The JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate
Dr. Baden Refuted the Single-Bullet Theory
Michael T. Griffith:
I'm sure readers have noticed that WC apologists, as evidenced by Tim Nickerson's labored and errant replies, still have not been able to explain the fact that the back-wound bullet could not have come from the sixth-floor window unless JFK had been leaning markedly forward when the missile struck, and that no photo or frame shows JFK's head tilted anywhere near that far forward, if at all.
Incredibly, Nickerson can't even admit what the HSCA's SBT diagram plainly shows, and he's still erroneously denying that Rydberg drew CE 385 under Humes's direct and point-by-point supervision, even though Humes and Rydberg themselves made this clear. I find it amazing that Nickerson actually cites Humes's descriptions of the back wound to support the claim that the wound was in the neck and not in the back, never mind the bullet holes in the rear of JFK's clothing, never mind the autopsy photo of the back wound, never mind the autopsy face sheet, never mind the "certified" death certificate, and never mind the HSCA FPP's SBT diagram. I see Nickerson even resorts to the ridiculous bunched-clothing theory, ignoring the fact that no photo or frame shows the jacket bunched nearly enough to make the holes align with a wound several inches higher, and ignoring the fact that Willis slide 5, taken much closer to the moment of impact, shows the jacket virtually flat on JFK's back.
This thread is a great example of the fact that WC apologists have largely ignored the HSCA FPP's findings about the back wound's location (slightly below the throat wound or, at the most, level with it) and the bullet's upward trajectory. In their various and conflicting SBT diagrams/animations, WC defenders always (1) have JFK sitting upright with his head held upright or tilted only slightly forward, (2) have the bullet traveling downward through the neck.
It is worth remembering that Dr. Werner Spitz, a prominent forensic pathologist who served on the RC's medical panel and on the HSCA FPP, informed the RC in 1975 that there was "no doubt" that the back-wound bullet hit the back "in a sharply upward direction" and that it traveled "upwards within the body":
There is no doubt that the bullet which struck the President’s back penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction, as is evident from the width of the abrasion at the lower half of the bullet wound of entrance. The term "sharply upward direction" is used because it is evident from this injury that the missile traveled upwards within the body. (Report of Werner Spitz, 4/24/75, p. 1, Rockefeller Commission papers)
Spitz was either unaware that these facts destroyed the SBT or he dismissed as irrelevant all the photos and footage taken of JFK during the SBT's timeframe. Ditto for Dr. Baden when he demonstrated in the 1988 NOVA JFKA documentary that the alleged magic bullet's trajectory would have been upward through the neck and that this trajectory could only align with the sixth-floor window if JFK had been leaning markedly forward when the bullet struck.
Jack Nessan:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 16, 2026, 02:49:48 PM ---I'm sure readers have noticed that WC apologists, as evidenced by Tim Nickerson's labored and errant replies, still have not been able to explain the fact that the back-wound bullet could not have come from the sixth-floor window unless JFK had been leaning markedly forward when the missile struck, and that no photo or frame shows JFK's head tilted anywhere near that far forward, if at all.
Incredibly, Nickerson can't even admit what the HSCA's SBT diagram plainly shows, and he's still erroneously denying that Rydberg drew CE 385 under Humes's direct and point-by-point supervision, even though Humes and Rydberg themselves made this clear. I find it amazing that Nickerson actually cites Humes's descriptions of the back wound to support the claim that the wound was in the neck and not in the back, never mind the bullet holes in the rear of JFK's clothing, never mind the autopsy photo of the back wound, never mind the autopsy face sheet, never mind the "certified" death certificate, and never mind the HSCA FPP's SBT diagram. I see Nickerson even resorts to the ridiculous bunched-clothing theory, ignoring the fact that no photo or frame shows the jacket bunched nearly enough to make the holes align with a wound several inches higher, and ignoring the fact that Willis slide 5, taken much closer to the moment of impact, shows the jacket virtually flat on JFK's back.
This thread is a great example of the fact that WC apologists have largely ignored the HSCA FPP's findings about the back wound's location (slightly below the throat wound or, at the most, level with it) and the bullet's upward trajectory. In their various and conflicting SBT diagrams/animations, WC defenders always (1) have JFK sitting upright with his head held upright or tilted only slightly forward, (2) have the bullet traveling downward through the neck.
It is worth remembering that Dr. Werner Spitz, a prominent forensic pathologist who served on the RC's medical panel and on the HSCA FPP, informed the RC in 1975 that there was "no doubt" that the back-wound bullet hit the back "in a sharply upward direction" and that it traveled "upwards within the body":
There is no doubt that the bullet which struck the President’s back penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction, as is evident from the width of the abrasion at the lower half of the bullet wound of entrance. The term "sharply upward direction" is used because it is evident from this injury that the missile traveled upwards within the body. (Report of Werner Spitz, 4/24/75, p. 1, Rockefeller Commission papers)
Spitz was either unaware that these facts destroyed the SBT or he dismissed as irrelevant all the photos and footage taken of JFK during the SBT's timeframe. Ditto for Dr. Baden when he demonstrated in the 1988 NOVA JFKA documentary that the alleged magic bullet's trajectory would have been upward through the neck and that this trajectory could only align with the sixth-floor window if JFK had been leaning far forward when the bullet struck.
--- End quote ---
Same useless crap. Stop being such a coward, stop hiding. Explain a separate wound to JBC if you don't think SBT is correct. Here are the facts you can use. 45 Degree downward angle through JBC's chest with a 10 degree medial angle right to left, this should help with your explanation.
I will start you off locating the shooter. For every 1 foot horizontal, you go 1 foot vertical. Maybe math is not your thing. If the shooter was 200 feet away, he would also be 200 feet off the ground. Should be easy to locate that building in Dealey Plaza or maybe not.
Explain the different medical wounds JBC would have suffered with a direct nose on bullet instead of one that was in the process of yawing after having passed through JFK. Hint: the rib damage would be way different.
C'mon you can do it. Your MTG weaver of tall tales.
Michael T. Griffith:
Since it is obvious that lone-gunman theorists here are simply not going to admit that the HSCA FPP's SBT actually destroys the SBT, let us take a moment to revisit the fact that there were too many bullet fragments deposited in Connally's body to have come from CE 399, the SBT's alleged bullet.
In his 11/29/63 supplemental x-ray report on Connally's wounds, Dr. Jack Reynolds, Parkland Hospital's chief radiologist and later a professor or radiology at Southwestern Medical School, said the metal fragment in Connally's thigh measured approximately 3.5 mm x 1.3 mm on the AP x-ray and about 2.0 mm x 1.5 mm on the lateral x-ray, so it was definitely somewhat dense and not any kind of a "flake":
There is, however, one density which remains constant on both films and appears to lie beneath the skin of the region of the subcutaneous fat in the medial aspect of the thigh meters posterior to the exterior of the anterior cortex. The shape of this density is irregular but is roughly oval. Precise measurements are difficult but it is estimated that the greatest length in the AP projection is about 3.5 millimeters and the greatest width about 1.3 millimeters.
Measurements of the densities in the lateral projection reveal the greatest length to be about 2 millimeters and the greatest width to be about 1.5 millimeters The long axis of the metallic object is oriented generally along the axis of the femur. ("Supplemental Report Describing in Detail the Appearance and Location of a Small Metallic Density Superimposed on the Soft Tissue Shadows of the Medial Aspect of the Left Thigh of Governor John Connally on Films Dated November 22, 1963," 11/29/63, pp. 1-2)
In his 11/9/77 HSCA interview, Dr. Reynolds said the identifiable opacity in the thigh x-rays "definitely has metal characteristics" and that his 11/29/63 report describing "the location of this fragment" was "correct":
Dr. Reynolds stated that an identifiable opacity exists in the thigh x-rays and that it definitely has metal characteristics. He stated that his 11-29-62 report, describing the location of this fragment as just beneath the skin in the region of the subcutaneous fat, is correct. (7 HSCA 320)
In addition, Dr. Reynolds said there were "at least" four bullet fragments visible in Connally's wrist wound:
After examining the original and the enhanced x-rays, Dr . Reynolds stated that there are at least four fragments of metal identifiable in Gov. Connally's wrist wound (7 HSCA 320)
The wrist fragments and the thigh fragment could not have come from CE 399, given that the bullet was missing less than 4 grains of its substance. Russell Kent:
Dr. Gregory, Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, testified that he removed two fragments (but left other small fragments in the wound). These became Warren Commission Exhibit (CE) 842 below in Figure 32. There is no explanation of how the two fragments became four.
On 29th November 1963, Parkland Memorial Hospital sent Connally’s x-rays to the FBI. The dimensions of the fragment left in his thigh, as shown on one of the x-rays, were 3.5 mm by 1.3 mm.
These are quite large fragments. It is reasonable to doubt that these fragments came from CE 399. (JFK Medical Betrayal: Where the Evidence Lies, pp. 210-211).
As I've pointed out previously, before they knew what they were supposed to say, before the SBT emerged as the explanation for JFK and Connally's non-fatal wounds, even Dr. Humes and Dr. Finck said that Dr. Gregory's 11/22/63 operative report described too many bullet fragments to have from CE 399 (2 H 374-375; 2 H 382).
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 16, 2026, 05:26:23 PM ---Since it is obvious that lone-gunman theorists here are simply not going to admit that the HSCA FPP's SBT actually destroys the SBT, let us take a moment to revisit the fact that there were too many bullet fragments deposited in Connally's body to have come from CE 399, the SBT's alleged bullet.
In his 11/29/63 supplemental x-ray report on Connally's wounds, Dr. Jack Reynolds, Parkland Hospital's chief radiologist and later a professor or radiology at Southwestern Medical School, said the metal fragment in Connally's thigh measured approximately 3.5 mm x 1.3 mm on the AP x-ray and about 2.0 mm x 1.5 mm on the lateral x-ray, so it was definitely somewhat dense and not any kind of a "flake":
There is, however, one density which remains constant on both films and appears to lie beneath the skin of the region of the subcutaneous fat in the medial aspect of the thigh meters posterior to the exterior of the anterior cortex. The shape of this density is irregular but is roughly oval. Precise measurements are difficult but it is estimated that the greatest length in the AP projection is about 3.5 millimeters and the greatest width about 1.3 millimeters.
Measurements of the densities in the lateral projection reveal the greatest length to be about 2 millimeters and the greatest width to be about 1.5 millimeters The long axis of the metallic object is oriented generally along the axis of the femur. ("Supplemental Report Describing in Detail the Appearance and Location of a Small Metallic Density Superimposed on the Soft Tissue Shadows of the Medial Aspect of the Left Thigh of Governor John Connally on Films Dated November 22, 1963," 11/29/63, pp. 1-2)
In his 11/9/77 HSCA interview, Dr. Reynolds said the identifiable opacity in the thigh x-rays "definitely has metal characteristics" and that his 11/29/63 report describing "the location of this fragment" was "correct":
Dr. Reynolds stated that an identifiable opacity exists in the thigh x-rays and that it definitely has metal characteristics. He stated that his 11-29-62 report, describing the location of this fragment as just beneath the skin in the region of the subcutaneous fat, is correct. (7 HSCA 320)
In addition, Dr. Reynolds said there were "at least" four bullet fragments visible in Connally's wrist wound:
After examining the original and the enhanced x-rays, Dr . Reynolds stated that there are at least four fragments of metal identifiable in Gov. Connally's wrist wound (7 HSCA 320)
The wrist fragments and the thigh fragment could not have come from CE 399, given that the bullet was missing less than 4 grains of its substance. Russell Kent:
Dr. Gregory, Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, testified that he removed two fragments (but left other small fragments in the wound). These became Warren Commission Exhibit (CE) 842 below in Figure 32. There is no explanation of how the two fragments became four.
On 29th November 1963, Parkland Memorial Hospital sent Connally’s x-rays to the FBI. The dimensions of the fragment left in his thigh, as shown on one of the x-rays, were 3.5 mm by 1.3 mm.
These are quite large fragments. It is reasonable to doubt that these fragments came from CE 399. (JFK Medical Betrayal: Where the Evidence Lies, pp. 210-211).
As I've pointed out previously, before they knew what they were supposed to say, before the SBT emerged as the explanation for JFK and Connally's non-fatal wounds, even Dr. Humes and Dr. Finck said that Dr. Gregory's 11/22/63 operative report described too many bullet fragments to have from CE 399 (2 H 374-375; 2 H 382).
--- End quote ---
This is why amateurs such as yourself should not try to analyze evidence that calls for expertise. You compare dimensions of the flakes to the weight of CE399. Talk about apples and oranges. The surgeon who removed the flakes from JBC's wrist estimated they had the weight of a postage stamp.
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 16, 2026, 02:49:48 PM ---I'm sure readers have noticed that WC apologists, as evidenced by Tim Nickerson's labored and errant replies, still have not been able to explain the fact that the back-wound bullet could not have come from the sixth-floor window unless JFK had been leaning markedly forward when the missile struck, and that no photo or frame shows JFK's head tilted anywhere near that far forward, if at all.
Incredibly, Nickerson can't even admit what the HSCA's SBT diagram plainly shows, and he's still erroneously denying that Rydberg drew CE 385 under Humes's direct and point-by-point supervision, even though Humes and Rydberg themselves made this clear. I find it amazing that Nickerson actually cites Humes's descriptions of the back wound to support the claim that the wound was in the neck and not in the back, never mind the bullet holes in the rear of JFK's clothing, never mind the autopsy photo of the back wound, never mind the autopsy face sheet, never mind the "certified" death certificate, and never mind the HSCA FPP's SBT diagram. I see Nickerson even resorts to the ridiculous bunched-clothing theory, ignoring the fact that no photo or frame shows the jacket bunched nearly enough to make the holes align with a wound several inches higher, and ignoring the fact that Willis slide 5, taken much closer to the moment of impact, shows the jacket virtually flat on JFK's back.
This thread is a great example of the fact that WC apologists have largely ignored the HSCA FPP's findings about the back wound's location (slightly below the throat wound or, at the most, level with it) and the bullet's upward trajectory. In their various and conflicting SBT diagrams/animations, WC defenders always (1) have JFK sitting upright with his head held upright or tilted only slightly forward, (2) have the bullet traveling downward through the neck.
It is worth remembering that Dr. Werner Spitz, a prominent forensic pathologist who served on the RC's medical panel and on the HSCA FPP, informed the RC in 1975 that there was "no doubt" that the back-wound bullet hit the back "in a sharply upward direction" and that it traveled "upwards within the body":
There is no doubt that the bullet which struck the President’s back penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction, as is evident from the width of the abrasion at the lower half of the bullet wound of entrance. The term "sharply upward direction" is used because it is evident from this injury that the missile traveled upwards within the body. (Report of Werner Spitz, 4/24/75, p. 1, Rockefeller Commission papers)
Spitz was either unaware that these facts destroyed the SBT or he dismissed as irrelevant all the photos and footage taken of JFK during the SBT's timeframe. Ditto for Dr. Baden when he demonstrated in the 1988 NOVA JFKA documentary that the alleged magic bullet's trajectory would have been upward through the neck and that this trajectory could only align with the sixth-floor window if JFK had been leaning markedly forward when the bullet struck.
--- End quote ---
The Clark Panel measured the entry wound to be 5.5 cm below that transverse fold in the skin of the neck. The HSCA's FPP measured it to be 6 cm below the skin fold. Going but what you see in that photo above, place a mark on the back in the lateral view below at the level that you believe that the wound was at. The yellow line represents my own determination of the approximate wound entry level and subsequent downward path of the bullet to the throat wound. The photo is not a diagram or an animation. It's an actual photograph of the body of Kennedy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version