You again blunder over information that has been known for decades. First off, you realize that the term "several" can refer to as many as nine or 10, right? You can Google it.
If a majority of the FPP disagreed with the upward-trajectory finding, why does the FPP's SBT diagram (7 HSCA 100, Figure 12) show the bullet traveling upward through the neck and show JFK leaning substantially forward? Why did Dr. Baden, the FPP chairman, demonstrate an upward trajectory through the neck with a wooden pointer in his filmed interview for NOVA's 1988 JFKA documentary, and why did Baden then lean markedly forward, still holding the pointer, to show how an upward trajectory through the neck could line up with the sixth-floor window? And, why does the FPP's report say that the back wound's abrasion collar is "evidence that the bullet's trajectory at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the body"? Let's read what the FPP said on this issue:
A red-brown to black area of skin surrounds the wound, forming what is called an abrasion collar. It was caused by the bullet's scraping the margins of the skin on penetration and is characteristic of a gunshot wound of entrance. The abrasion collar is larger at the lower margin of the wound, evidence that the bullet's trajectory at the instant of penetration was slightly upward in relation to the body. (7 HSCA 175)
Of course, one major problem is that no photo or frame shows JFK leaning as far forward as the FPP and Baden had to assume he was.
When there were no dissenting views, the report says "the panel". When there were dissenting views but still a majority view, the report says "a majority of the panel". "Several members of the panel" is several members, not the panel as a whole. Not even a majority. Baden was one of the several. He used his influence to have those drawings published in the report as "possible trajectories through the neck". In his later interviews in which he leans markedly forward, Baden was representing his view and that of two or three others of the panel.
On edit: The report, in at least one entry, does say "Most panel members".
Uh, yes, I already pointed this out. You realize that T1 was below the throat wound, right? Right? Look at the FPP's SBT diagram (7 HSCA 100, Figure 12). Here's a link to it:
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fichier:HSCA-JFK-neck2-6-43.jpg
Notice that the diagram shows the bullet entering slightly below the throat wound. Why do you suppose that not a single pro-SBT diagram acknowledges the FPP's location for the back wound and the FPP's depiction of an upward trajectory through the neck? Humm? Why do you suppose that is?
You already pointed what out? What does "superior" mean? T1 was not below the throat wound.
No single pro-SBT diagram acknowledges that the bullet made an upward trajectory through the neck because not even the "several members of the FPP" believed that the bullet made an upward path through the neck. I'm not aware of a single maker of a Pro-SBT diagram who agreed, or agrees, with the 11 degree angle belief of those several members of the HSCA FPP.
The FPP placed the "back wound" about 6 cm below a transverse fold in the skin of the neck. That skin fold is also visible in the left lateral view. The wound in the throat is also visible in that left lateral view. The Clark Panel measured the wound in the throat to be 9 cm below that fold in the skin of the neck.
What?! The drawing was made under Humes's direction and instruction. The medical artist, Harold Rydberg, only drew what Humes told him to draw; Humes presented the drawing to the WC as an accurate depiction of the SBT's trajectory through the neck; and the WC cited the drawing three times in the Warren Report and published it as an exhibit. The drawing, CE 385, shows the back wound above the throat wound and has the bullet traveling downward through the neck.
Humes was not standing over Rydberg's shoulder as Rydberg made his drawings. He was not responsible for how the drawings turned out.
And every single pro-SBT trajectory illustration, from Lattimer's diagrams to Myers' fraudulent animation, erroneously has the mythical magic bullet traveling downward through JFK's neck.
T1 is not in the "low neck." The neck ends at C7. The "C" stands for "cervical." The "T" stands for "thoracic." The FPP correctly referred to the T1 location as being "in the back area" and noted it was "a few inches lower" than where Humes placed it in CE 385 (1 HSCA 256).
It is just incredible that you guys still refuse to deal with the fact that the only way to make the T1 location and its upward trajectory work for the SBT is to make the demonstrably false assumption that JFK was leaning markedly forward when the bullet struck.
Every single pro-SBT trajectory illustration has the single bullet traveling downward through JFK's neck because Humes said that it did in his sworn WC testimony. That same testimony that both Boswell and Finck said that they concurred with in their own sworn WC testimonies.
Low neck is the low neck. Humes testified that the wound was in the low neck.
Commander HUMES - The wound in the low neck of which I had previously begun to speak is now posteriorly--is now depicted in 385, in 386 and in 388.
....
Commander HUMES - You will note that the wound in the posterior portion of the occiput on Exhibit 388 is somewhat longer than the other missile wound which we have not yet discussed in the low neck.
.....
Commander HUMES - I--our previously submitted report, which is Commission No. 387, identified a wound in the low posterior neck of the President.
.....
Commander HUMES - In attempting to relate findings within the President's body to this wound which we had observed low in his neck, we then opened his chest cavity, and we very carefully examined the lining of his chest cavity and both of his lungs.
.....
Commander HUMES - The angle which we observed in measuring, in comparing the point of entrance, our point of entrance labeled "C" on 385 and "D" point of exit is one that the point of exit is below the point of entrance compared with the vertical.
.....
Commander HUMES - The report which we have submitted, sir, represents our thinking within the 24-48 hours of the death of the President, all facts taken into account of the situation.
The wound in the anterior portion of the lower neck is physically lower than the point of entrance posteriorly, sir.Both Boswell and Finck concurred with Humes in their own sworn WC testimonies.
JFK's physique gave the impressive that he was hunched forward. Using the Croft photo, Thomas Canning estimated him to be hunched forward between 11 and 18 degrees.
Your denial of obvious reality here is akin to your long-standing refusal to acknowledge the fact that JFK's clothing clearly, self-evidently refutes any notion that the back-wound bullet exited the throat. Objective people can read your grasping replies in my threads "JFK's Clothing Refutes the Single-Bullet Theory" and "JFK's Throat Wound Was an Entrance Wound: Refuting the Shored-Wound Theory" and see that you guys have no tenable, sensible explanation for the clothing evidence.
JFK's jacket can clearly be seen to be bunched up as the motorcade made it's way through Dallas. Considering that the hole in the shirt matches up with the hole in the jacket, we can safely assume that it was bunched up as well. 1 inch of bunch-up raises the material below a little more than 2 inches. 1.5 inches of bunch-up raises the material below a little more than 3 inches. That's factoring in the crown.
If you guys were dealing rationally and credibly with the evidence, you would have abandoned the SBT way back when we learned (1) that there was no hole through JFK's tie and no nick on either edge of the tie knot, and (2) that the bullet holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat were over 5 inches below the collar.
If you were dealing rationally and credibly with the evidence you would accept that the single bullet theory should be known as the single bullet fact. You would not be denying the evidence. You would accept that the autopsy photos and x-Rays are genuine and unaltered. You would accept that the entry wound on Kennedy was between 5 and 6 cm below a transverse fold in the skin on the back of the neck.
