Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
Paul Davies

Author Topic: Reasonable Doubts?  (Read 2061 times)

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1829
    • SPMLaw
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #49 on: Yesterday at 02:49:32 PM »
There are so many things wrong with this sketch it is hard to know where to begin. For starters you make the same mistake CTs have by putting JBC's seat directly in front of JFK. The jump seat was offset to toward the left by about a half a body width.
Not according to Itek’s analysis, and not according to any measurements taken or the scale drawing provided by Hess and Eisenhardt who built it. The latter shows the right edge of the jump seat 2.5 inches inside the door.

Quote
You have JFK too far to the left. He was up against the right side of the car with his elbow resting on the side. The diagonal of the shot is wrong. JBC was not turned that far when he was struck
?? I am showing his position at z270.  He has moved far to the left.  Look at Altgens 6.

Quote
You show the bullet entering JBC's side instead of his back and then miraculously making a near 90 degree turn to the right in order to exit from below JBC's right nipple.
Nowhere near 90. It is less than 30 degrees. Put your finger just below your right nipple and turn around like that. The nipple stays in front of the right scapula and moves to the right.

The bullet deflects because JBC felt a significant impact in the back. It hit the fifth rib and pushed it enough to cause a fracture near the spine.

Online Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1598
    • JFK Assassination Website
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #50 on: Yesterday at 03:51:36 PM »
As I've pointed out before, no wound ballistics test has ever duplicated the SBT.

-- Martin Fackler's 1992 SBT wound ballistics test was fraudulent. First of all, not one of Fackler's test bullets passed through a simulated human neck and then destroyed 4-5 inches of rib bone while tearing through a simulated human chest before striking the cadaver radius bones. Not one.

Let me repeat that so the phony nature of Fackler's test can sink in: Fackler made no effort to simulate a human neck, a human chest, and a rib bone. Not one of his bullets hit anything before they hit the cadaver radius bones. Fackler simply shot cadaver radius bones with bullets whose velocity had been lowered to 1100-1300 FPS!

I suspect Fackler rigged the test because he knew full well that if his test bullets first had had to transit a human neck and then tear through a human chest and demolish 4-5 inches of rib bone in the process, the bullets would have emerged markedly deformed, just as they did in the AAT test and in Lattimer's test.

-- In Dr. Joseph Dolce's SBT test for the WC, even 6.5 mm FMJ bullets fired into cotton wadding emerged with more deformity than CE 399.

-- In the 1967 CBS SBT test, 6.5 mm FMJ bullets that merely passed through a 12-inch gelatin block before hitting cadaver wrists never had enough velocity to penetrate the simulated thigh, and some of them never even managed to exit the wrists.  One of the expert forensic consultants for the CBS test, Dr. W. F. Enos, said the CBS test "disproved" the SBT and that the SBT was "highly improbable" (Mal Jay Hayman, Burying the Lead: The Media and the JFK Assassination, Trine Day LLC, 2019, pp. 214, 218).

-- In the 1992 AAT SBT test, a 6.5 mm FMJ bullet was fired into two gelatin blocks. The second gelatin block contained animal bones to simulate the shattering of a rib bone and the smashing of a wrist bone. The bullet transited the first gelatin block and penetrated deep into the second block and struck the animal bones. It emerged markedly more deformed than CE 399.

-- In Lattimer's SBT test, one of the test bullets was split at the nose in several places and was markedly deformed, much more deformed than CE 399, and this wasn't even one of the bullets that had struck all three simulation objects. When interviewed by Stewart Galanor, Lattimer admitted that he had thrown away all the bullets that hit all three simulation objects. Gee, I wonder why.

Also, the historic 2023 Knott Laboratory SBT trajectory analysis, the most sophisticated and data-intensive SBT trajectory study ever done, determined the SBT is impossible, finding that JFK's and Connally's wounds do not line up in a trajectory back to the sixth-floor window.

Knott Lab's experts conducted a high-definition laser scan of Dealey Plaza to generate a point cloud of up to 2 million points per second, to accurately measure point-to-point anywhere in the scene. Using a 3D laser scanner (Leica RTC360), Knott Lab's experts did 36 laser scans of Dealey Plaza, producing a digital reconstruction of the plaza that has 851 million data points. No other SBT trajectory analysis has included such a detailed, accurate digital model of the plaza and of JFK's and Connally's positions in the limousine.

From this point cloud (the digital model of the plaza), Knott Lab's forensic engineers were able to match images from the scene and the Zapruder film using photogrammetry. They modeled the presidential limousine using multiple photographs and established the correct dimensions of the vehicle. Through a process called match moving, they synced frames from the Zapruder film into the digital recreation of the scene. The match moving enabled the alignment of the digital models of Kennedy and Connally in the vehicle to establish their positions frame by frame throughout the incident.

It is worth noting that NASA's Thomas Canning, who did the HSCA's trajectory analysis, had to assume that Connally was several inches farther to the left than the photographic evidence shows he was. Canning's trajectory diagram put one-third of Connally's torso between the seats and had Connally's left shoulder more than halfway to Mrs. Connally's seat (see JFK Exhibit F-144). Even after moving Connally so far to the left, Canning had to admit that the trajectory lines of JFK's and Connally's wounds "do not coincide," a problem that Canning attributed to "experimental error."

Moreover, Canning assumed that Connally was hit at Z190. He did so (1) because the Photographic Evidence Panel correctly determined that the first bullet that hit JFK was fired at right around Z188-190, and (2) because he was forced to assume the single-bullet theory was correct.

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #51 on: Yesterday at 04:16:00 PM »
Not according to Itek’s analysis, and not according to any measurements taken or the scale drawing provided by Hess and Eisenhardt who built it. The latter shows the right edge of the jump seat 2.5 inches inside the door.
?? I am showing his position at z270.  He has moved far to the left.  Look at Altgens 6.
Nowhere near 90. It is less than 30 degrees. Put your finger just below your right nipple and turn around like that. The nipple stays in front of the right scapula and moves to the right.

The bullet deflects because JBC felt a significant impact in the back. It hit the fifth rib and pushed it enough to cause a fracture near the spine.

I don't care how you slice it, you have JBC directly in front of JFK, you have the bullet striking JBC in the side instead of the back, the diagonal path of the bullet isn't close to what it actually was, and you have an impossible deflection of the bullet. Your theory is an absolute joke. I would be embarrassed to propose something so ludicrous but that doesn't seem to be a problem for you. I'm starting to think you are just trolling for attention by proposing something that is so obviously false just to get people to respond to you.

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #52 on: Yesterday at 04:18:14 PM »
As I've pointed out before, no wound ballistics test has ever duplicated the SBT.

Can you name one shooting in the history of firearms that has been duplicated? If not, there is no point in even addressing the rest of this drivel.


Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1829
    • SPMLaw
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #53 on: Yesterday at 04:49:11 PM »
I don't care how you slice it, you have JBC directly in front of JFK, you have the bullet striking JBC in the side instead of the back, the diagonal path of the bullet isn't close to what it actually was, and you have an impossible deflection of the bullet. Your theory is an absolute joke. I would be embarrassed to propose something so ludicrous but that doesn't seem to be a problem for you. I'm starting to think you are just trolling for attention by proposing something that is so obviously false just to get people to respond to you.
It is not my theory. I am just following the evidence. The evidence is that the first shot struck JFK and the second shot struck JBC in the torso.  The evidence is that the second shot occurred closer to shot no. 3 than shot no. 1.  and those last two were in rapid succession - not 5 seconds apart.  Witnesses who estimated the time said they were about 2 seconds (estimates ranged from 1.5-3 seconds). The evidence is that the head shot was the last shot. The evidence is that there were only three shots and they were distinct separate sounds although there is evidence that the reverberations from shot no. 2 had not fully dissipated before the third shot sounded (Mary Woodward and Ernest Brandt remarked on this).

So, according to the evidence, the first shot occurred after z186 and before z202.  The third shot occurred at z312-313. The second shot occurred after the midpoint between 1 and 3. That midpoint is between z250 and z258.  I have shown how JBC and JFK were positioned after z254 as in the Altgens 6 photo. They don't appear to have moved significantly between z254 and z271. 

My "theory" is that what happened is determined by the evidence, not spidey senses.

As far as the path through JBC is concerned, I have shown you what the wounds show . The fifth rib was pushed inward by the impact which stressed the rib near the spine and caused a fracture there.
« Last Edit: Yesterday at 05:08:01 PM by Andrew Mason »

Online John Corbett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1304
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #54 on: Yesterday at 05:13:41 PM »
It is not my theory. I am just following the evidence.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh, wait. You were being serious.

Isn't it amazing how after 62 years with millions of people investigating the JFKA, only you were able to figure it out.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1829
    • SPMLaw
Re: Reasonable Doubts?
« Reply #55 on: Yesterday at 05:57:37 PM »
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Oh, wait. You were being serious.

Isn't it amazing how after 62 years with millions of people investigating the JFKA, only you were able to figure it out.
The Secret Service and the Connallys said the SBT was wrong but the WC conclusion was right. That’s all I “figured out”.  I am just showing where that places the shots according to all the evidence.