The deformation of CE-399 adds credibility to the SBT

[Tim Nickerson]

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."

I doubt that a fully detailed study by them exists. Certainly not one like that of the ITEK film analysis of 1976. In their synopsis, Knott says that Connally would have had to be seated 10" inboard of Kennedy at Z225 for the SBT to work.They tell us that they ruled that out through their photogrammetry process but they don't tell us just how far inboard that they determined that Connally was. We're also not told by them what copy of Zapruder film that they used or what other photos that they used. In their video animation, they have Connally turned just barely to the right, when in reality his torso was rotated between 30 and 37 degrees at Z223. 30 degrees of right rotation moved the point of entry on Connally's back about 3 inches to the left. So, when you use the range given by ITEK(6.4"+/-2.2") plus the right rotation of Connally, the lateral angle of the SBT can be made to work.

Michael Griffith and Royell Storing both claim that the Knott Lab study is the most thorough, sophisticated, and scientific SBT trajectory analysis ever done. Griffith adds that "No previous analysis even comes close to matching the depth and sophistication of the Knott Lab analysis". Yet, when asked to provide particulars of the study they clam up. Neither of them will say if they read a full detailed study by Knott Lab on the SBT. 

[Tim Nickerson]

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

There are some real crazies over there. Varnell might not even be the looniest. I don't understand why Pat Speer feels the need to cater to them. He calls the SBT a hoax. His take on the theory is flawed. In reading his chapter on the SBT, I had a brief moment of doubt on my own stand on it. After measuring the lengths of my own ears, that doubt went away. I now think of Pat as Pat "Small Ears" Speer. 

I do like and respect Larry Schnapf.

[Zeon Mason]

What is confusing to me is the notion that an MC 6.5 mm ball nosed bullet , spinning end over end at a reduced velocity of 900 ft/sec can go thru a wrist bone and hand also. I do not there has been any experiment which replicated this end over end spinning AS the bullet strikes  a human cadaver wrist bone and exiting palm of hand which proves the minimal flaking at the nose end of an MC bullet similar to CE 399.

It may be that there is some misinterpretation with the description of the bullet “ tumbling” when in fact , it may be that it was more like “wobbling”. IE: instead of the bullet spinning end over end in the vertical plane, the bullet instead had its horizontal axis spin just slightly off center thus the bullet when it hit the wrist bone was still traveling nose first , but with a wobbling” spin.

I think a good example of the wobbling effect is the 5.56 mm type bullet designed for the AR-15/ M-16 rifles. It’s purposely designed to wobble slightly about its trajectory line axis so as increase probability of causing more internal damage to a human body on impact, as opposed to the typical conical shaped hunting bullets designed to penetrate completely thru a human or animal body.

And as I recall, the MC 6.5 mm ball nosed bullet was designed to penetrate thru a human body (including skull). At least one experiment has demonstrated that the 6.5 mm bullet can go thru two replica human torsos  and continue on afterwards at a velocity of approx 900 ft/sec.

In conclusion, the very slight minimal flake damage on the nose end of the CE 399 6.5mm MC bullet, is the real issue that CTs have criticized as improbable if the bullet impacts the wrist bone and hand of a human , given  the end over end “tumbling” description by conventional WC advocates. Therefore, it maybe that an experiment with a “wobbling” MC 6.5 mm bullet fired at 900 ft/sec velocity directly into a human cadaver wrist , such that the nose end of the bullet impacts the wrist bone, will produce a bullet more similar to CE 399 with resultant minimal flaking at the nose end.

[Dan O'meara]

It is clearly the case, obvious to anyone with a grain of common sense, that CE399 had nothing to do with JBC's wrist injury. What evidence have LNers based their interpretation on, supporting the view that CE399 "matches the injuries"?

So, what you are insinuating is John and everyone else does not know, but you do know what the bullet should look like to match the injuries. Especially given the wrist injury.

I'm just asking a simple question - what evidence supports the claim that the condition of CE399 "matches the injuries"?
What is the evidence?
Is there any?
Is it just an empty, unsupported claim?

The reason I ask this question is because,according to the Warren Commission, this is what a bullet looks like that's been fired into a wrist bone:



I'm sure you'll agree, it looks nothing like CE399.
And this is what a wrist bone looks like that has had a bullet fired through it:



I'm sure you'll agree that this looks nothing like JBC's wrist injury.
It makes sense that a bullet passing through the bone would leave a hole where it passed through. What mental gymnastics can be employed to explain this most obvious discrepancy?



The lack of hole through JBC's wrist bone indicates that a bullet has not passed through it.
We can determine where the bullet struck the bone as it creates a jagged kind of "X" shape with the fractured pieces of bone. But there's no hole for a bullet to pass through.
Also note the small cluster of metallic fragments.
In the LN version of events, these pieces of metal where deposited from the base of the bullet as it passed through JBC's wrist, the argument being that the bullet was tumbling ( ) and entered the wrist injury base-first (even though it was tumbling it also entered his thigh injury base-first.)
If that were the case then this cluster of metallic pieces would be found where the bullet struck the bone (the "X").
As we can see, this is not the case with JBC's wrist injury. This metallic cluster is nowhere near where the bullet struck the bone (relatively speaking).

I am simply asking, what is the evidence supporting the claim that the deformation of CE399 "matches the injuries"?

[Tim Nickerson]

I'm just asking a simple question - what evidence supports the claim that the condition of CE399 "matches the injuries"?
What is the evidence?
Is there any?
Is it just an empty, unsupported claim?

The reason I ask this question is because,according to the Warren Commission, this is what a bullet looks like that's been fired into a wrist bone:



I'm sure you'll agree, it looks nothing like CE399.

This is what a bullet looks like that's been fired into a wrist bone:



I'm sure you'll agree, it looks somewhat like CE-399.

[Dan O'meara]

This is what a bullet looks like that's been fired into a wrist bone:



I'm sure you'll agree, it looks somewhat like CE-399.

Hi Tim, I saw your earlier post with these pics and the link to the work of Martin Fackler but it didn't have those pics there.
Are the two things connected?

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Our purpose was to prove the fallacy in the claim of the "conspiracy theorists" that the human radius near its end could not be perforated by a FMJ bullet without causing that bullet to be deformed. Our results show clearly the fallacy in this claim."

So, the stated purpose of the experiment was to disprove the claims of certain CTers.
Hmmmm...

[Tim Nickerson]

Hi Tim, I saw your earlier post with these pics and the link to the work of Martin Fackler but it didn't have those pics there.
Are the two things connected?

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Our purpose was to prove the fallacy in the claim of the "conspiracy theorists" that the human radius near its end could not be perforated by a FMJ bullet without causing that bullet to be deformed. Our results show clearly the fallacy in this claim."

So, the stated purpose of the experiment was to disprove the claims of certain CTers.
Hmmmm...

That is one of the two bullets that they recovered. Fackler already knew that the human radius near its end could be perforated by a FMJ bullet without causing that bullet to be deformed. The test was just to demonstrate that it could.