JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Arlen Specter's SBT Notebook
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Charles Collins on September 14, 2025, 11:54:53 AM ---
Here’s a snippet from “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, page 232:
By late April, we were ready to focus again on the course of the bullets and the cause of the injuries suffered by Kennedy and Connally. We all recognized that the commission members were likely to find the single-bullet theory “implausible” at best.
Three decades later, Liebeler characterized the staff’s challenge in these terms: Plausibility has no innate qualities. It depends on what alternative hypotheses are available. The question must always be: “Plausible as compared to what?” Explanations dubious at first look better if all other possibilities are even more unlikely. The staff opted for the single bullet theory because all the alternatives were more implausible. They opted for it, in other words, because they believed it best explained what actually happened.38
After over six decades of scrutiny the SBT still stands. At some point it became more than a theory. To me it is now the single bullet fact.
--- End quote ---
Bravo!
Lance Payette:
I corrected what I had said above about John Orr. He does not basically accept the SBT at all. He has CE 399 striking JBC in the back and ending up in his thigh, but JBC's wrist wounds being caused by a fragment from the head shot.
The wrist wound thing intrigues me. It would seemingly eliminate a lot of the issues with the condition of CE 399 (the wrist fragments are not from it) and JBC's confusion as to when he was hit (because he was hit twice), while doing no real violence to the SBT. CE 399 would do everything the SBT says except cause JBC's wrist wounds.
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on September 14, 2025, 02:42:47 PM ---The wrist fragments are not from CE-399.
--- End quote ---
Dear Lance,
Why do you say that?
Should I read Orr's theory?
-- Tom
Lance Payette:
--- Quote from: Tom Graves on September 14, 2025, 02:57:35 PM ---Dear Lance,
Why do you say that?
Should I read Orr's theory?
-- Tom
--- End quote ---
Yes, I think Orr's theory is well worth reading even if one concludes he's dead wrong. He certainly put extensive work into it, and he is the one who commissioned the Knott Lab study even though he now distances himself from it. As I recall, one key point is that JBC's doctors seemed to think the wrist wounds had been caused by a sharp or jagged missile, which doesn't sound like CE 399.
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Lance Payette on September 14, 2025, 03:48:07 PM ---As I recall, one key point is that doctors seemed to think the wrist wounds had been caused by a sharp or jagged missile, which doesn't sound like CE 399.
--- End quote ---
Dear Lance,
Dr. Charles Gregory (the guy operated on JBC's wrist) said that wound looked as though the bullet (or "missile") had entered the back of his hand and exited from the palm side, that JBC's rib sustained a lot more damage than his radial bone did, and he suggested that the bullet (or "missile") had to be irregular in shape because it had carried some fibers from JBC's clothing into the wound.
I can't seem to find it at the moment, but IIRC, one of the doctors who attended to JBC said that the "irregular" shape of the missile that carried the fibers into the wrist wound was probably the sharp or angular base of CE-399, itself, as opposed to its non-fiber-carrying round nose.
Dr. Robert Shaw, who was familiar with the wound to JBC's wrist, postulated that the bullet "didn't pass through it, but struck it."
Which is what we see its doing rear-end-first in the animation I posted here a few weeks ago.
-- Tom
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version