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

[Andrew Mason]

------------------

Same nonsense on a different day. Maybe it is time to go back to fantasy land to create a new theory. This time leave Nelly and JBC, Jackie, and SA Hickey out of it.

In other words, let's not look at all the evidence.

Is there a particular reason that you are avoiding telling us where you think JFK's waving hand or arm, or part thereof, is in the Willis #5 photo?  You are the only person who seems to think it can be seen.

You now have stated the second shot fragmented and hit the window molding and the curb by Tague. The attending surgeon, Dr Gregory, completely dismisses the whole theory you just presented. The bullet did not fragment. There was no fragmented bullet associated with the wrist, and a bullet did exit the wrist but backwards and in a whole state. The exiting bullet then struck JBC’s thigh backwards and deposited a small amount of lead on the femur. You're always claiming that you follow the evidence. That is what the evidence shows that occurred. 

Gregory's view was that the wrist wound was caused by an irregular missile but the thigh wound was not (4 H 121-122).  :

"Dr. GREGORY. My initial impression was that whatever produced the wound of the wrist was an irregular object, certainly not smooth nosed as the business end of this particular bullet is because of two things. The size of the wound of entrance. and the fact that it is irregular surfaced permitted it to pick up organic debris, materials, threads, and carry them into the wound with it.
Now, you will note that Dr. Shaw earlier in his testimony and in all of my conversations with him, never did indicate that there was any such loss of material into the wrist, nor does the back of this coat which I hare examined show that it lost significant amounts of cloth but I think the tear in this coat sleeve does imply that there were bits of fabric lost. and I think those were resident in the wrist. I think we recovered them.

.... (4 H 124):
Dr. GREGORY, The wound of entrance is characteristic in my view of an irregular missile in this case, an irregular missile which has tipped itself off as being irregular by the nature of itself.
Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by irregular?
Dr. GREGORY. I mean one that has been distorted. It is in some way angular, it has edges or sharp edges or something of this sort. It is not rounded or pointed in the fashion of an ordinary missile. The irregularity of it also, I submit, tends to pick up organic material and carry it into the limb, and this is a very significant takeoff, in my opinion.
...
Dr. GREGORY. There is one additional piece of information that is of pertinence but I don’t know how effectively it can be applied to the nature of the missile.
That is the fact that dorsal branch of the radial nerve, a sensory nerve in this immediate vicinity was partially transected together with one tendon leading to the thumb, which was totally transected.
This could have been produced by a missile entering in the ordinary fashion, undisturbed, undistorted. But again it is more in keeping with an irregular surface which would tend to catch and tear a structure rather than push it aside.

... (4 H  128 after being shown bullet fragments CE567 and CE569 with photos CE568 and CE570):
"Dr. GREGORY. These items represent distorted bits of a missile, a jacket in one case, and part of a jacket and a lead core in the other.
These are missiles having the characteristics which I mentioned earlier, which tend to carry organic debris into wounds and tend to create irregular wounds of entry. One of these, it seems to me, could conceivably have produce the injury which the Governor incurred in his wrist.
Mr. DULLES. In his wrist?
Dr. GREGORY. Yes.
Mr. DULLES. And in his thigh?
Dr. GREGORY. I don’t know about that, sir. It is possible. But the rather remarkably round nature of the wound in the thigh leads me to believe that it was produced by something like the butt end of an intact missile."

You failed to explain this. Where is the whole bullet that damaged the wrist if it isn’t the one that damaged the thigh? Where is the proof there even being a third shot? You have never presented anything.

Why do you think that any fragments that left the car (one of which we know struck Tague and one of which almost made it over the windshield) should have been recovered? 

[Jack Nessan]

In other words, let's not look at all the evidence.

Is there a particular reason that you are avoiding telling us where you think JFK's waving hand or arm, or part thereof, is in the Willis #5 photo?  You are the only person who seems to think it can be seen.

Gregory's view was that the wrist wound was caused by an irregular missile but the thigh wound was not (4 H 121-122).  :

"Dr. GREGORY. My initial impression was that whatever produced the wound of the wrist was an irregular object, certainly not smooth nosed as the business end of this particular bullet is because of two things. The size of the wound of entrance. and the fact that it is irregular surfaced permitted it to pick up organic debris, materials, threads, and carry them into the wound with it.
Now, you will note that Dr. Shaw earlier in his testimony and in all of my conversations with him, never did indicate that there was any such loss of material into the wrist, nor does the back of this coat which I hare examined show that it lost significant amounts of cloth but I think the tear in this coat sleeve does imply that there were bits of fabric lost. and I think those were resident in the wrist. I think we recovered them.

.... (4 H 124):
Dr. GREGORY, The wound of entrance is characteristic in my view of an irregular missile in this case, an irregular missile which has tipped itself off as being irregular by the nature of itself.
Mr. DULLES. What do you mean by irregular?
Dr. GREGORY. I mean one that has been distorted. It is in some way angular, it has edges or sharp edges or something of this sort. It is not rounded or pointed in the fashion of an ordinary missile. The irregularity of it also, I submit, tends to pick up organic material and carry it into the limb, and this is a very significant takeoff, in my opinion.
...
Dr. GREGORY. There is one additional piece of information that is of pertinence but I don’t know how effectively it can be applied to the nature of the missile.
That is the fact that dorsal branch of the radial nerve, a sensory nerve in this immediate vicinity was partially transected together with one tendon leading to the thumb, which was totally transected.
This could have been produced by a missile entering in the ordinary fashion, undisturbed, undistorted. But again it is more in keeping with an irregular surface which would tend to catch and tear a structure rather than push it aside.

... (4 H  128 after being shown bullet fragments CE567 and CE569 with photos CE568 and CE570):
"Dr. GREGORY. These items represent distorted bits of a missile, a jacket in one case, and part of a jacket and a lead core in the other.
These are missiles having the characteristics which I mentioned earlier, which tend to carry organic debris into wounds and tend to create irregular wounds of entry. One of these, it seems to me, could conceivably have produce the injury which the Governor incurred in his wrist.
Mr. DULLES. In his wrist?
Dr. GREGORY. Yes.
Mr. DULLES. And in his thigh?
Dr. GREGORY. I don’t know about that, sir. It is possible. But the rather remarkably round nature of the wound in the thigh leads me to believe that it was produced by something like the butt end of an intact missile."
 
Why do you think that any fragments that left the car (one of which we know struck Tague and one of which almost made it over the windshield) should have been recovered?

Mason’s Theory

A Mason Three Shot Theory ---nothing but a perversion of a theory once entertained by the WC, specifically Attorney Specter, who discarded this nonsense after proving it was not a possibility after examining the known evidence and rightfully determined it wasn’t even plausible to consider.

One bullet in the thigh: CE399 (after exiting from JFK's throat).  One bullet through JBC's chest and wrist, fragmenting striking windshield and Tague.  Third bullet at z313

Bullet one—Causes only minor injury to the thigh despite traveling at 2000 fps. Vanishes into thin air or becomes CE 399 depending on the current need.

Bullet two—Fragments into several fragments that used to be the known fragments of the headshot at Z313 shot or vanish into thin air or become CE 399 depending on the current need.

Bullet three—Headshot, the bullet really does break into fragments, but the fragments leave the car and vanish into thin air, because if they don’t vanish into thin air then the whole theory is shown to be completely ridiculous.

Attending Surgeons testimony:

Dr Shaw:

Dr. SHAW ­ He says that he did not hear a second shot, but did hear­­­no, wait a minute, I shouldn't say that. He heard only two shots so that he doesn't know which shot other than the first one he did not hear. He only remembers hearing two shots, his wife says distinctly she heard three. (he being JBC) (Nellies first statement on the assassination was "she did not know about a third shot"
Mr. SPECTER - And did you find, or do you know whether any fragment was found in his wrist or the quantity of fragments in his wrist?
Dr. SHAW - It is my understanding that only foreign material from the suit of Governor Connally was found in the wrist, although in the X-ray of the wrist there appeared to be some minute metallic fragments in the wrist.

---------------------

Mr. SPECTER ­ Dr. Shaw, would you think it consistent with the facts that you know as to Governor Connally's wounds that he could have been struck by the same bullet which passed through President Kennedy, assuming that a missile with the muzzle velocity of 2,000 feet per second, a 6.5­millimeter bullet, passed through President Kennedy at a distance of 160 to 250 feet from the rifle, passing through President Kennedy's body, entering on his back and striking only soft tissue and exiting on his neck; could that missile have also gone through Governor Connally's chest in your opinion?

 Dr. SHAW ­ Yes, taking your description of the first wound sustained by the President, which I, myself, did not observe, and considering the position of the two men in the limousine, I think it would be perfectly possible for the first bullet to have passed through the soft tissues of the neck of President Kennedy and produced the wounds that we found on Governor Connally.
 
Mr. SPECTER ­ Could that bullet then have produced all the wounds that you found on Governor Connally?
Dr. SHAW ­ Yes, I would still be postulating that Governor Connally was struck by one missile

----------------------------------

Dr. SHAW ­ Yes, we have talked on more than one occasion about this. The Governor admits that certain aspects of the whole incident are a bit hazy. He remembers hearing a shot. He recognized it as a rifle shot and turned to the right to see whether President Kennedy had been injured. He recognized that the President had been injured, but almost immediately, he stated, that he felt a severe shock to his right chest
------------
Dr. SHAW - I have always felt that the wounds of Governor Connally could be explained by the passage of one missile through his chest, striking his wrist and a fragment of it going on into his left thigh. I had never entertained the idea that he had been struck by a second missile.
----------------
Mr. SPECTER - As to the wound on the back of Governor Connally, was there any indication that the bullet was tumbling prior to the time it struck him?
Dr. SHAW - I would only have to say that I'm not a ballistics expert, but the wound on his chest was not a single puncture wound, it was long enough so that there might have been some tumbling.
Mr. SPECTER - You mean the wound on his back?
Dr. SHAW - The wound on his back--yes, it was long enough so that there might have been some tumbling. In other words, it was not a spherical puncture wound.

-------------------

Maybe the question Arlan Specter should have asked Dr Gregory was ---can the bullet fragments or even a whole bullet completely disappear, this way Andrew does not have to explain where they are or anything about them?

Or how about can the opinions of people, who are standing in an echo chamber, on what they thought they heard for the number of shots, be considered proof of anything when it is known to be in direct conflict with the eyewitness statements and physical evidence of the same event? Remember Andrew, you always follow the evidence unless it has to do with a third shot and the fact there is no evidence. What again is the difference between you and Michael Griffith? Both of you believe a shot occurred that you have zero proof ever took place.

Dr Gregory:

Dr Gregory completely dismisses the idea the bullet fragmented. Maybe he did not know about bullets or bullet fragments that can vanish if they are a problem for Andrew’s three shot fictional fantasy.
Mr. SPECTER - For the purpose of this consideration, I am interested to know whether the metal which you found in the wrist was of sufficient size so that the bullet which passed through the wrist could not have emerged virtually completely intact or with 158 grains intact, or whether the portions of the metallic fragments were so small that that would be consistent with having Virtually the entire 6.5-mm. bullet emerge.
Dr. GREGORY - Well, considering the small volume of metal as seen by X-ray, and the very small dimensions of the metal which was recovered, I think several such fragments could have been flaked off of a total missile mass without reducing its volume greatly.
Now, just how much, depends of course upon what the original missile weighed. In other words, on the basis of the metal left behind in Governor Connally's body, as far as I could tell, the missile that struck it could be virtually intact, insofar as mass was concerned, but probably was distorted.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you have sufficient experience with gunshot wounds to comment as to whether a 6.5-mm. bullet could have passed through the Governor's wrist in the way you have described, leaving the fragments which you have described and still have virtually all the bullet missile intact, or having 158 grains of a bullet at that time?
Dr. GREGORY - Well, I am not an expert on ballistics, but one cannot escape certain ballistic implications in this business.
I would say, first of all, that how much of the missile remains intact as a mass depends to some extent on how hard the metal is. Obviously, if it is very soft, as lead, it may lose more fragments and therefore more weight and volume than it might if it is made of a harder material or is jacketed in some way.

Mr. SPECTER - Would you have any idea at all as to what the fragments which you observed in the Governor's wrist might weigh, Doctor?
Dr. GREGORY - No, not really, but it would have been very small---very small.

The attending physician, Dr Gregory, three different times stated the bullet did not fragment and only a few tiny flakes were present but instead remained intact. But why would you want to believe him when you have this wonderful totally fictional theory that the WC themselves discarded.

[Andrew Mason]

Mason’s Theory

A Mason Three Shot Theory ---nothing but a perversion of a theory once entertained by the WC, specifically Attorney Specter, who discarded this nonsense after proving it was not a possibility after examining the known evidence and rightfully determined it wasn’t even plausible to consider.

If he didn’t consider it, how could he have determined it was not possible? 

Three of the seven members of the WC refused to accept the SBT.  The WC could not say which bullet missed.

One bullet in the thigh: CE399 (after exiting from JFK's throat).  One bullet through JBC's chest and wrist, fragmenting striking windshield and Tague.  Third bullet at z313

Bullet one—Causes only minor injury to the thigh despite traveling at 2000 fps. Vanishes into thin air or becomes CE 399 depending on the current need.

It is always a good idea to understand what it is you are critiquing. 2000 fps is the bullet speed bullet before it strikes JFK in the back and exits his throat.  It passes through 4 layers of cloth, a layer of skin, strong upper neck muscle, the neck, throat, skin, 4 more layers of cloth and strikes a tie knot and begins tumbling.  It then strikes the thigh obliquely after passing through another two layers of cloth. It doesn’t vanish.  It is CE399.

Bullet two—Fragments into several fragments that used to be the known fragments of the headshot at Z313 shot or vanish into thin air or become CE 399 depending on the current need.

Always good to read the posts you critique.  I never said any of that.   

Bullet three—Headshot, the bullet really does break into fragments, but the fragments leave the car and vanish into thin air, because if they don’t vanish into thin air then the whole theory is shown to be completely ridiculous.

Let me know when you have read my post. I am not suggesting that the fragments from the headshot left the car. It is likely that the two large fragments found in the car are from the third shot.

Or how about can the opinions of people, who are standing in an echo chamber, on what they thought they heard for the number of shots, be considered proof of anything when it is known to be in direct conflict with the eyewitness statements and physical evidence of the same event?

You weren’t there.  They were.  Witnesses from all different locations heard three distinct shots.

Now, just how much, depends of course upon what the original missile weighed. In other words, on the basis of the metal left behind in Governor Connally's body, as far as I could tell, the missile that struck it could be virtually intact, insofar as mass was concerned, but probably was distorted.
…
The attending physician, Dr Gregory, three different times stated the bullet did not fragment and only a few tiny flakes were present but instead remained intact. But why would you want to believe him when you have this wonderful totally fictional theory that the WC themselves discarded.

He said CE567 and CE569 were the kind of missiles that could have caused JBC’s wrist wound. Neither is a whole bullet that remained intact.  Read my last post. I have set out his testimony on this.

[Jack Nessan]

If he didn’t consider it, how could he have determined it was not possible? 

Three of the seven members of the WC refused to accept the SBT.  The WC could not say which bullet missed.
It is always a good idea to understand what it is you are critiquing. 2000 fps is the bullet speed bullet before it strikes JFK in the back and exits his throat.  It passes through 4 layers of cloth, a layer of skin, strong upper neck muscle, the neck, throat, skin, 4 more layers of cloth and strikes a tie knot and begins tumbling.  It then strikes the thigh obliquely after passing through another two layers of cloth. It doesn’t vanish.  It is CE399.
Always good to read the posts you critique.  I never said any of that.   
Let me know when you have read my post. I am not suggesting that the fragments from the headshot left the car. It is likely that the two large fragments found in the car are from the third shot.You weren’t there.  They were.  Witnesses from all different locations heard three distinct shots.
He said CE567 and CE569 were the kind of missiles that could have caused JBC’s wrist wound. Neither is a whole bullet that remained intact.  Read my last post. I have set out his testimony on this.

It is pointless to read your posts, basically they are just an unfounded uninformed opinion without a sliver of truth to them.

AMason: “One bullet in the thigh: CE399 (after exiting from JFK's throat).  One bullet through JBC's chest and wrist, fragmenting striking windshield and Tague.  Third bullet at z313” 

 ------------

Bullet one—Causes only minor injury to the thigh despite traveling at 2000 fps. Vanishes into thin air or becomes CE 399 depending on the current need. 

The current need is the shot needed to be CE 399 not a different bullet. The problem is it doesn’t fit any part of what is known about the assassination. Just some wild explanation thrown out into the world.

A tangential looking wound not your oblique wound according to Dr. Shire the attending surgeon.

Dr Shire… “then it's possible that small fragments could have gone into bone as it did and that the damage to the soft tissues was done only by that small fragment, so that the major portion of the bullet simply hit the skin in a tangent and went on in its course elsewhere.

 ----------------

Bullet two—Fragments into several fragments that used to be the known fragments of the headshot at Z313 shot or vanish into thin air or become CE 399 depending on the current need. 

Instead of fragments from the shot at Z313 the need became for this fictional shot two to fragment and disappear. There is no clear point in the description of the wounding as to when it fragmented. It just did to make this fantasy story seem viable.

This nonsense is unbelievable and cannot be explained in any matter. The attending physician did not think it had fragmented. Dr Gregory states three times the bullet was whole.

A whole bullet just vanished into thin air. No fragments to be recovered. Who would of thunk it. A pure fantasy fictional account. 

-------

Bullet three—Headshot,

The bullet really did break into fragments, but according to you the fragments all stay in the car but not enough of them to make a whole bullet. They vanished into thin air in the car.

Not only is there no proof of a third shot, but the explanation also provided makes absolutely no sense from the standpoint of both of the statements of physicians, and no evidence of a bullet is ever discovered.

 

[Andrew Mason]

A tangential looking wound not your oblique wound according to Dr. Shire the attending surgeon.

Shires said tangential but he obviously meant something greater than zero degrees to the thigh (ie. greater than parallel to the thigh/femur).  Otherwise, there would be no strike on the thigh at all.   So I said oblique ie. something a bit more than zero and significantly less than 90 degrees.  If it was, as Shires suggested, close to tangential, (ie. oblique), then it is not going to do as much damage as a hit straight on (perpendicular) to the thigh.

Your repetitive assertion of "no evidence of three shots" has been dealt with many times with putting forward the evidence of three shots .  But you keep asserting "no evidence".  This is rather unproductive use of readers' time.

[Jack Nessan]

Shires said tangential but he obviously meant something greater than zero degrees to the thigh (ie. greater than parallel to the thigh/femur).  Otherwise, there would be no strike on the thigh at all.   So I said oblique ie. something a bit more than zero and significantly less than 90 degrees.  If it was, as Shires suggested, close to tangential, (ie. oblique), then it is not going to do as much damage as a hit straight on (perpendicular) to the thigh.

Your repetitive assertion of "no evidence of three shots" has been dealt with many times with putting forward the evidence of three shots .  But you keep asserting "no evidence".  This is rather unproductive use of readers' time.

Dr Shires stated tangential because he meant tangential. The only one confused about the difference between tangential, oblique and parallel is the author of a nonsense theory.
Dr Shires has no problem understanding what he meant, but obviously you do.

Dr Shire… “then it's possible that small fragments could have gone into bone as it did and that the damage to the soft tissues was done only by that small fragment, so that the major portion of the bullet simply hit the skin in a tangent and went on in its course elsewhere.

You have never provided a shred of evidence. Up to this point you have done nothing but state your confused opinion, and demand it be considered proof.

 As bizarre as this theory has always been, it has finally reached its zenith with a shot that all evidence of it now vanishes into thin air and a claim that a doctor did not know the difference between tangential and parallel, because every piece of information available about the witnesses, wounds, timing and etc points away from this goofy theory. 

[Andrew Mason]

and a claim that a doctor did not know the difference between tangential and parallel

I don’t see a difference between “tangential” and “zero degrees” when you are talking about a bullet path in relation to its target surface.  Perhaps you can tell us what you think the difference is and, if so, what angle other than zero degrees a tangential line would be to such a surface.

[Jack Nessan]

I don’t see a difference between “tangential” and “zero degrees” when you are talking about a bullet path in relation to its target surface.  Perhaps you can tell us what you think the difference is and, if so, what angle other than zero degrees a tangential line would be to such a surface.

A Mason:
 Shires said tangential but he obviously meant something greater than zero degrees to the thigh (ie. greater than parallel to the thigh/femur).

Here is your problem. Figure it out. If only you really knew what you were talking about.

There is no more babysitting this ridiculous nonsense. The only one confused about the difference between tangential, oblique and parallel is the author of this nonsense theory.

Dr Shires has no problem understanding what he meant, but obviously you do.