10 Reasons to Believe That Oswald Was Innocent

[John Corbett]

Finally, it is worth noting once again that in your whacky theory of the shooting, two FMJ bullets hit JFK, with one of them emerging virtually undamaged, with its lands and grooves intact, and with a loss of no more than 4 grains of its substance after allegedly penetrating seven layers of skin, smashing 4-5 inches of rib bone, and shattering a distal radius bone, while the other one shatters into dozens of metal particles, leaves a number of measurable fragments, and produces two sizable fragments after transiting a human skull.

I find it comical that you would think two bullets that struck different body parts in different ways should end up sustaining similar damage. A car that slides sideways into a guard rail is going to look quite a bit different than one the smashes head on into a tree.

MTG finds it incredulous that one bullet was shattered while one remained intact yet we have evidence that is exactly what happened. I wonder how he explains that.

[Michael T. Griffith]

MG: [Quoting physicist Howard Roffman]
The loss of a substantial quantity of brain tissue becomes significant when we consider Dr. Humes's testimony that the x-rays showed "30 or 40 tiny dustlike particle fragments" of metal in the President's head (2 H 353). Humes cautioned that the fragments that appeared to be "the size of dust particles" (2 H 359) on the x-rays would actually have been smaller because "x-ray pictures ... have a tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size" (2H353). Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman saw the x-rays during the autopsy and provided a similar description: " ... the whole head looked like a little mass of stars, there must have been 30, 40 lights where these little pieces were so minute that they couldn't be reached" (2 H 100). . . .

Dr. Fillinger tells me that the fragments described in the President's brain were not characteristic of a military round. . . . He feels that the break-up of the bullet is more consistent with a hunting round. . . .

The size and extent of the gaping defect, and the associated fracturing and fragmentation of the skull, are indicative of a high-velocity bullet's having struck the head to produce this damage. Dr. Fillinger has expressed to me his strong feeling that the extensive fragmentation of the skull is the consequence of a high-velocity round. He stated that the presence of such massive fracturing means that "there is a tremendous amount of force applied to the skull to produce all these fractures .. .. This has been pretty well fragmented, as a matter of fact," he told me, "and again, speaks for some sort of high-velocity round". . . .

Because there was great damage to the head and extensive bullet fragmentation in the brain, Dr. Fillinger was doubtful that the Mannlicher-Carcano could have produced these wounds. "To produce this kind of effect," he told me, "you have to have a very high-velocity projectile, and the Carcano will not stand very high bolt pressures."(Presumed Guilty, 1976, pp. 113-120)

Just as a reminder, Dr. Fillinger was a nationally recognized forensic pathologist, considered a "giant" in the field, who was known for handling the most serious cases. "The Halbert E. Fillinger Lifetime Achievement Award" was named after him to recognize outstanding contributors to forensic science. The International Association of Coroners and Medical Examiners chose Dr. Fillinger to represent them on the U.S. Department of Justice's National Medicolegal Review Panel. The website Practical Homicide says this about him:

The "Halbert E. Fillinger Lifetime Achievement Award" is named in honor of Dr. Halbert Fillinger, who was a forensic pathologist. His 40 years of service included his time as Chief Medical Examiner in the Philadelphia Medical Examiner's Office before being elected Coroner of Montgomery County, PA.

During his career, Dr. Fillinger lectured many times at the FBI academy in Quantico, Va., and all branches of the Armed Forces. Respected for his work, officials in the states of Texas, Michigan, Arkansas, Kentucky, Georgia, New York, New Jersey, and Colorado sought his advice. (https://www.practicalhomicide.com/current/Vidocq.html)

BTW, Dr. Fillinger regarded the SBT as pure bunk; he said there was just no way that CE 399 could have caused all of JFK's and Connally's non-fatal wounds and emerged virtually undamaged, especially with its lands and grooves intact (Roffman, Presumed Guilty, pp. 142-144).

JC: Now MTG pretends to be an expert in forensic pathology.

Huh? I was quoting a physicist who was discussing information he obtained directly from a renowned forensic pathologist when he interviewed him.

Tell us when Dr. Fillinger examined the medical evidence.

This is yet another lame dodge. Dr. Fillinger did not need to examine the medical evidence at the National Archives to comment on Humes's and Kellerman's WC testimony about the bullet fragmentation seen in the skull x-rays, and to comment on the fragmentation of the skull described by the autopsy doctors in their WC testimony and illustrated in the WC's two wound diagrams of the exit wound (CE 386 and CE 388). If he had examined the skull x-rays at the Archives, he would have seen the 30-40 tiny fragments that Humes and Kellerman described; and if he had examined the skull x-rays and autopsy photos at the Archives, he would have seen the skull damage that the autopsy doctors described and that the WC's wound diagrams illustrated.

So, now, what is your answer to Dr. Fillinger's point that FMJ ammo, especially FMJ ammo that was not traveling at a high velocity, would not have shattered into 30-40 tiny fragments and would not have caused the kind of extensive damage that was done to JFK's skull?

Notice that Dr. Fillinger's observations fit perfectly with Dr. Vincent DiMaio's observations about the behavior of FMJ bullets. Just to refresh your memory, once again, here's what Dr. DiMaio said on the subject:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Again, did you catch that? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment when they penetrate bone, they will only leave a "few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

On a side note, I trust you're aware that experts from both sides have described the cluster of 30-40 tiny fragments seen on the JFK skull x-rays as a "lead snowstorm."

The ammo that hit JFK's head could not have been FMJ ammo.

[John Corbett]

Huh? I was quoting a physicist who was discussing information he obtained directly from a renowned forensic pathologist when he interviewed him.

This is yet another lame dodge. Dr. Fillinger did not need to examine the medical evidence at the National Archives to comment on Humes's and Kellerman's WC testimony about the bullet fragmentation seen in the skull x-rays, and to comment on the fragmentation of the skull described by the autopsy doctors in their WC testimony and illustrated in the WC's two wound diagrams of the exit wound (CE 386 and CE 388). If he had examined the skull x-rays at the Archives, he would have seen the 30-40 tiny fragments that Humes and Kellerman described; and if he had examined the skull x-rays and autopsy photos at the Archives, he would have seen the skull damage that the autopsy doctors described and that the WC's wound diagrams illustrated.

So, now, what is your answer to Dr. Fillinger's point that FMJ ammo, especially FMJ ammo that was not traveling at a high velocity, would not have shattered into 30-40 tiny fragments and would not have caused the kind of extensive damage that was done to JFK's skull?

Notice that Dr. Fillinger's observations fit perfectly with Dr. Vincent DiMaio's observations about the behavior of FMJ bullets. Just to refresh your memory, once again, here's what Dr. DiMaio said on the subject:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Again, did you catch that? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment when they penetrate bone, they will only leave a "few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

On a side note, I trust you're aware that experts from both sides have described the cluster of 30-40 tiny fragments seen on the JFK skull x-rays as a "lead snowstorm."

The ammo that hit JFK's head could not have been FMJ ammo.

One question. How many instances of a FMJ Carcano bullet fragmenting has Dr. Fillinger observed, because those are the only ones pertinent to this case. Each FMJ bullet has unique characteristics based on factors such as bullet construction, shape, velocity, etc. It makes no sense to make a blanket statement regarding how all FMJ bullets will shatter. Given the rarity of FMJ bullets, it would not be surprising at all if Fillinger had never seen an example of a fragmented FMJ bullet.

[Zeon Mason]

The JFK brain matter that contained this trail of fine small particles was not preserved nor were those tiny particles ever removed and examined to see if they could be matched to 6.5 mm MC ammo.  Just coincidence?

[John Corbett]

The JFK brain matter that contained this trail of fine small particles was not preserved nor were those tiny particles ever removed and examined to see if they could be matched to 6.5 mm MC ammo.  Just coincidence?

Actually, fragments from the brain were compared to the fragments found inside the limo and fragments from JBC's wrist were compared to CE399, both by the FBI in 1964 and by Dr. Vincent Guinn for the HSCA in 1977. Ken Rahn wrote an excellent article about it. Rather than put my own spin on what those tests did or didn't prove, I'll post the article and everyone can decide for themselves.

https://kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/NAA/NAA_and_JFK_assassination.html

[Michael T. Griffith]

The JFK brain matter that contained this trail of fine small particles was not preserved nor were those tiny particles ever removed and examined to see if they could be matched to 6.5 mm MC ammo. Just coincidence?

Ditto for the 6.3 x 2.5 mm fragment in the rear outer table of the skull visible on the lateral x-rays. The autopsy doctors could not have missed this fragment, but they ignored it because they knew they couldn't associate it with the rear head entry wound. Sibert and O'Neill noted the fragment in their report on the autopsy, but Humes said nothing about it in the autopsy report.

The fragment is 9 cm above the rear head entry wound in the occiput and 1 cm below the phantom cowlick entry wound above the lambda in the parietal bone. The fragment doesn't fit with either entry site. Dr. Russell Fisher told Howard Donahue that he and the other Clark Panel members believed the fragment was a ricochet fragment. That is the only rational, scientifically plausible explanation.

For many years, WC defenders gleefully cited Dr. Vincent Guinn's 1977 NAA test. Guinn claimed that the test results showed that five JFKA bullet fragments came from just two bullets and that those two bullets came from the same batch of bullets that Oswald allegedly used, which in turn seemed to constitute conclusive scientific evidence for the single-bullet theory. However, Guinn's NAA claims were destroyed 20 years ago, first in 2006 by scientists Erik Randich and Patrick Grant, and again in 2007 by scientists Cliff Spiegelman, William Tobin, William James, Simon Sheather, and D. Max Roundhill.

This was, and remains, historic because if the five fragments came from three or more bullets, instead of just two, that would mean a second gunman's bullet must have hit JFK, as the scientists themselves explained.

So convincing were the refutations of Guinn's NAA findings that former HSCA chief counsel G. Robert Blakey denounced Guinn's NAA research as "junk science." Blakey had been deeply impressed with Guinn's NAA findings when they were presented to him in 1977. In fact, he leaked them to the press early in 1978 as decisive proof of Oswald's guilt. But, to his credit, when Blakey read the 2006 and 2007 refutations, he repudiated Guinn's NAA claims.

Summary of Randich and Grant's article in the Journal of Forensic Sciences
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/death-of-the-naa-verdict

"Chemical and Forensic Analysis of JFK Assassination Bullet Lots: Is a Second Shooter Possible?" (Spiegelman, Tobin,  James, Sheather, and Roundhill)
https://share.google/dfrci1tNxtQrbGHTz

[John Corbett]

Huh? I was quoting a physicist who was discussing information he obtained directly from a renowned forensic pathologist when he interviewed him.

This is yet another lame dodge. Dr. Fillinger did not need to examine the medical evidence at the National Archives to comment on Humes's and Kellerman's WC testimony about the bullet fragmentation seen in the skull x-rays, and to comment on the fragmentation of the skull described by the autopsy doctors in their WC testimony and illustrated in the WC's two wound diagrams of the exit wound (CE 386 and CE 388). If he had examined the skull x-rays at the Archives, he would have seen the 30-40 tiny fragments that Humes and Kellerman described; and if he had examined the skull x-rays and autopsy photos at the Archives, he would have seen the skull damage that the autopsy doctors described and that the WC's wound diagrams illustrated.

Why of course. Who needs to see the stinking medical evidence when second hand accounts are available. The FPP did see all the medical evidence and they concurred with the autopsy conclusion that the bullet that entered JFK's back exited from his throat. That finding was unanimous. But we should disregard that because of a conclusion by Fillinger based on what he read from Humes's and Kellerman's WC testimony. Do you have any idea how laughable that is?

So, now, what is your answer to Dr. Fillinger's point that FMJ ammo, especially FMJ ammo that was not traveling at a high velocity, would not have shattered into 30-40 tiny fragments and would not have caused the kind of extensive damage that was done to JFK's skull?

If he had never seen a case of what a 6.5mm FMJ Carcano bullet does when it strikes a skull, his observations are nothing more than educated guesses.

Notice that Dr. Fillinger's observations fit perfectly with Dr. Vincent DiMaio's observations about the behavior of FMJ bullets. Just to refresh your memory, once again, here's what Dr. DiMaio said on the subject:

Again, I have to remind you that not all FMJ ammo is the same. They have different shapes, constructions, velocities, etc., all of which will impact what happens to the bullet when it strikes a hard surface like a human skull. FMJ bullets come in a wide variety of shapes, calibers, velocities, etc. It is ludicrous to assume they will all fragment in the same manner when striking a human skull.

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Again, did you catch that? Let's review: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment when they penetrate bone, they will only leave a "few" fragments. And (2) if an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

On a side note, I trust you're aware that experts from both sides have described the cluster of 30-40 tiny fragments seen on the JFK skull x-rays as a "lead snowstorm."

So? [quote[

The ammo that hit JFK's head could not have been FMJ ammo.
[/quote]

An idiotic, statement made by an .....well, I don't need to say it.