A History of the Single-Bullet Theory Follies

[Tim Nickerson]

And what qualifications in neurology does Larry Sturdivan have?   

As far as I can tell, no qualified neurologist and no documented case establishes that:

• the so-called Thorburn position is a reflex position.
• that it is assumed where there is no compression or damage to the spinal cord
• that JFK's reaction could be anything other than a natural response to startle or pain and "air hunger" as he struggles to breathe.

We have a spine to protect the spinal cord from the effects of impacts to the body.  The 2000 fps bullet passed within 1-2 inches from the spine in 1 to 2 24000ths of a second. If it lost 600 Joules of its initial 1860 Joules of energy in passing through the neck, that means it deposited about 1/3rd of that or 200 Joules in the region near the spine.  But that is over a complete 360 degrees around the bullet.  In the direction of the spine it would be maybe 1/8th of that or 25 Joules.

25 Joules is the energy that a 25 watt lightbulb puts out in 1 second or the energy of a baseball moving at 18 m/sec or 40 mph.

Sturdivan's main expertise is wound ballistics. He has had his work published in peer-reviewed  journals. One such being "BALLISTICS FOR THE NEUROSURGEON" published in Neurosurgery, which is the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons. His work has also been published in The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery, Journal of Surgical Research, and  Computers in Biology and Medicine, to name a few others. He did not call the position that Kennedy assumed immediately post single bullet shot the Thorburn Position. He said that JFK assumed a Thorburn-like posture.

[Andrew Mason]

Sturdivan's main expertise is wound ballistics.

Which requires no qualifications in any medical field. Sturdivan had no medical education.  He studied how bullets damage the body using animals and ballistic gel as targets. He has no qualifications to opine on the neurological effect of bullets.

He has had his work published in peer-reviewed  journals. One such being "BALLISTICS FOR THE NEUROSURGEON" published in Neurosurgery, which is the official journal of the Congress of Neurological Surgeons.

He was one of several authors. The others had medical qualifications. So the publication does not mean he has any neurological qualifications.  He can say that a bullet can create a pressure in the skull or neck but he can’t say what the neurological effect is.

He did not call the position that Kennedy assumed immediately post single bullet shot the Thorburn Position. He said that JFK assumed a Thorburn-like posture.

He was simply following Latimer. And has been noted Latimer was a urologist not a neurologist.

[Tim Nickerson]

Which requires no qualifications in any medical field. Sturdivan had no medical education.

The fact that he's a wound ballistics expert contradicts your assertion.

He studied how bullets damage the body using animals and ballistic gel as targets. He has no qualifications to opine on the neurological effect of bullets.

If that was the case, the HSCA would not have had him testify or would have challenged the testimony that he gave.

He was one of several authors. The others had medical qualifications.

So what?

So the publication does not mean he has any neurological qualifications.

That he is named as one of the authors indicates that he has some neurological expertise.

He can say that a bullet can create a pressure in the skull or neck but he can’t say what the neurological effect is.

Why can't he say what the neurological effect is?

He was simply following Latimer. And has been noted Latimer was a urologist not a neurologist.

He was not following Lattimer. He was stating a known fact. When the seventh and eighth cervical nerves are damaged, everything below is disabled. With Thorburn's patient, the damage to spinal nerves at the level of C6 was gradual. With JFK, the damage to the nerves at the level of C7 was instantaneous. That's why Sturdivan referred to the position assumed by JFK as a Thorburn-like Posture. In reality, he could have just referred to it as the Thorburn Position.

[Michael T. Griffith]

....Until they discovered that the tracheostomy was done at the same location as the pre-existing throat wound.

That myth was debunked years ago. The autopsy doctors knew about the throat wound. They even probed it. Keep in mind that we know that at least one of the early drafts of the autopsy report, written after Humes supposedly first learned of the throat wound, said nothing about the wound being an exit point for the back wound. The Parkland doctors' 11/22 press conference was broadcast on national TV, and in that presser Dr. Perry twice said the throat wound was an entrance wound. Dr. Robert Livingston, the scientific director at NIH at the time, saw that press conference and called Dr. Humes to discuss the throat wound before the autopsy began.

I recommend that you read about the ARRB and other disclosures regarding the fact that the autopsy doctors were absolutely, totally, positively certain that the back wound had no exit point. They established this with multiple probings. They removed the chest organs and positioned the body "every which way" to facilitate the probing. People near the autopsy table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity. This explains why one of the early drafts of the autopsy report said the throat wound was caused by an exiting head-shot fragment.

When the HSCA interviewed autopsy witness Richard Lipsey, who was General Wehle's aide at the autopsy, he was very worried that his disclosure about the non-exiting back wound would be made public. Lipsey explained that the autopsy doctors positively established that the back wound had no exit point:

The other bullet had entered from behind and hit his chest cavity and the
bullet went down into the body. And during the autopsy, this is the only part
that I can imagine would be of any--really, what I’ve told you right there,
of strictly confidential nature that was never written up anywhere. And I
presume, am I right, that this tape and this conversation is strictly confidential?
You know, it’s not going to be published I guess is what I’m getting at? . . .

They turned the body up at one point to determine where that bullet that
entered back here that didn't have an exit mark. Where was that bullet?
And so when it got to down to where they thought it hit his chest cavity,
they opened him up and started looking in here. That's why I remember
one thing, they took, after they had taken all his organs out, during the
autopsy they had them sitting up there: "Now let's see if we can find the
bullet." They cut all his organs apart.

A number of other witnesses described how thoroughly and extensively the pathologists tried to find the exit point for the back wound and the bullet that had created it. One of the disclosures includes the fact that Finck announced toward the end of the autopsy that he had determined the back wound had no exit point.

Finck was the only forensic pathologist at the autopsy. When Finck indicated he was going to dissect the back wound, a standard and crucial autopsy procedure, a senior military officer ordered him not to do so, as Finck admitted in his testimony at the Clay Shaw trial. When Finck asked to examine JFK's clothing, another crucial and standard autopsy procedure, a senior military officer said he did not need to see the clothing. There was a reason that Humes and Boswell excluded Finck from the first brain exam that was done two to three days after the autopsy.

Nurse Heschliffe saw the throat wound which she described as a small round hole (6 H 141):

• Mr. SPECTER. Did you see any wound on any other part of his body?
  Miss HESCHLIFFE. Yes; in the neck.
  Mr. SPECTER. Will you describe it. please?
  Miss HESCHLIFFE. It was just a little hole in the middle of his neck.
  Mr. SPECTER. About how big a hole was it?
  Miss HESCHLIFFE. About as big around as the end of my little finger.

Yes, and the throat wound was also punched-in and not jagged, and there was more damage behind the wound than to the surface of the wound, clear indications of an entrance wound.

This was also seen by Dr. Carrico:  "We opened his shirt and coat and tie and observed a small wound in the anterior lower third of the neck" (6 H 3)

Carrico was not saying that he didn't see the throat wound until after they opened the shirt and coat. Carrico specified to Dulles that the throat wound was above the tie/collar. Carrico explained this in detail when interviewed by Harold Weisberg. He was adamant that the throat wound was above the tie and was visible before they removed the shirt. Dr. Ronald Jones said the same thing. I cover this in more detail in the OP for the thread "The Entrance Wound in the Throat, the Front Shirt Slits, and Tie Knot Nick."

and by Dr. Perry: "Dr. PERRY. The wound was roughly spherical to oval in shape, not a punched out wound, actually, nor was it particularly ragged. It was rather clean cut, but the blood obscured any detail about the edges of the wound exactly" (6 H 9).

Yeap, all of which are indications of an entry wound.

That is not the evidence. The cut to the tie to the left side of the knot and was a clean cut:
They had pulled the tie down before cutting it. You can see this from the tie in CE395.
That nick was closely examined by the FBI and found to be elongated horizontally (Frazier 5 H 62).  The tie was cut vertically.

First off, none of this addresses the fact that no bullet exiting the shirt slits could have made a nick near the left edge of the tie knot. We have ample photographic evidence that JFK's tie knot was neatly centered between the collar band. A bullet exiting the slits would have had to tear through the middle of the bottom half of the tie knot, but there was no hole in the tie. No bullet exiting the slits could not have magically weaved around the body of the tie knot to create a nick near the left edge. That is a manifestly impossible scenario. These facts alone destroy the SBT.

Dr. Carrico said he saw no nick in the tie until after the nurses started cutting away the clothing. We have to remember that the nurses were in an extreme hurry when they began cutting off the clothing. It is entirely reasonable to assume that one of the nurses accidentally nicked the tie knot before steadying herself and snipping the tie above the knot.

They did not cut the tie near the throat. How would they cut the shirt underneath the tie knot?

Again, Dr. Carrico and one of the nurses confirmed that the nurses made the shirt slits. There is no fabric missing from the slits. If a bullet had made the shirt slits, some fabric would be missing, but none is missing. Also, both Weisberg and Mantik reported that they could see the jagged edges of a sharp blade when they examined the slits under high magnification.

[Andrew Mason]

The fact that he's a wound ballistics expert contradicts your assertion.

If that was the case, the HSCA would not have had him testify or would have challenged the testimony that he gave.

So what?

This is why courts do not allow witnesses to provide opinion evidence unless 1. the evidence cannot be understood without special knowledge and 2.  the witness has the qualifications to satisfy the court that they are an "expert" in the particular field. 

I have no doubt that Sturdivan was qualified to give expert opinion evidence on wound ballistics.  But he lacked qualifications to opine on the neurological effects.  He could have provided his estimate of the lateral pressure made by the bullet in passing through the neck (which he did not do).  But he wasn't qualified to say what the neurological effect of that would have been. If he had actually done tests to measure the amount of compression on the spinal cord and nerves coming out of the spine at the C6 - C7 level he could have given that information to a neurologist who might form an opinion as to what the neurological effect would have been.

That he is named as one of the authors indicates that he has some neurological expertise.

If a qualified neurologist wants to add a physicist to the article to provide an analysis of the physics, that doesn't disqualify the paper from being considered a worthwhile paper for a neurology publication.  But it does not make the physicist a neurologist.

He was not following Lattimer. He was stating a known fact. When the seventh and eighth cervical nerves are damaged, everything below is disabled. With Thorburn's patient, the damage to spinal nerves at the level of C6 was gradual. With JFK, the damage to the nerves at the level of C7 was instantaneous. That's why Sturdivan referred to the position assumed by JFK as a Thorburn-like Posture. In reality, he could have just referred to it as the Thorburn Position.

The question is whether, and to what extent, the pressure on the neck muscles 1-2 inches from the spine from the one twelfth of a millisecond that the bullet applies that pressure in passing through the neck will interfere with the function of those nerves.  We know that if the nerves are damaged, there is a neurological effect.  There is no evidence that any of these nerves were damaged. The autopsy found no damage.

[Tim Nickerson]

This is why courts do not allow witnesses to provide opinion evidence unless 1. the evidence cannot be understood without special knowledge and 2.  the witness has the qualifications to satisfy the court that they are an "expert" in the particular field. 

I have no doubt that Sturdivan was qualified to give expert opinion evidence on wound ballistics.  But he lacked qualifications to opine on the neurological effects.  He could have provided his estimate of the lateral pressure made by the bullet in passing through the neck (which he did not do).  But he wasn't qualified to say what the neurological effect of that would have been. If he had actually done tests to measure the amount of compression on the spinal cord and nerves coming out of the spine at the C6 - C7 level he could have given that information to a neurologist who might form an opinion as to what the neurological effect would have been.
If a qualified neurologist wants to add a physicist to the article to provide an analysis of the physics, that doesn't disqualify the paper from being considered a worthwhile paper for a neurology publication.  But it does not make the physicist a neurologist.
The question is whether, and to what extent, the pressure on the neck muscles 1-2 inches from the spine from the one twelfth of a millisecond that the bullet applies that pressure in passing through the neck will interfere with the function of those nerves.  We know that if the nerves are damaged, there is a neurological effect.  There is no evidence that any of these nerves were damaged. The autopsy found no damage.

The autopsy did not determine that the seventh and eighth cervical nerves were not damaged. Sturdivan described what damage to those nerves would result in. We see that in the position that Kennedy assumed beginning at about Z225. It may be that the nerves were not permanently damaged. Neurosurgeon Dr. Kenneth Strully believed that they were not. But the description of his seen below is rather similar to that given by Sturdivan.

The following are excerpts from a letter sent by Strully to Dr.
Robert Artwohl, dated April 9, 1994:

"Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck.  This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck.  This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity within a fraction of a second as determined by the speed of the missile according to ballistic studies.  As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet's path took place first; -- right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps and sequential contraction of all muscles in the forearms, hands, chest, abdominal walls and paraspinal muscle groups, with muscles in the lower extremities, farthest from the shock wave, responding last.  All neural structures in the neck were stimulated at the same moment but the distance an impulse had to travel to cause muscle contractions in the hamstrings and gluteal muscles was greater, thus the motor responses in these muscles occurred much later."
.....
"There is no evidence here of Kennedy having assumed Thorburn's Position which is seen in quadriplegics due to transverse lesions of the spinal cord at the C6 level. The position is assumed involuntarily.  With quadriplegia, the patient lying in the supine position can only contract the biceps while the triceps, anconeus and muscles innervated by the C6 root and all others innervated by spinal nerves distal to the C6 level are paralyzed.  The patient under these circumstances cannot extend the forearm at the elbow once contraction of the biceps occurs to flex the forearm at the elbow. Kennedy did not reach for his throat.  All movements seen in  the films, occurring relative to the bullet's passage, were involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands."

[Andrew Mason]

The autopsy did not determine that the seventh and eighth cervical nerves were not damaged. Sturdivan described what damage to those nerves would result in. We see that in the position that Kennedy assumed beginning at about Z225. It may be that the nerves were not permanently damaged. Neurosurgeon Dr. Kenneth Strully believed that they were not. But the description of his seen below is rather similar to that given by Sturdivan.

The following are excerpts from a letter sent by Strully to Dr.
Robert Artwohl, dated April 9, 1994:

"Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck.  This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck.  This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity within a fraction of a second as determined by the speed of the missile according to ballistic studies.  As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet's path took place first; -- right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps and sequential contraction of all muscles in the forearms, hands, chest, abdominal walls and paraspinal muscle groups, with muscles in the lower extremities, farthest from the shock wave, responding last.  All neural structures in the neck were stimulated at the same moment but the distance an impulse had to travel to cause muscle contractions in the hamstrings and gluteal muscles was greater, thus the motor responses in these muscles occurred much later."
.....
"There is no evidence here of Kennedy having assumed Thorburn's Position which is seen in quadriplegics due to transverse lesions of the spinal cord at the C6 level. The position is assumed involuntarily.  With quadriplegia, the patient lying in the supine position can only contract the biceps while the triceps, anconeus and muscles innervated by the C6 root and all others innervated by spinal nerves distal to the C6 level are paralyzed.  The patient under these circumstances cannot extend the forearm at the elbow once contraction of the biceps occurs to flex the forearm at the elbow. Kennedy did not reach for his throat.  All movements seen in  the films, occurring relative to the bullet's passage, were involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands."

Ok.  Strully appears to have the proper qualifications.  I can't seem to find his actual letter, but I will assume it is an accurate summary.

I am not sure how long it takes for an involuntary reaction to occur but I expect it takes less than the time required for a voluntary reaction. A voluntary reaction requires around 150 ms. Three frames is 165 ms.  This article indicates that the involuntary reaction takes less than 100 ms.

Strully refers to the clenching of the hand as an involuntary reaction so it appears that he is referring to the reaction that begins at z226. Before then, JFK's right hand does not appear to be clenched although the left could be. The right hand clenches in z226.  Since the bullet passed to the right of the spine, I am not sure how that would cause the left hand to clench before the right.  So, I will assume neither hand is clenched until z226:


So, Strully's opinion would suggest that JFK was hit within two frames of z226 or no earlier than z224.  Which means that JFK had already moved away from the right side of the car, that his hands were already in front of him at z224 and Jackie was already turned looking at him before he was shot.