JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
Autopsy proves SBT impossible
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Ray Mitcham on April 14, 2018, 10:35:20 AM ---O'Connor to the HSCA
O'Connor said for a while there was no discussion of any other wounds until later on, when they found the bullet wound in the... ?back in the neck?... just above C7. O.Connor said it was approximately dead center in the midline of the back.
Just above C7! Agrees with Burkley on the position in the back.
On the death certificate that Burkley signed, the back wound was located ?at about the level of the third thoracic vertebra? (ARRB MD6, p.2).
The autopsy descriptive sheet, the pathologists? official diagram of the wounds to the body, placed the back wound in the same location. Burkley signed the sheet, ?Verified? (ARRB MD1).
Sibert and On'Neill report.
During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column.
--- End quote ---
Ray, are you alright?
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Matt Grantham on April 14, 2018, 04:56:15 PM --- On a different tact, I am a bit curious about the claim that when we see Connally's shirt puff up at one of the first couple of frames as the motorcade emerges from behind the sign is proof he is shot at the same time as the President Clearly JFK is already reacting before this frame How is that possible?
--- End quote ---
You are quite right. From z195 to z226 JFK changes both his body position/hand position and facial expression. The change in appearance of JBC's jacket could not be from a bullet that struck JFK at z224 because the changes in JFK occurred before the change in jacket appearance..
The zfilm is not clear enough to conclude that the front of JBC's jacket moves outward. The change between z223 and z224 appears to be the reverse of the change from 222 to 223. What is seen is a change in the amount of white shirt, which could be due to a change in light or jacket movement. It could have the same cause as JFK's change in appearance if JFK was shot in the neck enough time before z224 to allow him to react to it and the change in appearance of JBC's jacket is caused by JBC beginning to react to hearing the shot. In any event, there is abundant evidence that there was only one shot at this point. There is consistent evidence that JFK was hit by the first shot and JBC was hit in the torso by the second. That tells you that JBC is reacting to something other than his chest wound. He said he reacted to hearing the first shot.
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Rob Caprio on April 14, 2018, 11:01:32 PM ---Cite your supporting evidence for each of your points. You won't be able to of course because it doesn't exist.
--- End quote ---
1. and 2. Robert Frazier 5 H 59-62. 3. JFK autopsy xrays show no bullet in the body. 4. Howard Brennan, Robert Jackson, Mrs. Cabell, Amos Euins all saw the rifle in the 6th floor window. Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Norman and James Jarman also heard a bolt action rifle being fired 3 times in the same location. 5. The HSCA report beginning at 41 outlines the trajectory evidence of the path from the SN through JFK's neck.
--- Quote ---Many of the medical witnesses said that the throat wound was one of entry. One doctor said that IF it was one of exit then the bullet that caused the small wound only had the energy to "drop out" of JFK's throat. Obviously it wouldn't have the energy to go on and do all the damage to JBC as claimed.
Even the WCR said that it was PROBABLY a wound of exit. Probably leaves conjecture. Autopsies are NOT conducted to leave conjecture.
All this has been, and will be, covered in my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series.
--- End quote ---
In order to determine whether the back wound is an entry or exit wound one has to consider all the evidence. None of the doctors had examined the clothing. Frazier did that examination. He was never contradicted.
Matt Grantham:
The HSCA report beginning at 41 outlines the trajectory evidence of the path from the SN through JFK's neck.to consider all the evidence. None of the doctors had examined the clothing. Frazier did that examination. He was never contradicted.
[/quote]
Maybe this not what you are suggesting but forensic pathology is science It does not take into account outside circumstances We have seen the pictures, examiners etc and we have heard from the witnesses Those are the facts in terms of the forensics I like forensics I think they are the bedrock of cases They are certainly not superseded by mere opinions of a commission
I am a litle confused Are you LN and still saying a separate bullet Connally ? One could say that I suppose if we considered the IFT (Incredible Frgament Theory)where a fragment of the third shot broke off and hit Tague
Andrew Mason:
--- Quote from: Matt Grantham on April 16, 2018, 03:02:38 AM ---
Maybe this not what you are suggesting but forensic pathology is science. It does not take into account outside circumstances. We have seen the pictures, examiners etc and we have heard from the witnesses. Those are the facts in terms of the forensics. I like forensics I think they are the bedrock of cases They are certainly not superseded by mere opinions of a commission.
--- End quote ---
Forensics may or may not be useful. Some "forensic" analyses are not reliable without other evidence. A good example is hair and fibre analysis. Other kinds of forensic "science" are simply unproven. A good example is bullet lead analysis. Remarkably, comparative bullet lead analysis was introduced without any testing of the theory. When it was subjected to scrutiny, it was found to be completely unreliable (see: the Wikipedia article on CBLA ). Another example is jiggle analysis. Until it can be tested and shown to consistently and accurately identify shots from just the camera jiggles (which has never been done) it remains junk science.
--- Quote --- I am a litle confused Are you LN and still saying a separate bullet Connally ? One could say that I suppose if we considered the IFT (Incredible Frgament Theory)where a fragment of the third shot broke off and hit Tague
--- End quote ---
I accept that Oswald was the lone assassin because there is overwhelming, consistent evidence and no evidence that anyone else was involved. I do not accept the SBT because there is overwhelming evidence that:
1. the first shot was after z186.
2. the first shot struck JFK
3. the second shot struck JBC.
4. the only evidence we have is that a fragment from the second shot struck James Tague. This is corroborated somewhat by Wm. Greer who heard a concussion on the second shot - which is likely when fragments caused the windshield damage in the president's limo.
5. the shot pattern was 1......2...3, the last two being closer together - see my summary here.
So there was only one shot before the midpoint between 1 and 3. That puts the second shot after z256. This fits with Hickey (who said he was looking at JFK at the time of the second shot and saw JFK's hair lift on the side of his head and thought it missed - he was turned backward until sometime after z255 - Altgens) , Greer (said he turned around immediately after the second shot - he turns at z280 or so), and Altgens (who said his z255 photo was after the first and before any other shot). Nothing conflicts with JBC being hit after z270 except subjective interpretations of some people (including, ironically, the Connallys themselves) as to when the Governor looked like he was hit.
6. there is evidence from Hickey and the zfilm that a second shot at z272 barely missed JFK.
7. a separate shot at about z272 striking JBC's fifth rib, deflecting slightly to go along the rib for a few inches on the outside of the rib and then penetrating the rib and exiting, striking JBC on the top of the right radius that was pressed against chest is consistent with the position of the body and wrist. However, the bullet should have deflected away from the point of contact, which was on the top, distal side of the radius. That is consistent with the bullet fragmenting and fragments striking the top of the windshield and at least one going over the windshield. That is consistent with the evidence that Tague was struck on the second shot and Greer sensed a "concussion" on the second shot.
8. the trajectory of a shot through JBC striking his wrist and then his thigh never works at any position. However, there is a distinct possibility that the first shot through JFK proceeded downward and to JBC's left and struck his left thigh, butt first. That is consistent with the condition of CE399 and the wound characteristics of the thigh.
Three shots, three hits. A second shot at z272 leaves just enough time for Oswald to fire a third by z313. There is abundant evidence that the last shot was fired quickly after the second. All wounds are explained. It is really just a matter of seeing what the evidence says and putting aside "expert" opinions of what people thing JBC is doing in the zfilm.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version