NEW ARTICLE: JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible

[Michael T. Griffith]

Notice that the SBT believers here are still declining to explain how a bullet exiting the throat and the shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie knot, much less how such a bullet could have miraculously weaved around the body of the knot and nicked the knot's outer surface at point that was not on either edge of the knot. Crickets. Silence. They have nothing to say on this determinative issue.

Mind you, in posing these two questions, I'm assuming for the sake of argument that the throat wound was behind the shirt slits and that the slits were made by the bullet that allegedly exited the throat. If one wants to interpret the autopsy photo of the gaping tracheostomy as indicating the throat wound was low enough to make the shirt slits, then one needs to explain (1) how the alleged exiting bullet could have missed tearing through the tie knot, (2) how the bullet could have nicked the outer surface of the knot inward from the knot's left edge, (3) the Parkland accounts that the nurses nicked the tie and made the shirt slits, and (4) the fact that three Parkland doctors independently said that they saw the throat wound before the clothing was removed and that the wound was immediately above the tie knot.

Finally, SBT believers, incredibly, are still making the downright silly argument that only the SBT can solve the "problem" of the bullet that "went on to strike JBC in the back." This is no problem at all. It's only a "problem" in their minds because they can't unchain themselves from the SBT myth. As many researchers have pointed out many times,

-- Connally himself did not believe he was hit by the same bullet that hit JFK.

-- Since Connally was seated several inches to the left of JFK, a bullet that narrowly missed JFK could have easily hit Connally in the back.

-- Connally's back wound and interior chest wound refute the SBT from the get-go, because the SBT requires that the Connally bullet was traveling sideways when it hit his back and smashed his rib, but his back wound was only 1.5 cm in width, and the wound path through Connally's chest was narrow, so much so that Dr. Shaw noted that when the bullet smashed 5 inches of the fifth rib it did little damage to the surrounding tissue.

-- The initial FBI and Secret Service analyses concluded that JFK and Connally were hit by separate non-fatal bullets.

SBT defenders just keep ignoring these facts, and just keep repeating the nonsense that only the SBT can explain the bullet that hit Connally, while refusing to explain how the bullet that allegedly exited JFK's throat and shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie knot and nicked the knot's outer surface inward from the knot's left edge. As I've said before, dealing with SBT believers is not much different than dealing with Moon-landing deniers and 9/11 Truthers. When you try to get them to deal with hard physical evidence that destroys their myths, they duck and dodge and bob and weave and refuse to directly confront that hard physical evidence.

[Jack Nessan]

Notice that the SBT believers here are still declining to explain how a bullet exiting the throat and the shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie knot, much less how such a bullet could have miraculously weaved around the body of the knot and nicked the knot's outer surface at point that was not on either edge of the knot. Crickets. Silence. They have nothing to say on this determinative issue.

Mind you, in posing these two questions, I'm assuming for the sake of argument that the throat wound was behind the shirt slits and that the slits were made by the bullet that allegedly exited the throat. If one wants to interpret the autopsy photo of the gaping tracheostomy as indicating the throat wound was low enough to make the shirt slits, then one needs to explain (1) how the alleged exiting bullet could have missed tearing through the tie knot, (2) how the bullet could have nicked the outer surface of the knot inward from the knot's left edge, (3) the Parkland accounts that the nurses nicked the tie and made the shirt slits, and (4) the fact that three Parkland doctors independently said that they saw the throat wound before the clothing was removed and that the wound was immediately above the tie knot.

Finally, SBT believers, incredibly, are still making the downright silly argument that only the SBT can solve the "problem" of the bullet that "went on to strike JBC in the back." This is no problem at all. It's only a "problem" in their minds because they can't unchain themselves from the SBT myth. As many researchers have pointed out many times,

-- Connally himself did not believe he was hit by the same bullet that hit JFK.

-- Since Connally was seated several inches to the left of JFK, a bullet that narrowly missed JFK could have easily hit Connally in the back.

-- Connally's back wound and interior chest wound refute the SBT from the get-go, because the SBT requires that the Connally bullet was traveling sideways when it hit his back and smashed his rib, but his back wound was only 1.5 cm in width, and the wound path through Connally's chest was narrow, so much so that Dr. Shaw noted that when the bullet smashed 5 inches of the fifth rib it did little damage to the surrounding tissue.

-- The initial FBI and Secret Service analyses concluded that JFK and Connally were hit by separate non-fatal bullets.

SBT defenders just keep ignoring these facts, and just keep repeating the nonsense that only the SBT can explain the bullet that hit Connally, while refusing to explain how the bullet that allegedly exited JFK's throat and shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie knot and nicked the knot's outer surface inward from the knot's left edge. As I've said before, dealing with SBT believers is not much different than dealing with Moon-landing deniers and 9/11 Truthers. When you try to get them to deal with hard physical evidence that destroys their myths, they duck and dodge and bob and weave and refuse to directly confront that hard physical evidence.

MG “Notice that the SBT believers here are still declining to explain how a bullet exiting the throat and the shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie knot, much less how such a bullet could have miraculously weaved around the body of the knot and nicked the knot's outer surface at point that was not on either edge of the knot. Crickets. Silence. They have nothing to say on this determinative issue.”

The autopsy photo speaks for itself. Despite your posting to the contrary, the wound is below the collar. JBC was struck by the bullet passing through JKS’s neck. In your own words:

MG ---“Sherlock Holmes famously said, "When you eliminate the impossible, however improbable, whatever remains must be the truth." To put it another way, once all impossible scenarios are removed from consideration, the only remaining explanation, even if it seems unlikely, must be the correct one.”
 
-----------------------------------------------------------

MG--" the autopsy photo of the gaping tracheostomy as indicating the throat wound was low enough to make the shirt slits,"

MG “the bullet could have nicked the outer surface of the knot inward from the knot's left edge”

I think you are right. The bullet made the shirt slits and nicked the edge of the tie. Good thinking Michael.

 

[Michael T. Griffith]

Now is a good time to quote Rockefeller Foundation fellow and investigative journalist Henry Hurt's excellent analysis of the throat wound, the tie knot, and the shirt slits:

That front neck wound, of course, was largely believed to have
been one of entry by those experienced observers at Parkland Hospital.
That was the thrust of their initial impressions and was stated
several times at a press briefing conducted at the hospital by a White
House official.

But the official version ruled that it was a wound of exit and
suggested that the exiting bullet caused the nick on the knot
of the President's tie. The government version also suggested
that the slits through the front of the neckband of the President's
shirt were caused by an exiting bullet." The initial difficulty with the
government's case was that the laboratory—after spectrographic
analysis—could find no metal traces on the tie or the neckband of
the collar, traces that should have been there if a bullet had
caused the damage.

The second major problem was one that often plagued the
commission: a highly credible witness who saw and said things that
contradicted the larger picture. Dr. Charles Carrico, the doctor who
examined Kennedy in the emergency room before his shirt and tie
were removed, testified to the Warren Commission (and later confirmed
in an interview) that the anterior neck wound was above the
knot of his tie.'"

A wound location this high in the front would render fatuous the
whole teetering premise of the Warren Commission. (The commission
ignored Dr. Carrico's testimony on this point, even though he was
the doctor in the best position to have any direct knowledge.)

Weisberg pressed his case in court to have the National Archives
release clear photographs of the President's shirt and tie, because
the pictures that had been provided by the FBI to the Warren
Commission were unclear and virtually worthless. The photographs
finally disclosed to Weisberg show that the suggested bullet holes
in the shirt's front neckband are not bullet holes at all. They are
slits made by scalpels used by nurses to cut off the President's
necktie. One nurse who cut off the clothing confirmed this, adding
impressive credence to Weisberg's observations.

The other astonishing confirmation is that the bullet hole in the
back of the shirt is precisely where the first body chart placed it.
That chart had been ignored by the commission and disavowed by
the doctor who prepared it.

The testimony of Dr. Carrico, combined with the revelations in
the photographs, shows with absolute certainty to almost any layman
that the bullet that entered Kennedy's back nearly six inches below
his collar at a sharply downward angle could not possibly have exited
from Kennedy's neck, above the collar, where Dr. Carrico saw the
wound.

Where, then, did the frontal neck wound come from? That is a
question never pursued by the commission. The answer is one the
government seems not to want to know. (Reasonable Doubt: An
Investigation into the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,
Henry Holt and Company, 1985, p. 60)

This is another good example of the fact that the facts about JFK's clothing and their destruction of the SBT have been known for decades, but WC apologists refuse to face them.

One important contribution of my article is that it proves that the tie knot was centered in the middle of JFK's collar band, which proves that any bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the knot and could not have nicked the outer surface of the knot.

[Jack Nessan]

Now is a good time to quote Rockefeller Foundation fellow and investigative journalist Henry Hurt's excellent analysis of the throat wound, the tie knot, and the shirt slits:

That front neck wound, of course, was largely believed to have
been one of entry by those experienced observers at Parkland Hospital.
That was the thrust of their initial impressions and was stated
several times at a press briefing conducted at the hospital by a White
House official.

But the official version ruled that it was a wound of exit and
suggested that the exiting bullet caused the nick on the knot
of the President's tie. The government version also suggested
that the slits through the front of the neckband of the President's
shirt were caused by an exiting bullet." The initial difficulty with the
government's case was that the laboratory—after spectrographic
analysis—could find no metal traces on the tie or the neckband of
the collar, traces that should have been there if a bullet had
caused the damage.

The second major problem was one that often plagued the
commission: a highly credible witness who saw and said things that
contradicted the larger picture. Dr. Charles Carrico, the doctor who
examined Kennedy in the emergency room before his shirt and tie
were removed, testified to the Warren Commission (and later confirmed
in an interview) that the anterior neck wound was above the
knot of his tie.'"

A wound location this high in the front would render fatuous the
whole teetering premise of the Warren Commission. (The commission
ignored Dr. Carrico's testimony on this point, even though he was
the doctor in the best position to have any direct knowledge.)

Weisberg pressed his case in court to have the National Archives
release clear photographs of the President's shirt and tie, because
the pictures that had been provided by the FBI to the Warren
Commission were unclear and virtually worthless. The photographs
finally disclosed to Weisberg show that the suggested bullet holes
in the shirt's front neckband are not bullet holes at all. They are
slits made by scalpels used by nurses to cut off the President's
necktie. One nurse who cut off the clothing confirmed this, adding
impressive credence to Weisberg's observations.

The other astonishing confirmation is that the bullet hole in the
back of the shirt is precisely where the first body chart placed it.
That chart had been ignored by the commission and disavowed by
the doctor who prepared it.

The testimony of Dr. Carrico, combined with the revelations in
the photographs, shows with absolute certainty to almost any layman
that the bullet that entered Kennedy's back nearly six inches below
his collar at a sharply downward angle could not possibly have exited
from Kennedy's neck, above the collar, where Dr. Carrico saw the
wound.

Where, then, did the frontal neck wound come from? That is a
question never pursued by the commission. The answer is one the
government seems not to want to know. (Reasonable Doubt: An
Investigation into the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,
Henry Holt and Company, 1985, p. 60)

This is another good example of the fact that the facts about JFK's clothing and their destruction of the SBT have been known for decades, but WC apologists refuse to face them.

One important contribution of my article is that it proves that the tie knot was centered in the middle of JFK's collar band, which proves that any bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the knot and could not have nicked the outer surface of the knot.

MG  “The testimony of Dr. Carrico, combined with the revelations in
the photographs, shows with absolute certainty to almost any layman
that the bullet that entered Kennedy's back nearly six inches below
his collar at a sharply downward angle could not possibly have exited
from Kennedy's neck, above the collar, where Dr. Carrico saw the
wound.”

Exactly right. The photos clearly show the bullet exit wound was below the collar where it then nicked the tie and wounded JBC.

MG “One important contribution of my article is that it proves that the tie knot was centered in the middle of JFK's collar band, which proves that any bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the knot and could not have nicked the outer surface of the knot.”

Could not be more wrong about the tie knot, the exit wound, and any supposed fictional contribution.

[Michael T. Griffith]

The fact that JFK's tie proves that no bullet exited the throat and shirt slits also explains the fact that the throat wound was too small to have been an exit wound for a 6.5 mm bullet. Dr. Finck wrote that the throat wound was approximately 5 mm in diameter. Dr. Perry, who obviously saw the throat wound before he did the tracheotomy over it, told Dr. Humes that the throat wound was "only a few mm in size, 3-5 mm.” The alleged lone gunman supposedly used 6.5 mm bullets. A missile of this diameter would have made a much larger wound if it had exited the throat, as the WC's own wound ballistics proved.

In the WC's own wound ballistics test, the smallest exit wound that was created in the simulated human necks was 10 mm in diameter. The exit wounds in the WC's test were also punched-out, whereas JFK's throat wound was punched-in.

Reaching and straining, WC supporters attempt to explain the WC test results and the throat wound's contrastingly small size and punched-in feature by speculating that JFK's collar band restrained the skin of the neck as the bullet transited the neck, thereby enabling the bullet to cause a small punched-in wound. This makes no sense. How would the skin, even if tightly restrained by the collar band, not have been punched outward by an exiting bullet? The edges of the wound might not have been as pronounced, but they would still have been pushed outward. They certainly wouldn't have been punched inward.

Moreover, the restrained-skin argument ignores the fact that the shirt slits, supposedly made by an exiting bullet, were below the inside collar band, so the skin behind the slits would not have been restrained.

Furthermore, it seems very doubtful that even the skin directly behind the collar band would have had time to become significantly restrained. Why? Because the bullet would have transited the neck in no more than 55 milliseconds. To get some idea of just how fast this would have been, consider that an eyeblink takes 100 to 150 milliseconds. What little degree of restraint that the bullet's alleged transit through the neck would have caused in such a microscopic amount of time would have been negligible.

All of this, in turn, helps us appreciate the explanatory power and importance of Dr. Carrico's key information that the throat wound was above the tie knot. Sadly, SBT believers pretend that Carrico's testimony was "unclear," "ambiguous," etc. No, it was not. WC member Allen Dulles specifically asked Carrico to "show" him where the wound was, then asked him to confirm that he was putting his hand just above his tie, and then Carrico said yes. So Carrico was demonstrating where the wound was with his hand; he put his hand just above his tie, and then he confirmed this placement when Dulles asked him to confirm it. Carrico's testimony is only "unclear" and "ambiguous" to those who are so emotionally/ideologically attached to the lone-gunman theory that they refuse to accept evidence that destroys it.

In addition, as has been mentioned several times, when Carrico was interviewed by Harold Weisberg and was asked specifically about his exchange with Dulles, he confirmed that he demonstrated the location of the wound by putting his hand right above his tie knot. See Weisberg's book Never Again, pp. 241-242.

Finally, the throat wound's location just above the tie knot was corroborated by Dr. Ronald Jones, who independently and in two separate interviews, said the wound was above the tie knot.

[Jack Nessan]

The fact that JFK's tie proves that no bullet exited the throat and shirt slits also explains the fact that the throat wound was too small to have been an exit wound for a 6.5 mm bullet. Dr. Finck wrote that the throat wound was approximately 5 mm in diameter. Dr. Perry, who obviously saw the throat wound before he did the tracheotomy over it, told Dr. Humes that the throat wound was "only a few mm in size, 3-5 mm.” The alleged lone gunman supposedly used 6.5 mm bullets. A missile of this diameter would have made a much larger wound if it had exited the throat, as the WC's own wound ballistics proved.

In the WC's own wound ballistics test, the smallest exit wound that was created in the simulated human necks was 10 mm in diameter. The exit wounds in the WC's test were also punched-out, whereas JFK's throat wound was punched-in.

Reaching and straining, WC supporters attempt to explain the WC test results and the throat wound's contrastingly small size and punched-in feature by speculating that JFK's collar band restrained the skin of the neck as the bullet transited the neck, thereby enabling the bullet to cause a small punched-in wound. This makes no sense. How would the skin, even if tightly restrained by the collar band, not have been punched outward by an exiting bullet? The edges of the wound might not have been as pronounced, but they would still have been pushed outward. They certainly wouldn't have been punched inward.

Moreover, the restrained-skin argument ignores the fact that the shirt slits, supposedly made by an exiting bullet, were below the inside collar band, so the skin behind the slits would not have been restrained.

Furthermore, it seems very doubtful that even the skin directly behind the collar band would have had time to become significantly restrained. Why? Because the bullet would have transited the neck in no more than 55 milliseconds. To get some idea of just how fast this would have been, consider that an eyeblink takes 100 to 150 milliseconds. What little degree of restraint that the bullet's alleged transit through the neck would have caused in such a microscopic amount of time would have been negligible.

All of this, in turn, helps us appreciate the explanatory power and importance of Dr. Carrico's key information that the throat wound was above the tie knot. Sadly, SBT believers pretend that Carrico's testimony was "unclear," "ambiguous," etc. No, it was not. WC member Allen Dulles specifically asked Carrico to "show" him where the wound was, then asked him to confirm that he was putting his hand just above his tie, and then Carrico said yes. So Carrico was demonstrating where the wound was with his hand; he put his hand just above his tie, and then he confirmed this placement when Dulles asked him to confirm it. Carrico's testimony is only "unclear" and "ambiguous" to those who are so emotionally/ideologically attached to the lone-gunman theory that they refuse to accept evidence that destroys it.

In addition, as has been mentioned several times, when Carrico was interviewed by Harold Weisberg and was asked specifically about his exchange with Dulles, he confirmed that he demonstrated the location of the wound by putting his hand right above his tie knot. See Weisberg's book Never Again, pp. 241-242.

Finally, the throat wound's location just above the tie knot was corroborated by Dr. Ronald Jones, who independently and in two separate interviews, said the wound was above the tie knot.

Dr. Carrico's key information that the throat wound was above the tie knot.

It is not complicated. Apparently, you go dumb and blind when you look at the autopsy photo.

[Jake Maxwell]

Clint Hill seems very credible in this interview...
Disavows the SBT...
Check out the interview... at 35:44
Note how his wife, Lisa (at 37:50), refuses leading questions of the interviewer, and insists that Clint Hill be heard on the SBT and etc... love it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdRrcvvAhps