, JFK and JBC were not aligned with a trajectory that traces from Connally's chest exit wound through his back wound and back through JFK's throat wound and back to the sixth-floor window. It just doesn't work.

Folks, the smears and disinformation coming from Todd and WC apologists about the Knott Lab SBT study is really misleading and unserious.

MG: If Knott Lab's study had confirmed the SBT, we both know you'd be singing a very different tune.

Now you presume to read my mind! But, sorry, no. You are simply wrong. Had it supported the SBT, I would put it in the same place that I do with Myers' similar effort: interesting, but nowhere rigorous enough for the conclusion to be significant.


MG: FYI, the amount of data is crucial in any trajectory analysis.

That's not true at all. All you need to know is the relative position and orientation of the gun and targets, as well as the location of the bullet holes in the targets. Anything beyond that might make for a prettier presentation, but it's superfluous to the actual analysis.


MG: The Knott Lab study was far more sophisticated than the Failure Analysis study on several counts, starting with the fact that Knott did a laser survey of Dealey Plaza and constructed an exact digital replica of the plaza.  That's kind of, sort of, important for any trajectory analysis of the SBT, don't you think? The technology to create that replica didn't even exist in 1994.

The advantage of using a 3d laser scanner over older methods, like laser theodolites, is that it's faster and cheaper. Not necessarily better or more accurate. With the 3d scanner, a couple of guys can survey something like Dealey Plaza in a couple of hours. Older methods would have required a days and at least one full survey team to do the same thing. The other advantage is that the laser scanner will interface directly to your CAD/visualization software so the data generated by the survey can be directly transferred and automatically transformed into a 3d model. You probably get a more accurate model, but realistically any improvement is miniscule when cast against the scale of the problem. Going from +/- 1" to +/- 1/8" is an improvement; however, at 65 yards, the 1" max difference results in a 0.24 degree difference in angle. That's not even a rounding error in this context. 


MG: Knott Lab focused on the key, crucial issue of JFK's and Connally's positions.

So, wait. First you make this big fuss about KL using the laser scanner to survey Dealey Plaza. Then you forget that and switch to "oh, but they were really focusing on the positions of JFK and JBC," a subject for which the laser scanner is useless, unless you have a time machine.


MG: They were aware of the questions about the location of JFK's back wound, but they proved that no matter which location you choose, JFK and JBC were not aligned with a trajectory that traces from Connally's chest exit wound through his back wound and back through JFK's throat wound and back to the sixth-floor window. It just doesn't work.

They also have Connally leaning forward, which he wasn't. JFK is leaning backwards, but it you look at the other photographs take of the limousine that day, he's always leaning forwards when he turns to the left. Connally is also slightly larger, especially through the shoulders. They put the back wound at the JFK's centerline, which is indefensible, and also artificially pushes the trajectory to the left. They have the rifle being fired from the west side of the SN window, like they don't really know where the sniper's nest actually was. A close look at the materials released by Knott Labs, and it looks, at best, like a half-finished project that was cut short, or maybe something based on faulty research. It looks nice at first glance, but fails to convince on thorough examination.   


MG: Folks, the smears and disinformation coming from Todd and WC apologists about the Knott Lab SBT study is really misleading and unserious.

Ad hominem well-poisoning isn't a convincing substitute for evidence and logic. Maybe you should try the latter?

[Dan O'meara]

Where can one read the Knott study? Not a synopsis of the study or a video synopsis of it, but the actual full study itself. What generation copy, or copies, of the Zapruder film did they use? Did they use the Betzner and Willis photos? If so, what generation copies were they? How far inboard of JFK did they determine Connally to be? Did they factor in the right rotation of Connally when concluding that the SBT could not work? It seems that they did not. In a video synopsis of theirs, they say that they found a significant angle difference between the entry/exit points on JFK and Connally.

Has nobody noticed that the Knott reconstruction has the bullet passing through JFK and hitting Connally in the back.
For some reason I'm not sure about, it never occurred to the good folk at Knott to explain this bizarre discrepancy.
It never occurred to them that it highlighted that there model was badly awry in some way.
Did they believe that there was a bullet hole somewhere else in JBC's back?

[Dan O'meara]

This is a still from the original Knott Labs animation.
It clearly demonstrates that JBC is positioned incorrectly in relation to JFK. JBC appears to be sat directly in front of JFK whereas, in reality, he should be way more to his left.
Knott did a great job of recreating Dealey Plaza. They did an OK job of recreating the limo. They did an extremely poor job of positioning the occupants of the limo.
Moving JBC to his left would bring the spot where Knott has the bullet hitting his back more in line with reality.

.

There are so many issues with the above still it's hard to know where to begin and it's hard to understand how Knott Labs never had to explain these issues.

1] Why is the bullet striking JFK in the wrong place.
2] Why is it exiting his chest
3] How can the bullet be shown hitting JBC in that position when no bullet hole was found there
4] The red line (which represents the path of the bullet through JBC) indicates that he was shot by JFK! How can this be?

The Knott Labs animation is garbage and has done nothing to further our understanding of the assassination. It is as if those responsible for it were completely unaware of the various injuries suffered by the two men.
An analysis of the Z-film reveals, beyond any reasonable doubt, that both JFK and JBC were shot through at the same time, presumably by the same bullet.
The idea that this bullet was CE399 is a joke.

[Dan O'meara]

I've reproduced this post made by John Mytton which nicely highlights Knott Labs mediocre efforts to deal with this issue:




Let's not lose track of the actual purpose of what Knott Laboratory actually submits into courts, they basically compose what amounts to a video game graphic and this three dimensional representation "helps" the jury visualize what happened, the Knott Labs visuals lack the precision to be accepted as conclusive proof, hence their explanation on their web page,   

Forensic Visualization
Forensic visualization aids attorneys through scientifically accurate reconstructions of incidents or accidents.
Recent consumer behavior studies have found that, “Viewers retain 95% of a message when they watch it in a video compared to just 10% when reading it in text.” Our visualizations helps investigators and attorneys convey the complexities of a case in a format that jurors can easily and quickly comprehend.
https://knottlab.com/services/forensic-visualization/

And again because it's so important, Knott Labs computer modelling lacks the desired precision for conclusive proof, and especially since the position of the Limo and the occupants has information derived from Zapruder's fuzzy two dimensional film frame which shows no depth and therefore the "Z" axis placement has to be estimated. And don't forget John Orr a well known conspiracist commissioned this work, so Knott Lab clearly had a vested interest in producing results to satisfy their paying client.

Knott Lab's three dimensional approximation based on a two dimensional image.





As the Limo entered Houston, note Connally's position.



JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

Also, regarding the throat wound, Dr. Nathan Jacobs observed that the Parkland doctors described a laceration of the pharynx and trachea that was larger than the small throat wound, which would usually indicate the bullet traveled from front to back. The interior damage noted below the level of the throat wound indicates that the projectile, whether a bullet, a bullet fragment, or a glass fragment, ranged downward after it entered the throat

When Harold Weisberg examined high-quality photos of JFK's shirt at the National Archives, he noticed there is less blood inside the collar band than on the outside, which doesn't fit the SBT scenario. If a bullet had exited the throat, one would expect there would be just as much blood, if not more, on the inside of the collar band as on the outside of it. Not only did Weisberg find this is not the case, but he also discovered that where the sides of the shirt overlap, there is no blood at all:

This is less blood inside the collar band than on the outside of the fabric, not consistent with the
bloodstains coming from the body side. Where the sides of the shirt overlapped in wearing,
no blood. (Post Mortem, p. 347)

Weisberg also found evidence that confirmed the belief that the slits were made by the emergency room nurses as they cut away the president's clothing; he could see the zigzag mark of a cutting blade on the slits:

The dead giveaway of the fabrication that this is where the magical bullet must have exited,
according to the official story, is the nonmagical, mute evidence of the slit on the left side.
The irregular, zigzag mark of a cutting blade is visible with an engraver's lens no more powerful
than the 10-power miniature I carry. (Post Mortem, p. 347)

One of the nurses confirmed this to researcher Henry Hurt.

And, it bears repeating (1) the FBI found no metallic traces around the shirt slits, a clear indication that no bullet exited the throat, and (2) the released photos of JFK's tie prove there was no hole through the tie but only a small nick on the left edge of the knot, proving that no bullet exited the throat, since the tie knot was squarely centered between the shirt collar bands, so no bullet could have exited the slits without tearing through the tie.

All the bogus SBT animations in the world cannot overturn these facts.

​