Fourth Edition of "Forensic Science and President Kennedy's Head Wounds"

[Tim Nickerson]

I think more specifically Frazier testified he could not determine directionality and metal content because the clothes had been compromised by the dry cleaning.   However he acknowledged that some type of missile caused the damage.  Thus it’s possible to recreate the holes in surrogate clothes based on the documented measurements/locations of the bullet holes and run string through the holes to get some idea of the path.  I did it with a mannequin arm with holes in it corresponding to JBC’s wounds and with a stand in with string taped to the corresponding locations of the wounds.  It revealed the French cuff had to be entirely out of the suit sleeve and the forearm pronated to an extreme degree of its range.  It’s entirely possible that’s how JBC was sitting but it’s an awkward position.

Frazier said that he couldn't even say that the holes in the clothes were actually bullet holes.

[Tim Nickerson]

I think more specifically Frazier testified he could not determine directionality and metal content because the clothes had been compromised by the dry cleaning.   However he acknowledged that some type of missile caused the damage.  Thus it’s possible to recreate the holes in surrogate clothes based on the documented measurements/locations of the bullet holes and run string through the holes to get some idea of the path.  I did it with a mannequin arm with holes in it corresponding to JBC’s wounds and with a stand in with string taped to the corresponding locations of the wounds.  It revealed the French cuff had to be entirely out of the suit sleeve and the forearm pronated to an extreme degree of its range.  It’s entirely possible that’s how JBC was sitting but it’s an awkward position.

I don't think it would be possible to recreate the holes in surrogate clothes to any good degree of accuracy, even if Connally's clothes hadn't been washed. Fabric stretches, and not all fabric stretches the same.

[Stewart Fillmore]

Frazier said that he couldn't even say that the holes in the clothes were actually bullet holes.

He testified they were consistent with being bullet holes but he could not determine directionality.  He must have presumed they were bullet holes however because in his testimony regarding the May 1964 reconstruction, he offered no resistance to being asked if all the holes in the clothes of both men reasonably aligned. 

[Tim Nickerson]

He testified they were consistent with being bullet holes but he could not determine directionality.  He must have presumed they were bullet holes however because in his testimony regarding the May 1964 reconstruction, he offered no resistance to being asked if all the holes in the clothes of both men reasonably aligned.

At the time of his post May 24, 1964 testimony, he was assuming that they were bullet holes. And rightly so. The questions that he was being asked in the testimony about trajectory alignment seemed rather pointless after he pointed out to Specter that he hadn't made a very thorough study of the Zapruder film.

[John Corbett]

At the time of his post May 24, 1964 testimony, he was assuming that they were bullet holes. And rightly so. The questions that he was being asked in the testimony about trajectory alignment seemed rather pointless after he pointed out to Specter that he hadn't made a very thorough study of the Zapruder film.

JBC had a hole in his back and another in his chest. His clothes had holes in the same location. Who in their right mind would argue that the holes in his body and the holes in his clothes were not caused by the same bullet?