This is yet another one of your dishonest juvenile dodges in which you once again hilariously dismiss the science of wound-ballistics testing. Obviously, you don't have a shred of evidence to back up your grasping fiction that WCC 6.5 mm FMJ bullets behave differently than other FMJ bullets, because then, among other things, you'd have to explain why the FMJ bullets in the Failure Analysis test did not even fragment after penetrating skull bone.
As usual, you have things bassackwards. You are the one who is asserting that a Carcano bullet could not have been the one that struck JFK in the head because of the way it fragmented so the burden is on you to prove that. The simple fact is a fragmented Carcano bullet is the only one recovered from the limo so that is prima facia evidence it was the one that caused the head wound. No other bullets or fragments from any other bullet was recovered in the limo which would be a very strange occurrence if another type of bullet had struck JFK in the head. Maybe it was one of those magic bullets that completely vanish after striking the victim.
DiMaio was talking about the behavior of all FMJ bullets, period. DiMaio certainly would have said something if the millions of 6.5 mm FMJ bullets manufactured by the Western Cartridge Company behaved differently than other FMJ bullets, especially since tens of thousands of those bullets were still being used when he wrote the first and second editions of his book (first edition in 1985, second in 1999).
BTW, WCC produced 4 million 6.5 mm FMJ bullets in 1954 alone.
Of those 4 million FMJ Carcano bullets, how many were determined to have struck a victim in the head? I know of only one such case. Apparently you don't know of any others either.
You keep making false statements about the number of headshot wound-ballistics tests that have used WCC 6.5 mm FMJ ammo: the WC's test, Lattimer's test, and DeSalles' test, all of which failed to duplicate the behavior of the ammo that hit JFK's head. Are you ever going to explain why the x-rays of the test skulls in the WC's test show bullet fragmentation that looks nothing like that seen in the JFK autopsy skull x-rays, both in the number of fragments and in their distribution patterns?
I have told you on numerous occasions that every shooting is unique and that it is almost impossible to perfectly duplicate any shooting. Perhaps you can point to a case in which that was done.
And let me just remind you, again, that your side's leading wound-ballistics experts, Dr. Larry Sturdivan, has admitted that the bullets that Oswald allegedly used would never, ever have deposited a fragment from their cross-section on the outer table of a skull at or near the entry point.
When did Larry Sturdivan end up on my side. You have this quirky idea that all LNs think alike.
Finally, I notice you said nothing about your gaffe that the distance a bullet travels is irrelevant to how it performs. This is so typical of you: you make a blundering, idiotic claim and then you either refuse to acknowledge your blunder when it is pointed out to you or you blame the blunder on some faulty source that you should have known better than to consult in the first place.
I said velocity is what matters to how a bullet will behave when striking an object.
