JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
The deformation of CE-399 adds credibility to the SBT
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on July 31, 2025, 01:43:45 PM ---[...]
--- End quote ---
Given: 1) the varying velocities of CE-399 during its wounding of JFK and JBC, 2) the fact that that a bullet like CE-399 has a tendency to start tumbling when it exits something soft, and 3) the fact that it had already passed through both JFK and JBC when it struck the radial bone in JBC's wrist, it's a fool's errand to try to duplicate the deformation that CE-399 sustained.
We can be confident, however, that CE-399 was already tumbling when it wounded JBC because it left an oblong entrance wound in his back.
And we can be confident that CE-399 was still tumbling when it penetrated JBC's wrist because it carried fibers from the margin of JBC's right suit sleeve into the wound, i.e., the round-nosed bullet must have penetrated the wrist backwards and carried said fibers into the wound with its squared-off base.
The damage to Connally's wrist would have been much greater (perhaps even requiring amputation) if it had been hit straight-on by a bullet travelling some 2000 feet-per-second, and the deformation to said bullet would have been significantly different (e.g., the nose would have been smashed).
And oh, yeah, CE-399 does have Oswald's Carcano's marks on it.
Lance Payette:
CE 399 does not really “add credibility” to the SBT. CE 399 is “arguably not inconsistent with” the SBT. It would add more credibility to the SBT if it were far more extensively and plausibly damaged and its provenance were certain (e.g., it had been found lodged in Connally’s thigh at Parkland or on his seat in the limo). When we combine the startling condition of CE 399 with its uncertain provenance and the inherent implausibility of the SBT – well, sure, it’s way more of a problem for the LN narrative than a more damaged bullet lodged in JBC's thigh would have been.
I used to fire all sorts of guns at bottles and cans in a riverbed where the bullets lodged in a sand bank behind them. Sometimes we'd dig out the bullets just to see what they looked like. It was often very surprising how badly deformed they were. On the other hand, I was astonished at a documentary that showed a Carcano bullet penetrating two feet into a pine board and remaining more pristine than CE 399.
The biggest selling point of CE 399, it seems to me, is the connection to Oswald’s rifle. Assuming that CE 399 was indeed fired from Oswald’s rifle, then if the SBT isn’t correct we are quickly in the realm of an elaborate and implausible (to me) conspiracy. If CE 399 were a fake, what sort of Three Stooges conspirators would have produced a fake that looked so implausibly pristine and raised so many questions? How many shots would you have to fire to produce a bullet with that particular damage - 100 or more? And how would you know, before the JFKA or within a few hours thereafter, that you "needed" such a fake? And, unless you were in fact the Three Stooges, why would you ever have allowed a conspiracy scenario where the need for such a fake was even possible?
The SBT has survived 62 years of scrutiny, with enough medical, ballistics and forensics experts concurring with it, that it’s simply silly to say the SBT is "impossible." Yes, other experts have said this and tried to prove it, but to me the SBT, warts and all, stands as "implausible but possible" and probably the most likely explanation. To me, there are and always will be too many unknowns ever to say the SBT is definitely correct or definitely impossible. In the context of all else we know, it's a reasonable explanation.
What I don’t understand is why the debate continues on forums such as this, as though someone were going to say something new or startling at this point. I looked closely at the Knott Laboratory's study, and it seems to me to make assumptions about things that can’t possibly be known with the precision Knott claims. It was commissioned, moreover, by John Orr, who has been on an obsessive anti-SBT crusade for more than 30 years. I wonder how many people know that Orr’s theory, at least in 2013, had Oswald firing both the shot that hit JFK in the back and exited his throat and a separate shot that hit Connally in the back, as well as a third shot that missed; the head shot was (Orr says) a professional on top of what I take to be the Dal-Tex building. https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/how-i-investigated-president-john-f-kennedys-assassination. It’s difficult to believe that the paying client being a longtime anti-SBT crusader like Orr had no effect on Knott’s work.
In the nearly two years since the Knott study was published, it seems to have generated remarkably little interest apart from self-promotion by Knott. I found this comment at the Ed Forum by Tom Gram, who is certainly a sane and thorough researcher and who seems to share my concerns about the "precision" perhaps being more illusory than real.
The issue I think is that the limo and human models are just photogrammetry using the Zapruder film; so basically Dale Myers, and a few things don’t look particularly accurate. They have JFK way over on the edge of the car with his arm hanging over, shots at Z210 and Z225 which seems like an odd choice of frames for 2023, etc. etc.
One thing I’m surprised no one has commented on is it looks like they have the back wound positioned below the shoulder line and coming right out of the official exit on JFK’s neck. In that sense their model seems to support the SBT more than refute it.
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on July 31, 2025, 08:57:12 PM ---In the nearly two years since the Knott study was published, it seems to have generated remarkably little interest apart from self-promotion by Knott.
--- End quote ---
Have you read the actual Knott study? The full study, not a synopsis of it. If so, where can it be read?
Lance Payette:
--- Quote from: Tim Nickerson on July 31, 2025, 09:08:59 PM ---Have you read the actual Knott study? The full study, not a synopsis of it. If so, where can it be read?
--- End quote ---
No, I have been puzzled by this myself. I have Googled extensively and have (I think) read everything Knott has put out, but I have not seen the actual study. Pat Speer wrote that he understood there had been a falling out between Orr and Knott. Is it possible Orr owns the rights? It seems very odd that Knott does all this self-promotion but never actually says (as far as I can tell), "You can read the full study HERE."
Lance Payette:
Long thread at the Ed Forum that isn't too kind to the Knott/Orr project: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/29880-%E2%80%9Cnew-evidence%E2%80%9D-why-the-sbt-is-impossible-so-says-the-video/page/2/
Larry Schnapf said this, which suggests there is no "study," just the dubious animation:
Knott Labs was hired by John Orr to develop photogrammetry for a 3D animation of DP. Orr provided the details and instructions to Knott to do a bare-bones 3D animation that focused on two frames of the Z-film. Stoll-the CEO of KL- knew very little about the assassination and to this day continues to make serious mistakes when discussing the assassination, the project and the implications of the project.
After the initial 3D animation was completed in 2018, John Orr and I formed a limited partnership to fund further work on this project. We subequently parted ways with KL when the person who worked on the project left KL. We have continued to revise the animation and are close to finishing it.
Stoll/KL is promoting an old version of the animation and I would not put much credence in anything Stoll or KL says. -FWIW
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version