The JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate
Fourth Edition of "Forensic Science and President Kennedy's Head Wounds"
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Stewart Fillmore on September 02, 2026, 05:49:15 AM ---I don’t believe there were any bullet fragments in the chest, as per Dr Shaw’s WC testimony. But he did have fragments in the wrist and leg. The wrist wound is troublesome when you analyze the holes in the suit and shirt sleeves, and the pants. Using both mannequins and a live stand in, I’ve run string through pre cut holes in a suit and shirt with French cuffs in the exact locations documented in the official record. For the string to align, the French cuff had to be completely out of the suit sleeve and the forearm pronated (thumb down) to the near extreme end of its range. Also the exit hole in the French cuff was jagged and highly irregular—almost a zig zag shape. And yet the entry hole in the pants was round and the flesh wound in the leg described as “punctate” by Dr Shires. The odds of a completely unstable bullet making the irregular exit hole in the cuff and within a few inches landing presumably base first to make a round hole has to be astronomical.
--- End quote ---
FBI firearms examiner Robert Frazier said that he could make no determinations from the holes in the shirt and jacket due to the fact that they had been laundered. I assume that the pants had been cleaned as well.
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Stewart Fillmore on September 04, 2026, 01:27:36 AM ---I’m not aware of Lattimer duplicating the overall shot with dummies set up in the same relative positions as JFK and JBC as Alex Krstic (the Australian test) did on the Unsolved History episode. Lattimer duplicated several elements of the SBT but if he did an overall reconstruction, I’d like to see his results if you can tell me where I could find it.
The Krstic test actually set up the reconstruction pretty rigorously following the parameters of the shot with JFK and JBC in their relative positions. They marked the entry point approximately 14 cm below the dummy’s mastoid process. They shot from 60 feet up and hit just a little low and left of the aim point. They showed a graphic from a side view showing the bullet exited in JFK’s chest, well below the throat. They failed to show the actual exit point but through a narrator said the single bullet theory worked. The bullet’s nose was flattened and the bullet shaft bent. The narrator explained that the nose was flattened because the bullet struck two ribs in the test—otherwise it would have been very similar to 399. They forgot to add that 399 struck JBC’s wrist bone.
But you’re absolutely correct about the alignment issues. My testing on both the range and with a 1:1 model of the limousine using mannequins and stand ins, has revealed neither the vertical angle (slope), nor the horizontal angle (right to left direction) of the shot works. The 17 degree slope of the shot exits 2 1/2 inches below the throat with an entry on the suit coat 5 3/8 inches below the top of the collar (with the coat bunched approximately 2 inches). It gets further out of whack with the 13 degree right to left aspect of the shot. My testing has revealed JBC’s midline sitting centered in a 20.5 inch wide jump seat placed 2.5 inches from the car door had to be moved 9 inches inboard for the shot to align. This was done with string run through pre cut holes in the mannequins/stand ins clothes at the exact FBI measurements. The string forces the geometry and I think is more compelling than animated reconstructions.
--- End quote ---
Connally's jump seat wasn't 2.5 inches from the car door. The 2.5 inches is from the draft diagram of the limo, not the completed product. Secret Service agent Thomas Kelley measured the distance from the Jump seat to the door to be 6 inches. The ITEK Corporation film analysis of the assassination measured Connally to be as much as 8.6 inches inboard of Kennedy. When factoring in the approximate 30 degree right rotation of Connally at the time of the single bullet shot, the lateral trajectory is easily made to work.
The vertical angle of trajectory through Kennedy was about 17.5 degrees. I assure you that it does work. I would show it to you visually but apparently we are not supposed to use Imgur here. This information found in the Clark Panel report should help you visualize it though.
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md59/html/Image07.htm
Examination of photographs of anterior and posterior views of thorax, and anterior, posterior and lateral views of neck (Photographs 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 38, 39, 40, 41).
"There is an elliptical penetrating wound of the skin of the back located approximately 15 cm. medial to the right acromial process, 5 cm. lateral to the mid-dorsal line and 14 cm. below the right mastoid process. This wound lies approximately 5.5 cm. below a transverse fold in the skin of the neck. This fold can also be seen in a lateral view of the neck which shows an anterior tracheotomy wound. This view makes it possible to compare the levels of these two wounds in relation to that of the horizontal plane of the body. A well defined zone of discoloration of the edge of the back wound, most pronounced on its upper and outer margins, identifies it as having the characteristics of the entrance wound of a bullet. The wound with its marginal abrasion measures approximately 7 mm. in width by 10 mm. in length. The dimensions of this cutaneous wound are consistent with those of a wound produced by a bullet similar to that which constitutes exhibit CE 399. At the site of and above the tracheotomy incision in the front of the neck, there can be identified the upper half of the circumference of a circular cutaneous wound the appearance of which is characteristic of that of the exit wound of a bullet. The lower half of this circular wound is obscured by the surgically produced tracheotomy incision which transects it. The center of the circular wound is situated approximately 9 cm. below the transverse fold in the skin of the neck described in a preceding paragraph. This indicates that the bullet which produced the two wounds followed a course downward and to the left in its passage through the body."
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Stewart Fillmore on September 04, 2026, 02:13:02 AM --- Dr Shaw described the wound as elliptical and 1.5 cm in its greatest diameter. He later told the HSCA he felt the wound was from a tangential entry rather than a yawing bullet. But I agree, an elongated wound could indicate the bullet had been knocked off a stable trajectory (ie going thru JFK first). However, Connally said consistently until the day he died that he was turning as he was hit. I know from many firearms training sessions in the FBI using turning targets that a stable bullet striking a rotating target will leave an elongated entry. So I did tests on the range shooting into the Connally target while it was rotated from its right to left. The results were an elongated entry approximately 1.5 cm wide.
--- End quote ---
Dr. Shaw recorded in his Nov 22, 1963 operative report on Connally that the wound was approximately 3 cm in length. Even at his revised length of 1.5 cm the bullet had to have been tumbling. Wound ballistics expert Larry Sturdivan testified to that fact before the HSCA. Linked to below are graphics provided by the HSCA that explain the difference between a tangential strike and a strike by a bullet that is yawed. Unfortunately they mislabeled them.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0089a.htm
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0088b.htm
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Stewart Fillmore on September 04, 2026, 02:13:02 AM ---Indeed the Carcano bullet tends to yaw upon exiting. I’ve recreated it with ballistic dummies with pigskin wrapped around the neck while wearing a dress shirt, necktie and suit coat. In fact most times (3 of 4 in my testing) made full side on entries in the Connally dummy. But Connally’s jacket didn’t reflect a side on entry but a 1/2 by 3/8 inch hole (which was compromised as evidence because it was dry cleaned before being properly analyzed. Haag incorrectly said that Connally had a full side on wound. Dr Shaw described the wound as elliptical and 1.5 cm in its greatest diameter. He later told the HSCA he felt the wound was from a tangential entry rather than a yawing bullet. But I agree, an elongated wound could indicate the bullet had been knocked off a stable trajectory (ie going thru JFK first). However, Connally said consistently until the day he died that he was turning as he was hit. I know from many firearms training sessions in the FBI using turning targets that a stable bullet striking a rotating target will leave an elongated entry. So I did tests on the range shooting into the Connally target while it was rotated from its right to left. The results were an elongated entry approximately 1.5 cm wide.
Regarding the Australian test, if you’re talking about the one done for Unsolved History (JFK Beyond the Magic Bullet) by Alex Krstic, they didn’t shoot animals (the Edgewood testing did) but ballistic dummies with bones embedded in the Connally dummy. They set it up following the SBT parameters fairly accurately. Yet despite an exit well below the throat in JFK’s chest. They recovered the bullet and its nose was deformed and the shaft of the bullet was bent. Despite both these discrepancies, the narrator stated the single bullet theory had been confirmed.
Interestingly when I first started my testing, I tried simply to replicate the 1/2 inch overlapping vertical slits in the dress that J Edgar Hoover told the WC was typical of a bullet exiting cloth. I also faithfully set up my dummy (with the same ballistic gel covered around the neck with pigskin and wearing a suit) by the WC parameters. My aim point was 5 3/8 inches below the top of the suit collar with the jacket bunched approximately 2 inches and the dummy sitting normally upright. With a 17 degree shot to that point, I not only got a round exit hole but an exit in the chest 2 1/2 inches below the throat. To get the bullet to exit near the shirt collar, it took a near horizontal shot aimed at the suit collar. I ran it 19 times and got 19 round exit holes—not a single vertical slit. But the trajectory discrepancy really intrigued me and led to the remainder of my SBT testing.
--- End quote ---
So you want to dismiss the Aussie test because the bullet didn't come out looking exactly like CE399. IOW, you expect a perfect replication. Why would CE399 have a damaged nose if the nose never struck bone. The smaller exit wound in JBC's chest simply indicates it had continued to yaw as it passed through his chest and had down almost a full 180 by the time it exited his chest and headed toward his wrist.
You didn't even try to explain why if JBC wasn't far enough to the left of JFK to be struck next to his right armpit that the bullet didn't hit JBC farther to the left on his back. How could a bullet exiting JFK's throat have missed him completely? I've never seen a CT who claimed that JBC's wounds didn't line up with JFK's exit wound even try to explain that.
A bullet striking JFK two inches to the right of his spine and exiting from the center of his throat would have been going directly at JBC's back and would have to have hit him somewhere. We know what they somewhere was. Furthermore, how could a different bullet whether from Oswald's gun or a second shooter have hit JBC next to his armpit, exited from below his right nipple, and hit his wrist with JFK in the way? People who dispute the SBT never seem to have any interest in providing a plausible alternative. You'd think if the SBT was false, somebody could have at least come up with a plausible alternative after 62 years. As it is, the SBT wins by default as the only plausible explanation for JFK's non-fatal wounds and all of JBC's wounds.
Michael T. Griffith:
--- Quote from: Tim Nickerson on September 04, 2026, 03:47:26 AM ---Have you read the WC Testimonies of Alfred Olivier and Arthur Dziemian and their "Wound Ballistics of 6.5 mm Mannlicher Carcano Ammunition" report? Their firing of WCC 6.5 mm FMJ bullets into the skulls of human cadavers resulted in the bullets massively fragmenting and the heads exploding as well.
--- End quote ---
This is incorrect, as I've explained to you before in other threads, and as I document in my article "Forensic Science and President Kennedy's Head Wounds," which is the subject of this thread. Have you read my article yet? It deals extensively with the WC's head-shot wound-ballistics test.
For starters -- again, as I've pointed out to you before -- the extant x-rays of the skulls from the WC's test refute any notion that the bullets exploded into dozens of fragments, much less that their fragmentation pattern resembles the pattern we see in the JFK autopsy skull x-rays.
Dr. Olivier specified to Howard Donahue in 1969 that the bullets in the WC's test only broke into a few fragments each time.
Even if we take CE 857 and CE 859 at face value, they show that the WC's test did not duplicate the fragmentation seen in the autopsy skull x-rays. Rather than reinvent the wheel, I quote from my article:
CE 859 shows more fragments than are seen in CE 857. It appears to show between 26 and 30 fragments, and all of them are either small or very small—not one of them is as large as the two large fragments seen in CE 857.
Yet, even CE 859 shows fewer fragments than the JFK autopsy skull x-rays show. The skull x-rays show about 40 tiny fragments just in the right-frontal region alone—these fragments have been described as a "snowstorm.” To the viewer's left of this fragment cloud we see a number of other fragments that are larger in size than the cloud fragments and that extend upward to a point at least 1 inch from the debunked cowlick entry site. Not one of the bullets in Olivier's
head-shot test deposited a "snowstorm" of tiny fragments in the right-frontal region, or in any region, and none of them left a trail of fragments that ranged upward from the fragment cloud.
In addition, the JFK autopsy skull x-rays show at least two fragments on the back of the skull, one in the outer table and another between the galea and the outer table. Not one of the bullets in the WC's tests deposited fragments on or above the outer table.
Given Dr. Olivier’s statements to Donahue in 1969, and given the obvious discrepancy between the fragments seen in CE 857 and CE 859, it seems apparent that the two exhibits consist of fragments from more than just one of the FMJ bullets, and perhaps from all 10 of the FMJ bullets, that were fired in Olivier’s test.
Furthermore, if the CE 857 and CE 859 fragments really came from only one of the test bullets, what about the fragments from the nine other bullets? Leaving aside the fact that the two exhibits obviously do not contain the same fragments, even though Dr. Olivier said they should, the fact that no fragments from the nine other bullets were identified as such or entered into evidence as such raises serious doubts about the integrity of the two exhibits. (pp. 12-13)
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version