The Entrance Wound in the Throat, the Front Shirt Slits, and Tie Knot Nick

[John Mytton]

   You seem to have forgotten the "bunching" issue with respect to the Shirt and coat. It could apply here too.

The rear of JFK's jacket bunching in the following way is independent of the collar and tie, which are fixed securely around the neck.



We can't see the underlying shirt but there is evidence that Kennedy's shirt demonstrated a near identical bunching.



Explain how you believe a similar bunching can occur to the front of the collar and tie?



JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

The rear of JFK's jacket bunching in the following way is independent of the collar and tie, which are fixed securely around the neck.

How many times are you going to post this bogus "evidence" and ignore the objections to it? Again:

1. Willis slide 5, taken almost at the moment of impact of the first hit, shows JFK's coat lying virtually flat on his back.

2. The modest bunching seen in your GIF could not possibly have produced the 5-inch difference between the rear clothing holes and the WC's location for the back wound. This is not to mention that the modest bunching does not even reach the shirt collar.

We can't see the underlying shirt but there is evidence that Kennedy's shirt demonstrated a near identical bunching.

And I'll again point out:

1. The photo you're using shows Kennedy in a very different position than the position he was in when he was shot. In your photo, he's leaning far forward with his elbows and forearms on his legs. In the motorcade, he was reclining back against the seat, and his back never came off the seat until after he began to react to the first hit. Most of JFK's shirt was pinned against the back seat by his torso until he began to react to the first wound.

2. The photo you're using shows JFK wearing only a shirt and no coat, so there was nothing to keep the shirt from bunching. This was not the case during the motorcade.

3. The close alignment of the rear clothing holes means that the shirt and coat would have had to bunch in nearly perfect correspondence, virtually millimeter-for-millimeter correspondence, an absurd proposition.

Explain how you believe a similar bunching can occur to the front of the collar and tie? JohnM

Huh? Explain how a bullet exiting the shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie. Even your third photo shows that the top part of the tie was neatly centered between the edges of the collar band. We know the slits were below the interior collar band and parallel with the bottom half of the exterior collar band. There is no way a bullet exiting those slits could have avoided tearing through the tie, but we know there was no hole through the tie, only a small nick on the left edge of the knot.

Explain how a bullet exiting the shirt slits could have magically weaved around the bulk of the tie knot and nicked the left edge. It's just nonsense.

I see that Mitch Todd has misleadingly cherry-picked part of Dr. Carrico's testimony, ignoring the part where Carrico specified to WC member Dulles that the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, and ignoring Carrico's detailed interview with Harold Weisberg in which Carrico confirmed that the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, that he saw the throat wound before the clothes were removed, and that he saw no slits in the shirt until after the nurses began cutting away JFK's clothing.

In the segment quoted by Mitch Todd, Carrico was not saying he did not see the throat wound until after the clothing had been removed. The "we" referred to those in the room, including those who had entered the room after the clothing had been cut away. Dr. Ronald Jones specified that he saw the throat wound above the shirt and tie before the clothing was removed. So did Dr. Goldstrich. I quote from the OP:

Dr. Ronald Jones saw JFK's body before the clothes were removed. Interviewed for the 2023 Paramount documentary JFK: What the Doctors Saw, Dr. Jones said the throat wound was "visible" and that it was "just above where the shirt and tie was":

The first thing I noticed was a very small wound in his neck in the front. . . .
We could tell that the wound was in the front of the neck just above
where the shirt and tie was. So it was visible to you.
(18:12-18:19, 18:32-18:39)

In the same documentary, Dr. Joe D. Goldstrich, a fourth-year medical student at Parkland Hospital at the time, said he could see the neck wound when JFK's clothes were still on:

I do remember that very early on, even when his clothes were
still on, I saw the wound in his neck. (18:20-18:28)

There is no way Jones and Goldstrich could have seen the throat wound if it had been beneath/behind the shirt slits. This raises another problem: the shirt slits were simply too low to explain the throat wound.

[Royell Storing]

The rear of JFK's jacket bunching in the following way is independent of the collar and tie, which are fixed securely around the neck.



We can't see the underlying shirt but there is evidence that Kennedy's shirt demonstrated a near identical bunching.



Explain how you believe a similar bunching can occur to the front of the collar and tie?



JohnM

   Come on John. If the shirt can "bunch" in the back, it can do so also in the front. If a shirt is a "tailored" fit, it "bunches" nowhere, front or back. Be objective.

[Tim Nickerson]

I further notice that you said nothing about the fact that the FBI found no metallic traces around the shirt slits but did find metallic traces around the rear clothing holes

"If a bullet goes through multiple layers of cloth, bullet wipe may be present only around the defect in the cloth that was perforated first." -- pages 354 and 355 of Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques. by Vincent J. M. Di Maio, M.D.

[Mitch Todd]

I see that Mitch Todd has misleadingly cherry-picked part of Dr. Carrico's testimony, ignoring the part where Carrico specified to WC member Dulles that the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, and ignoring Carrico's detailed interview with Harold Weisberg in which Carrico confirmed that the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, that he saw the throat wound before the clothes were removed, and that he saw no slits in the shirt until after the nurses began cutting away JFK's clothing.

In the segment quoted by Mitch Todd, Carrico was not saying he did not see the throat wound until after the clothing had been removed. The "we" referred to those in the room, including those who had entered the room after the clothing had been cut away. Dr. Ronald Jones specified that he saw the throat wound above the shirt and tie before the clothing was removed. So did Dr. Goldstrich. I quote from the OP:

Dr. Ronald Jones saw JFK's body before the clothes were removed. Interviewed for the 2023 Paramount documentary JFK: What the Doctors Saw, Dr. Jones said the throat wound was "visible" and that it was "just above where the shirt and tie was":

The first thing I noticed was a very small wound in his neck in the front. . . .
We could tell that the wound was in the front of the neck just above
where the shirt and tie was. So it was visible to you.
(18:12-18:19, 18:32-18:39)

In the same documentary, Dr. Joe D. Goldstrich, a fourth-year medical student at Parkland Hospital at the time, said he could see the neck wound when JFK's clothes were still on:

I do remember that very early on, even when his clothes were
still on, I saw the wound in his neck. (18:20-18:28)

There is no way Jones and Goldstrich could have seen the throat wound if it had been beneath/behind the shirt slits. This raises another problem: the shirt slits were simply too low to explain the throat wound.

I cherry-picked nothing. The Carrico quote from his 1964 WC testimony is correct and in context. Perry and Jones testified that they went from the cafeteria to TR1 together and entered at the same time. Perry testified (again, in 1964) that when he and Jones arrived, Carrico was "attaching the Bennett apparatus to an endotracheal tube in place to assist his respiration." Further, Perry testified that the clothes had already been cut away when he and Jones entered the room:

"Mr. SPECTER - Upon your arrival in the room, where President Kennedy was situated, what did you observe as to his condition?
Dr. PERRY - At the time I entered the door, Dr. Carrico was attending him. He was attaching the Bennett apparatus to an endotracheal tube in place to assist his respiration.
The President was lying supine on the carriage, underneath the overhead lamp. His shirt, coat, had been removed. There was a sheet over his lower extremities and the lower portion of his trunk. He was unresponsive. There was no evidence of voluntary motion. His eyes were open, deviated up and outward, and the pupils were dilated and fixed.
I did not detect a heart beat and was told there was no blood pressure obtainable. He was, however, having ineffective spasmodic respiratory efforts. There was blood on the carriage."

The interviews with Jones and Goldstritch were made 60 years after the fact, and their memories have had decades to decay and be infiltrated by external factors. The WC testimony of Perry, Jones, Carrico, et al, was taken mere months after the assassination when the events in question still lay fresh in their minds. The only real reason to prefer the decades-later recollections over the 1964 testimony is an irrational desire to believe the latter accounts.

You could also show us independent confirmation that Goldstritch was ever in TR1. He's one of those guys who just sort of pop out of nowhere years and years later.

   
 

[Royell Storing]

  So they run an inept "investigation" where every single witness inside TR1 is Not interviewed regarding the condition of the JFK Body, and You want to hold that against people that do interview these eyewitnesses 60 yrs later?  This is also why the SS had to steal the JFK Body. They needed to erase the condition of the JFK Body as witnessed by the Parkland Dr's only minutes after the Kill Shot.

[Tom Graves]

So they run an inept "investigation" where every single witness inside TR1 is Not interviewed regarding the condition of the JFK Body, and You want to hold that against people that do interview these eyewitnesses 60 yrs later?  This is also why the SS had to steal the JFK Body. They needed to erase the condition of the JFK Body as witnessed by the Parkland Dr's only minutes after the Kill Shot.

You're so full of beans, Storing.

[Royell Storing]

You're so full of beans, Storing.

   If that is the best rebuttal you got, I must have presented a very compelling case. Thank you.