JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Michael T. Griffith on August 25, 2020, 08:25:33 PM
-
Regarding the fact that the medical evidence clearly indicates JFK’s head was hit by frangible ammo, not by fully metal-jacketed (FMJ) ammo, below are some statements I recently gathered on the behavior of FMJ bullets from various firearms/ballistics/medical journals.
The ammo that hit JFK's head left dozens of fragments in his skull, a veritable "snowstorm" of fragments, which is very typical for frangible ammo but not for FMJ ammo. The lone-gunman theory claims that JFK was hit in the back of the head by one FMJ bullet, whereas most conspiracy theorists believe that at least two bullets hit JFK in the head, that at least one of them was a frangible bullet, and that one of them was fired from the front.
Please note that all of these sources are talking about tests or cases where FMJ bullets were fired at a single target and penetrated one or two layers of bone (mostly skull bone or simulated skull bone), one or two layers of skin, and one layer of tissue. I am noting this so that WC apologists do not say, “These articles prove that the SBT is possible!” No, none of the bullets discussed below passed through five layers of skin, three layers of tissue, tore up 4 inches of rib bone, and shattered the radius bone, one of the hardest bones in the body.
Since some of the URLs are very long, I have put all the links to the quotes on a separate page, and a link to this page is given after each quote.
This comes from “Contact Wounds” from GUWS Medical. The article notes that the presence of small fragments along the wound track “virtually rules out” FMJ ammo, and that in “rare” cases, an FMJ bullet will leave “a few” dust-like fragments if it perforates bone—“a few,” not 40-plus. The article further notes that if x-rays show a “snowstorm” of fragments in the head, this “rules out” FMJ ammo:
In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition, such as may be used in a semi-automatic pistol. The reverse is not true, however; absence of lead on x-ray does not necessarily rule out a lead bullet. In rare instances, involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone.
One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a "lead snowstorm" [Figure 11.4]. In high-quality x-rays, the majority of the fragments visualized have a fine "dust-like" quality. Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug.(https://miketgriffith.com/files/fmjbehaviorlinks.htm)
This comes from “Gunshot Injuries: What Does a Radiologist Need to Know?” The author notes that FMJ bullets typically do not leave a trail of fragments along their path but that hollow-point and semi-jacketed bullets do leave a fragment trail:
Bullets with full metal jackets often remain in one piece and usually do not deform much (Figs 2,3). These projectiles typically do not leave a trail of lead fragments along their path. On the other hand, semi-jacketed, hollow-point, nonjacketed, and soft-point bullets tend to deform on impact or break apart (4,8), leaving a telltale trail of metal fragments through the soft tissues (Figs 4,6) (9,12). (https://miketgriffith.com/files/fmjbehaviorlinks.htm)
This comes from “Ballistic Impacts on an Anatomically Correct Synthetic Skull with a Surrogate Skin/Soft Tissue Layer,” a study done in England. The authors observe that five of the six FMJ bullets fired into simulated human skulls did not fragment but emerged intact:
Six head models were impacted with 7.62 x 39 mm full metal jacket mild steel core (FMJ MSC) bullets with a mean velocity of 652 m/s. The impact events were filmed with high-speed cameras. The models were imaged pre- and post-impact using computed tomography. . . .
The six models were then examined by two Home Office Forensic Pathologists with extensive experience of assessing ballistic injury. The pathologists were invited to conduct a formal ‘post-mortem’ examination of each model. . . .
The pre- and post-shot CT scans were viewed by a Military Consultant Radiologist with extensive experience of ballistic injury imaging using OsiriXDICOM viewer. . . .
All the bullets with the exception of the one impacting Face 4 emerged intact from the models. . . .
Five of the entry sites had associated radial fractures, although these were found more often by the pathologists than from the CT scans due to the soft tissue CT appearance being close to that of the synthetic bone as described above (Faces 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6). [MG: This is important because one of the problems with the now-debunked cowlick entry site is that no fractures radiate from it.] (https://miketgriffith.com/files/fmjbehaviorlinks.htm)
This comes from “Wound Ballistics of Injuries Caused by Handguns With Different Types of Projectiles.” Partially metal-jacketed bullets and hollow-point bullets fired into pig skulls left numerous fragments along the wound track, but none of the FMJ bullets left any fragments that could be seen on the x-rays:
Unlike round lead projectiles, partial metal-jacketed projectiles were associated with wound tracks that contained multiple projectile fragments of different sizes and shapes along the entire path of the bullet. . . .
Radiological images of gunshot injuries caused by hollow-point projectiles reveal multiple projectile fragments, beginning approximately 5 cm distal to the entrance site (Fig. 2B). Fragments of different sizes were detected along the wound track. . . .
None of the full metal-jacketed projectiles were seen on the radiological images. (https://miketgriffith.com/files/fmjbehaviorlinks.htm)
This comes from “Gunshot Wounds” from Pathology Outline. The author notes that FMJ bullets tend to transit a body without being deformed, and that when x-rays reveal a “lead snowstorm,” this indicates the bullet was a semi-jacketed (partially jacketed) bullet:
Full metal jacketed bullets produce less tissue damage and tend to travel through the body undeformed.
Semi-jacketed ammunition creates the classic "lead snowstorm" appearance on x-ray due to peeling back of the jacket as it travels through the body, releasing numerous small lead fragments. (https://miketgriffith.com/files/fmjbehaviorlinks.htm)
This comes from “Radiographic Examination of Jacketed and Non Jacketed Bullet Fragment Patterns.” The author notes that the pig skulls hit with FMJ bullets (labeled Pattern C) “contained no radiographic evidence of fragments in the tissue or bone,” whereas the skulls hit by hollow-point bullets (Pattern D) “contained some fragments of lead”:
The purpose of this study is to examine bullet fragment patterns from jacketed and nonjacketed bullets in porcine [pig] fore limbs using radiography. Ten porcine fore limbs with tissue and bone were used to produce the bullet fragment patterns. Three out of thirty-three bullets remained in the sample. Bullets that penetrated the samples were collected in a bullet trap and weighed to determine the amount of bullet fragment weight loss for each bullet. The samples were x-rayed and bullet fragment patterns were compared between the jacketed and non-jacketed bullets. . . .
The full metal jacketed bullets and jacketed hollow point bullets were classified as Pattern C and Pattern D, respectively. Pattern C contained no radiographic evidence of fragments in the tissue or bone and Pattern D contained some fragments of lead from the jacketed hollow point bullets clustered near the bone. (https://miketgriffith.com/files/fmjbehaviorlinks.htm)
For more evidence that JFK’s head was hit by frangible ammo, please see my article “Forensic Science and President Kennedy’s Head Wounds”:
https://miketgriffith.com/files/forensic.htm
-
Regarding the fact that the medical evidence clearly indicates JFK’s head was hit by frangible ammo, not by fully metal-jacketed (FMJ) ammo, below are some statements I recently gathered on the behavior of FMJ bullets from various firearms/ballistics/medical journals.
The ammo that hit JFK's head left dozens of fragments in his skull, a veritable "snowstorm" of fragments, which is very typical for frangible ammo but not for FMJ ammo. The lone-gunman theory claims that JFK was hit in the back of the head by one FMJ bullet, whereas most conspiracy theorists believe that at least two bullets hit JFK in the head, that at least one of them was a frangible bullet, and that one of them was fired from the front.
Please note that all of these sources are talking about tests or cases where FMJ bullets were fired at a single target and penetrated one or two layers of bone (mostly skull bone or simulated skull bone), one or two layers of skin, and one layer of tissue. I am noting this so that WC apologists do not say, “These articles prove that the SBT is possible!” No, none of the bullets discussed below passed through five layers of skin, three layers of tissue, tore up 4 inches of rib bone, and shattered the radius bone, one of the hardest bones in the body.
Since some of the URLs are very long, I have put all the links to the quotes on a separate page, and a link to this page is given after each quote.
This comes from “Contact Wounds” from GUWS Medical. The article notes that the presence of small fragments along the wound track “virtually rules out” FMJ ammo, and that in “rare” cases, an FMJ bullet will leave “a few” dust-like fragments if it perforates bone—“a few,” not 40-plus. The article further notes that if x-rays show a “snowstorm” of fragments in the head, this “rules out” FMJ ammo:
This comes from “Gunshot Injuries: What Does a Radiologist Need to Know?” The author notes that FMJ bullets typically do not leave a trail of fragments along their path but that hollow-point and semi-jacketed bullets do leave a fragment trail:
This comes from “Ballistic Impacts on an Anatomically Correct Synthetic Skull with a Surrogate Skin/Soft Tissue Layer,” a study done in England. The authors observe that five of the six FMJ bullets fired into simulated human skulls did not fragment but emerged intact:
This comes from “Wound Ballistics of Injuries Caused by Handguns With Different Types of Projectiles.” Partially metal-jacketed bullets and hollow-point bullets fired into pig skulls left numerous fragments along the wound track, but none of the FMJ bullets left any fragments that could be seen on the x-rays:
This comes from “Gunshot Wounds” from Pathology Outline. The author notes that FMJ bullets tend to transit a body without being deformed, and that when x-rays reveal a “lead snowstorm,” this indicates the bullet was a semi-jacketed (partially jacketed) bullet:
This comes from “Radiographic Examination of Jacketed and Non Jacketed Bullet Fragment Patterns.” The author notes that the pig skulls hit with FMJ bullets (labeled Pattern C) “contained no radiographic evidence of fragments in the tissue or bone,” whereas the skulls hit by hollow-point bullets (Pattern D) “contained some fragments of lead”:
For more evidence that JFK’s head was hit by frangible ammo, please see my article “Forensic Science and President Kennedy’s Head Wounds”:
https://miketgriffith.com/files/forensic.htm
Fine. Except no one is talking about Western Cartridge Company Mannlicher-Carcano bullets. The WCC/MC bullets. The reason is because these bullets do fragment upon striking bone at high velocity, like around 1900 feet per second.
Let’s look at these articles:
“Contact Wounds” from GUWS Medical
; Mentions rifles firing FMJ bullets, but not a WCC/MC bullet.
https://www.guwsmedical.info/contact-wounds/info-sxi.html
; Mentions rifles firing FMJ bullets, but not a WCC/MC bullet.
“Gunshot Injuries: What Does a Radiologist Need to Know?”
Real heading: Ballistic impacts on an anatomically correct synthetic skull with a surrogate skin/soft tissue layer
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-017-1737-9
; 7.62 x 39 mm full metal jacket bullet, but not a WCC/MC bullet.
“Gunshot Wounds” from Pathology Outline.
From Ohio State:
http://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/forensicsgunshotwounds.html?mobile=off
; Not talking about a WCC/MC bullet.
“Radiographic Examination of Jacketed and Non Jacketed Bullet Fragment Patterns.”
http://faculty.mnsu.edu/jamesbailey/wp-content/uploads/sites/60/2014/05/Radiographic-Examination-of-Jacketed-and-Non-Jacked-Bullet-Fragment-Patterns.pdf
; Not talking about a WCC/MC bullet.
This comes from “Wound Ballistics of Injuries Caused by Handguns With Different Types of Projectiles.” Partially metal-jacketed bullets and hollow-point bullets fired into pig skulls left numerous fragments along the wound track, but none of the FMJ bullets left any fragments that could be seen on the x-rays:
; Not talking about a WCC/MC bullet. Not even talking about rifle bullets but the generally much slower handgun bullets.
These articles are not talking about WCC/MC bullets, but Full Metal Jacket bullets in general. Which differ from each other. And even so, are full of qualifiers.
“typically do not leave a trail of fragments”
“five of the six FMJ bullets”
Etc.
Lots of stuff on how many types of FMJ bullet generally do not fragment. Nothing about WCC/MC bullets do not fragment.
But we have a whole book on WCC/MC bullets. Larry SPersonivan’s “The JFK Myths”. On page 118, in Table II. It shows that a WCC/MC will start to deform at velocities at or above 1700 feet per second. Larry SPersonivan explains that if a WCC/MC deforms long enough, it will fragment.
On page 122, Figure 20, we have a picture of a WCC/MC bullet fragment from a bullet fired into a skull. It is labeled “Skull Shot # 8170”. This test was conducted by the Biophysics Division. “Skull Shot # 8170” looks at least as damaged as either CE 569 or CE 567, the fragments recovered from the limousine.
Where is the Pro CT equivalent? An article showing a WCC/MC bullet, fired into a skull, at high speed, and recovered intact with little damage, or at least not fragmented? There is none. Because clearly WCC/MC can and do fragment, and leave a trial of fragments behind them, when they strike a skull at high speed. Regardless of what other types of FMJ bullets, fired from rifles or handguns, may do.
It occurs to me that I should clarify what I have been calling for. A true ballistic expert who supports the CT position. But not when talking about other FMJ bullets, or FMJ bullet fired from handguns. But WCC/MC bullets. It’s got to be a true ballistic expert. And he or she has to be talking about WCC/MC bullets, not other types of bullets, not even other types of FMJ bullets.
-
Fine. Except no one is talking about Western Cartridge Company Mannlicher-Carcano bullets. The WCC/MC bullets. The reason is because these bullets do fragment upon striking bone at high velocity, like around 1900 feet per second.
Let’s look at these articles:
“Contact Wounds” from GUWS Medical
; Mentions rifles firing FMJ bullets, but not a WCC/MC bullet.
https://www.guwsmedical.info/contact-wounds/info-sxi.html
; Mentions rifles firing FMJ bullets, but not a WCC/MC bullet.
“Gunshot Injuries: What Does a Radiologist Need to Know?”
Real heading: Ballistic impacts on an anatomically correct synthetic skull with a surrogate skin/soft tissue layer
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-017-1737-9
; 7.62 x 39 mm full metal jacket bullet, but not a WCC/MC bullet.
“Gunshot Wounds” from Pathology Outline.
From Ohio State:
http://www.pathologyoutlines.com/topic/forensicsgunshotwounds.html?mobile=off
; Not talking about a WCC/MC bullet.
“Radiographic Examination of Jacketed and Non Jacketed Bullet Fragment Patterns.”
http://faculty.mnsu.edu/jamesbailey/wp-content/uploads/sites/60/2014/05/Radiographic-Examination-of-Jacketed-and-Non-Jacked-Bullet-Fragment-Patterns.pdf
; Not talking about a WCC/MC bullet.
This comes from “Wound Ballistics of Injuries Caused by Handguns With Different Types of Projectiles.” Partially metal-jacketed bullets and hollow-point bullets fired into pig skulls left numerous fragments along the wound track, but none of the FMJ bullets left any fragments that could be seen on the x-rays:
; Not talking about a WCC/MC bullet. Not even talking about rifle bullets but the generally much slower handgun bullets.
These articles are not talking about WCC/MC bullets, but Full Metal Jacket bullets in general. Which differ from each other. And even so, are full of qualifiers.
“typically do not leave a trail of fragments”
“five of the six FMJ bullets”
Etc.
Lots of stuff on how many types of FMJ bullet generally do not fragment. Nothing about WCC/MC bullets do not fragment.
But we have a whole book on WCC/MC bullets. Larry SPersonivan’s “The JFK Myths”. On page 118, in Table II. It shows that a WCC/MC will start to deform at velocities at or above 1700 feet per second. Larry SPersonivan explains that if a WCC/MC deforms long enough, it will fragment.
On page 122, Figure 20, we have a picture of a WCC/MC bullet fragment from a bullet fired into a skull. It is labeled “Skull Shot # 8170”. This test was conducted by the Biophysics Division. “Skull Shot # 8170” looks at least as damaged as either CE 569 or CE 567, the fragments recovered from the limousine.
Where is the Pro CT equivalent? An article showing a WCC/MC bullet, fired into a skull, at high speed, and recovered intact with little damage, or at least not fragmented? There is none. Because clearly WCC/MC can and do fragment, and leave a trial of fragments behind them, when they strike a skull at high speed. Regardless of what other types of FMJ bullets, fired from rifles or handguns, may do.
It occurs to me that I should clarify what I have been calling for. A true ballistic expert who supports the CT position. But not when talking about other FMJ bullets, or FMJ bullet fired from handguns. But WCC/MC bullets. It’s got to be a true ballistic expert. And he or she has to be talking about WCC/MC bullets, not other types of bullets, not even other types of FMJ bullets.
This is embarrassingly, comically wrong. "It occurs to me" that you obviously don't do any hunting or shooting and don't know much about ammo. WCC/MC FMJ bullets do not magically behave differently than do other FMJ bullets. Furthermore, WCC/MC FMJ bullets are copper-jacketed, as are most other FMJ bullets. For decades, the vast majority of FMJ bullets were copper-jacketed. Even today, most FMJ bullets are copper-jacketed. If you doubt this, just go to any major website that sells ammo, such as the Ammo.com website:
"The term full metal jacket means the lead bullet is encased in a separate harder metal – this is typically copper, but can sometimes be other materials and even hybrid composites." (https://ammo.com/bullet-type/full-metal-jacket-fmj)
And, uh, have you forgotten that you claim that CE 399, a WCC/MC FMJ bullet, penetrated seven layers of skin, smashed 4 inches of rib bone, and shattered a radius bone, and yet supposedly emerged with its lands and grooves intact and with less than 3-4 grains of its substance missing? Did that slip your mind?
You can't have it both ways: You can't argue that it would not have been unusual for an FMJ bullet to have done all the SBT damage and still have emerged virtually pristine, and then turn around and say that it would not have been unusual for an FMJ bullet to have (1) left over 40 fragments inside JFK's head, (2) impossibly left two fragments on the outer table of the skull--one in it and one just underneath it, and (3) ejected its nose and tail from the skull and deposited them in the limo. You need to pick which of those two myths you're going to defend.
Oh, and did you forget that not one of the WCC/MC FMJ bullets fired into skulls in Olivier's ballistics tests for the WC fragmented into dozens of fragments inside and/or outside the skull, much less magically deposited two fragments on the outer table of the skull on the wrong side of the entry site? Not a single one of them did this. Did that slip your mind too?
Finally, you still have not read my article "Forensic Science and President Kennedy's Head Wounds," have you?
-
Joe, you are not answering the question I asked and that was what size are the WCC/MC fragments compared to the frags left by the frangible round?
-
Joe, you are not answering the question I asked and that was what size are the WCC/MC fragments compared to the frags left by the frangible round?
I don’t know. You are asking much more technical questions than the questions I ask of Mr. Griffith. Which always go unanswered. But my layman’s opinion is this. We know WCC/MC fragment, this has been shown when a WCC/MC bullet strikes the skull of a recently dead animal. Once a WCC/MC bullet fragment, it’s largely lead core is totally exposed. So, I would imagine it would leave the same kind of fragment trail left by a non-FMJ bullet which is just a lead bullet with no jacket.
The problem is neither you nor Mr. Griffith are citing the work of real ballistic experts, talking about the effect of a WCC/MC bullet, on the skull of a living or recently killed animal. Such an expert could easily answer these technical questions. But none of you have found such an expert who supports your assertions. Not in 56 years and counting.
-
Joe, you are not answering the question I asked and that was what size are the WCC/MC fragments compared to the frags left by the frangible round?
Actually, I did a little reading since my previous post. I think I can answer your question. Where there any fragments left in the wake of the bullet that was fired through Skull # 8170 and what were their sizes?
The answer is no. I believe there were no fragments left in the wake of the bullet. Unlike what happened to President Kennedy. This is because Skull # 8170 was not a living human head, nor a recently living human head, nor a living animal head nor a recently living animal head. Skull # 8170 was a human skull. A dried human skull. Never-the-less, I assume the skull was not too old, not too dried out, because it did fragment the WCC/MC Bullet. But no trail of fragments was left suspended in the air inside the hollow skull because, it was, after all, a hollow skull. A trail of fragments would only be left behind if it travelled through organic material, like a brain, which could cause the small fragments to be stripped off the main bullet fragment and left suspended within the brain. Obviously, this is not going to happen with a hollow skull.
Speaking as a layman, I suspect that the more recent the subject had died, the denser, the less dry, the skull will be. And will have a big effect on whether a WCC/MC bullet will be fragmented by the skull or not.
Larry SPersonivan explained that the difference between President Kennedy’s head and Skull # 8170 is that President Kennedy was head was living and robust. Skull # 8170 was from a medical supply source, which are from unclaimed bodies that generally suffered varying degrees of malnutrition. And the skull would dry out and become less dense by the time most of the organic material is gone and only the bone of the skull is left.
Hence, some differences between the bullet that went through Skull # 8170 and President Kennedy. The bullet that went through President Kennedy’s head broke up into 3 fragments. The Skull # 8170 bullet remained in one extremely mangled fragment that did not quite separate into multiple fragments, but came close to doing so, as one can see from Figure 20 on Page 122 from Larry SPersonivan’s book “The JFK Myths”. Also, while a string of tiny fragments was left in President Kennedy’s head, there was no string of tiny fragments left within Skull # 8170, suspended in air. Nor should we expect to see such.
-
Joe,
I’m sorry it I am asking a technical question but that is my nature, 30 years in the Silicon Valley in engineering and root cause failure analysis will do that to you.
Unfortunately there are probably not many experts on the WCC/MC because they stopped making them in 1956 as I understand it. You don’t know the answer to my question well that’s ok, let’s talk about what we do know and see if we have a come to an understanding and agree that are different frags.
We have all seen the frags from the JFK assassination the frags from the WCC/MC are usually anywhere from a full section of the diameter of the round down to maybe a sizable corner. Let’s just say based on the pictures we have seen that the average frag from the WCC/MC that we have compressed into a ball. Looking at the frags they might be 3/16 to ¼ in. in diameter. The frags from the a frangible round appear to be under a 1/16 of an inch in size and possibly smaller more like 1/32 of an inch in size and always a shape and look all to themselves. They are black and burnt looking, caused by the “explosion” I suspect.
So the basic difference is the WCC/MC are large, up to a ¼” or more, metallic looking, different “colored” components and erratic shapes like you would expect a torn up bullet to look like. The frangible frags on the other hand look black and burnt, very small in size with no discernible characteristics; they look like the aftermath of an explosion, black burnt particulate. So in one hand you have pieces of broken up metallic looking bullet parts of various shades of gray and copper and of various sizes and shapes, and many with rifling grooves on them and in the other hand where you have these little small particles that look like very course pepper all similar in size. So the contents of each hand looks totally different from the other. So you could say I am acting as a technical expert and telling everyone the two types of fragments are totally different from each other and could not be mistaken to be from the same source. It’s like one makes rocks and the other makes tiny black pebbles.
I hope my explanation helps you see the difference between the two groups of fragment’s.
-
This is embarrassingly, comically wrong. "It occurs to me" that you obviously don't do any hunting or shooting and don't know much about ammo. WCC/MC FMJ bullets do not magically behave differently than do other FMJ bullets. Furthermore, WCC/MC FMJ bullets are copper-jacketed, as are most other FMJ bullets. For decades, the vast majority of FMJ bullets were copper-jacketed. Even today, most FMJ bullets are copper-jacketed. If you doubt this, just go to any major website that sells ammo, such as the Ammo.com website:
It occurred to you? I have stated on several occasions that I am not a ballistic expert, do not shoot rifles, do not go hunting. But I do read the material of genuine ballistic experts.
"The term full metal jacket means the lead bullet is encased in a separate harder metal – this is typically copper, but can sometimes be other materials and even hybrid composites." (https://ammo.com/bullet-type/full-metal-jacket-fmj)
Yes. But most (I believe) full metal jacket bullets have a minimum deformation velocity that is greater than the muzzle velocity of the rifles that fired them. So, these bullets will not be fragmented by human bone. Agreed? While a full metal jacket bullet that has a minimum deformation velocity significantly less than the muzzle velocity of the rifle that fire them can deform and be fragmented. So, our discussions should be limited to WCC/MC bullets that does have a higher muzzle velocity then it’s minimum deformation velocity where such deformation is possible.
And, uh, have you forgotten that you claim that CE 399, a WCC/MC FMJ bullet, penetrated seven layers of skin, smashed 4 inches of rib bone, and shattered a radius bone, and yet supposedly emerged with its lands and grooves intact and with less than 3-4 grains of its substance missing? Did that slip your mind?
No, but it didn’t strike human bone at 1900 feet per second, like the bullet that strike President Kennedy’s did. It was slowed by President Kennedy’s neck before it struck the rib.
You can't have it both ways: You can't argue that it would not have been unusual for an FMJ bullet to have done all the SBT damage and still have emerged virtually pristine, and then turn around and say that it would not have been unusual for an FMJ bullet to have (1) left over 40 fragments inside JFK's head, (2) impossibly left two fragments on the outer table of the skull--one in it and one just underneath it, and (3) ejected its nose and tail from the skull and deposited them in the limo. You need to pick which of those two myths you're going to defend.
Oh yes, I can have it both ways. There is a big difference in the effect of a WCC/MC hitting bone at 1900 feet per second, like the bullet that struck President Kennedy’s skull and a WCC/MC first hitting bone at 1400 feet per second, like the bullet that struck Governor Connally’s rib. If you had read the work of a real ballistic expert, like Larry SPersonivan, you would know this. The same type of bullet can behave very differently depending on the details of what exactly happened.
Oh, and did you forget that not one of the WCC/MC FMJ bullets fired into skulls in Olivier's ballistics tests for the WC fragmented into dozens of fragments inside and/or outside the skull, much less magically deposited two fragments on the outer table of the skull on the wrong side of the entry site? Not a single one of them did this. Did that slip your mind too?
But none of those were living human heads. Or even recently living human heads. Or living animal heads. Or recently living animal heads. How long had the owner of these skulls died? How much had these skulls dried out? How much less dense than living skulls had they become?
Even so, at least one human skull did fragment a WCC/MC bullet. The one through Skull # 8170. Despite the fact it was not a living head.
Finally, you still have not read my article "Forensic Science and President Kennedy's Head Wounds," have you?
No. I have read articles and an entire book by a genuine ballistic experts on the President Kennedy assassination. But I haven’t found the time yet to read an article on President Kennedy’s Head Wounds written by a non-ballistic expert such as yourself. Right now, I am reading Steven Pinker’s “The Better Angles of our Nature”. I fear it will be some time before I can wade through the work of superior writers before I can start to delve into the works of writers of your level.
How about this for a deal. Why don’t you read a book by a genuine ballistic expert, Larry SPersonivan? The JFK Myths. He is a genuine ballistic expert. He is talking about the properties of WCC/MC bullets, not other bullets. If you read this one book by a genuine expert, I will read your one article, even though it is written by a non-ballistic expert, who has never been trusted by a court of law or any investigative group to give testimony as a ballistic expert.
-
Joe, you are not answering the question I asked and that was what size are the WCC/MC fragments compared to the frags left by the frangible round?
That is the crux of the issue and one of the fatal flaws of the lone-gunman theory. In Olivier's ballistics tests for the WC, the 10 WCC/MC bullets fired into skulls simply did not behave anything like the lone-gunman theory's head-shot bullet. The record shows that the 10 bullets produced 29-31 fragments. CE 859 shows the fragments from the tests. The fragments in CE 857 were all included in CE 859, according to Olivier. If there were more fragments, Olivier did not say so, and there is no record of any other fragments from his tests.
Suspiciously, Olivier did not specify how many bullets did not fragment or if all of them fragmented. However, we know that not one of those bullets shattered into dozens of pieces, leaving 40-plus fragments inside the skull, depositing two fragments on the outer table of the skull, and ejecting its nose and tail from the skull.
The importance of the two outer-table fragments cannot be overstated. Those two fragments alone refute the lone-gunman theory. If they came from the WC's head-shot bullet, they must have been scraped off the bullet as it entered the skull, which is unheard of behavior for FMJ bullets, and then they somehow ended up 1 cm below the entrance wound! Even more fantastically, if these fragments were the WC's head-shot bullet, they must have come from the mid-section of the bullet, which is a ballistic impossibility, as even SPersonivan admitted.
As many other researchers have noted, Olivier just bald-facedly lied when he told the WC that his tests showed that an FMJ bullet could have caused all of JFK's head wounds. His tests showed no such thing. But, that's a subject for another discussion.
-
What do you mean by: For many, but not all types of FMJ, this will never happen in the real world, because these velocities are greater than the muzzle velocity of the rifle that fires them.
If you are insinuating that the round is moving faster than the muzzle velocity from the gun which it was fired from that is wrong. The maximum velocity reached is when it leaves the muzzle then it gets slowed down by air resistance.
-
Joe,
“Hence, some differences between the bullet that went through Skull # 8170 and President Kennedy. The bullet that went through President Kennedy’s head broke up into 3 fragments. The Skull # 8170 bullet remained in one extremely mangled fragment that did not quite separate into multiple fragments, but came close to doing so, as one can see from Figure 20 on Page 122 from Larry SPersonivan’s book “The JFK Myths”. Also, while a string of tiny fragments was left in President Kennedy’s head, there was no string of tiny fragments left within Skull # 8170, suspended in air. Nor should we expect to see such.”
And were two of these fragments deposited on the outside back of his head? And where was the third frag found?
A string of tiny fragments found in JFK’s head and not in skull #8170. This is because #8170 was shot with a FMJ round and JFK was shot with a frangible round.
-
Joe,
“Hence, some differences between the bullet that went through Skull # 8170 and President Kennedy. The bullet that went through President Kennedy’s head broke up into 3 fragments. The Skull # 8170 bullet remained in one extremely mangled fragment that did not quite separate into multiple fragments, but came close to doing so, as one can see from Figure 20 on Page 122 from Larry SPersonivan’s book “The JFK Myths”. Also, while a string of tiny fragments was left in President Kennedy’s head, there was no string of tiny fragments left within Skull # 8170, suspended in air. Nor should we expect to see such.”
SPersonivan goofed horrendously on this point. He was simply unaware of the cloud of fragments in the frontal part of the head on the x-rays. In SPersonivan's defense, he was never shown the original lateral x-rays but only the HSCA FPP's doctored "enhanced" version of them. I have pointed this out to Elliott at least once. Dr. Michael Kurtz:
Sturvidan also stated that Kennedy was not struck in the front of the head by an exploding bullet fired from the grassy knoll. The reason, SPersonivan declared, was that the computer-enhanced x-rays of Kennedy's skull do not depict "a cloud of metallic fragments very near the entrance wound." In cases where exploding bullets impact, he asserted that "you would definitely have seen" such a cloud of fragments in the x-ray. SPersonivan's remarks betrayed both his own ignorance of the medical evidence and the committee's careful manipulation of that evidence. SPersonivan saw only the computer-enhanced x-ray of the skull, not the original, unretouched x-rays. Had he seen the originals, he would have observed a cloud of metallic fragments clustered in the right front portion of the head. Furthermore, the close-up photograph of the margins of the large wound in the head shows numerous small fragments. The Forensic Pathology Panel itself noted the presence of "missile dust" near the wound in the front of the head. One of the expert radiologists who examined the x-rays noticed "a linear alignment of tiny metallic fragments" located in the "posterior aspect of the right frontal bone." The chief autopsy pathologist, Dr. James J. Humes, remarked about the numerous metallic fragments like grains of sand scattered near the front head wound. The medical evidence, then, definitely proves the existence of a cloud of fragments in the right front portion of Kennedy's head, convincing evidence, according to SPersonivan, that an exploding bullet actually did strike the president there. (Michael Kurtz, Crime of the Century, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, pp. 177-178)
I forgot to mention two other ballistics tests. In tests conducted by forensic pathologist Dr. John Nichols, FMJ bullets emerged in virtually perfect condition after penetrating several feet of tough Ponderosa pine wood. Dr. John Lattimer fired Carcano bullets through test skulls. X-rays of these test skulls revealed no bullet fragments, not even near the wound of entry in the rear top of the head (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, p. 98).
-
SPersonivan goofed horrendously on this point. He was simply unaware of the cloud of fragments in the frontal part of the head on the x-rays. In SPersonivan's defense, he was never shown the original lateral x-rays but only the HSCA FPP's doctored "enhanced" version of them. I have pointed this out to Elliott at least once. Dr. Michael Kurtz:
Larry SPersonivan is well aware of this case. I have never heard a true ballistic expert, agree with your point. Have you? If so, can you name them and provide a link?
I forgot to mention two other ballistics tests. In tests conducted by forensic pathologist Dr. John Nichols, FMJ bullets emerged in virtually perfect condition after penetrating several feet of tough Ponderosa pine wood.
Stop the presses. Yes, this is well known. If you had read a Larry SPersonivan’s book, “The JFK Myths”, you would know what property of a material is most important in what damage it will do to a bullet. And that property is density. It’s not hardness, it’s density. So soft tissue, which has the same density as water, will not deform a WCC/MC bullet, even if hit at muzzle velocity. But bone, which generally has a density of twice that of water, will.
What is the density of Ponderosa pine wood? Slightly less than that of water. So, even through wood is hard, it won’t damage a WCC/MC bullet anymore than soft tissue will. So naturally it will come out undeformed after going through, as I recall, 47 inches of soft wood.
Dr. John Lattimer fired Carcano bullets through test skulls. X-rays of these test skulls revealed no bullet fragments, not even near the wound of entry in the rear top of the head (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, p. 98).
What ballistic expert says that there are lead fragments near the wound of entry (the back of the head) of JFK’s X-Rays? Do you consider the wound of entry near the front?
And again, this brings up the question as to how old were the test skulls? How much had they dried up? Was the density of the bone still twice the density of water, as it is with living bone?
Now, on the question of why we don’t small lead fragments within the test skull X-Rays, like we do with JFK’s head X-Rays. You do realize that these test skulls were bare skulls, don’t you? How can I explain this to you? The test skulls were similar to your own head. There was nothing between the ears. There was no organic material, like the brain, that the badly deformed bullet would travel through, which strips off small fragments as the bullet with its exposed lead core moves through the brain. And even if, somehow, such fragments were created, they would not remain suspended in space within an empty skull. So, we should not expect to see any X-Ray of a test skull to look identical to an X-Ray of JFK’s skull, with both showing a trail of fragments along the bullet’s path.
We know that with the test result of Skull # 8170, a bullet will get very badly mangled upon striking a skull, even of just a bare skull which has, no doubt, undergone some drying after death. So, if some skulls have dried out enough so that they no longer can mangle a WCC/MC bullet, that doesn’t matter. All that counts is what the skull of a still living man will do to such a bullet.
-
Let’s take inventory here; supposedly there were 3 large fragments found, two on the back of the head, not in the head. Where was the third frag found? Also we have a spray of tiny frags on the interior of the skull. The large frags would be from a FMJ round and the spray of tiny frags would be from a frangible round. This indicates he was hit with two different bullets. Before I go any further with this I want the three large fragments location, where they were found. So if we can all agree where the large fragments were found…….. I know of 2 large fragments found on the back of JFK’s head, I don’t know where the third one was found.
-
Larry SPersonivan is well aware of this case.
He was not aware of it at the time of the HSCA. He said that if a frangible bullet had hit the skull, he would expect to see a cluster of fragments near its entry point, yet he said nothing about the fact that that x-rays show a cloud of fragments in the right-front part of the skull So he was either lying through his teeth or he was not aware that the original x-rays show a cluster of fragments in the frontal region, exactly as SPersonivan indicated you would expect to see from a frontal shot with a frangible bullet.
In his book The JFK Myths, SPersonivan says nothing--not one word--about the small genuine fragment inside the 6.5 mm object and about the small fragment next to it (the one that Dr. McDonnel identified, and that Dr. Mantik has confirmed).
In his book, SPersonivan reaches and strains to explain the "snow storm" of fragments visible on the lateral skull x-rays. He suggests they were "flushed out" by blood and got stuck in the bone flaps on the way the way to the hospital! Seriously? And this guy is your go-to "expert"?
SPersonivan also says that no forger would have planted the 6.5 mm object because it could not be a bullet fragment, adding that a forger would have planted something "that could actually be mistaken for a bullet fragment." Uh, is SPersonivan not aware that three federal medical panels--the Clark Panel, the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel, and the HSCA's forensic pathology panel--concluded that the 6.5 mm object was a bullet fragment?! So the forgery was good enough to fool all the forensic pathologists and radiologists on those panels.
SPersonivan does not even attempt to explain why the high fragment trail was not mentioned in the autopsy report and why the doctors insisted they saw a low fragment trail between the EOP and the right eye. Crickets.
Nor does SPersonivan say a word about Dr. Mantik's OD measurements, even though he mentions the book Assassination Science, which contains a section on the measurements. (By the way, that section was proof-read by Dr. Arthur Haas, who was the director of Kodak's Department of Medical Physics at the time.)
Three medical doctors have confirmed via OD measurements that there is a small fragment inside the 6.5 mm object but that the 6.5 mm object is not metallic but is a ghosted image. None of the experts on the above-named panels realized this because they didn't do any OD measurements. Again, SPersonivan simply ignores the OD measurements.
I have never heard a true ballistic expert, agree with your point. Have you? If so, can you name them and provide a link?
Huh? Are you saying that you have a "true ballistics expert" who denies that the autopsy skull x-rays show a cloud of fragments in the frontal area? Who is this "expert"? And since when do ballistics experts read x-rays?
Anyway, SPersonivan said that a frangible bullet would have left a cloud of fragments near its entry point:
Mr. MATTHEWS: Mr. SPersonivan, taking a look at JFK Exhibit F-53, which is an x-ray of President Kennedy's skull, can you give us your opinion as to whether the president may have been hit with an exploding bullet? . . .
Mr. SPersonIVAN: In those cases, you would definitely have seen a cloud of metallic fragments very near the entrance wound. (1 HSCA 401, emphasis added)
And that is exactly what we see on the skull x-rays: there is a cloud of fragments near the right temple, and several witnesses saw a small wound in JFK's right temple (the mortician filled the small hole with wax).
It is humorous to see you dismiss the conclusions of forensic pathologists and pretend that only the opinions of ballistics experts count when it comes to bullet behavior. Most ballistics experts have no experience with gunshot wounds on actual people. They have never seen firsthand the effects of bullets on the body. They have never done autopsies on gunshot victims, have never removed bullet fragments during autopsies, etc., etc. And, most ballistics experts have no training in reading x-rays.
Perhaps you are taking this silly position because so many forensic pathologists have noted that the head-shot bullet did not behave like an FMJ missile. On an interesting side note, we now know that the autopsy doctors themselves expressed surprise during the autopsy that there were so many fragments in the head from the supposedly FMJ bullet.
Off the top of my head, I can name you two ballistics experts who argue that the head-shot bullet did not behave like an FMJ bullet: Howard Donahue and Dr. Roger McCarthy.
Furthermore, I am still waiting for you to name me a single ballistics expert who claims that it is not at all unusual for an FMJ bullet that strikes a skull (1) to fragment into dozens of pieces, (2) to leave two mid-section fragments on the outer table of the skull 1 cm below the entry point or 9 cm above the entry point, and (3) to eject the nose and tail from the skull.
I know that SPersonivan would never endorse such a ludicrous position. He argued that the 6.5 mm object must be an artifact because he said that the object would have had to be a mid-section fragment and that an FMJ bullet would never deposit such a fragment. And I agree that an FMJ bullet would never, ever, ever behave like that.
Ok, then you guys need to explain the two small fragments on the back of the head. They're on the outer table of the skull. They're not even near an entry point. They are 1 cm below the debunked cowlick entry point, and 9 cm above the EOP entry site. It is clear, obvious, and self-evident that they are ricochet fragments--there is no other rational, plausible, scientific explanation for them, but you guys can't admit this because your version of the shooting won't allow it.
Stop the presses. Yes, this is well known. If you had read a Larry SPersonivan’s book, “The JFK Myths”, you would know what property of a material is most important in what damage it will do to a bullet. And that property is density. It’s not hardness, it’s density. So soft tissue, which has the same density as water, will not deform a WCC/MC bullet, even if hit at muzzle velocity. But bone, which generally has a density of twice that of water, will.
Oh?! So bone will deform FMJ bullets?! Well, yes, I agree. Bone won't cause FMJ bullets to shatter into dozens of pieces, but it most certainly can deform them. So how do you explain CE 399? Its lands and grooves are not even disrupted. Bullets fired into soft materials have emerged with more deformity than CE 399 has.
What is the density of Ponderosa pine wood? Slightly less than that of water. So, even through wood is hard, it won’t damage a WCC/MC bullet anymore than soft tissue will. So naturally it will come out undeformed after going through, as I recall, 47 inches of soft wood.
LOL! This sets a new record for absurdity and silliness. This is every bit as comical as flat-Earth arguments. Let's just say this: You go get a bullet and try to push the bullet through pine wood, and then try to push that same bullet through water. I guarantee you that you will have no trouble pushing the bullet through the water but that you will be unable to push the bullet through the pine wood. I guarantee it. You won't be able to push the bullet through the pine wood because pine wood is vastly tougher than water.
What ballistic expert says that there are lead fragments near the wound of entry (the back of the head) of JFK’s X-Rays?
LOL! Humm, well, I wasn't aware that ballistics experts were trained in radiology. You keep ignoring the fact that Dr. Mantik has confirmed the presence of those two fragments with OD measurements. Their OD measurements are comparable to the OD measurements of the two largest fragments in the frontal region, so we know they are metallic.
Anyway, I can name a whole bunch of radiologists and medical experts with training and experience in radiology who have identified at least one fragment in the rear outer table of the skull on the autopsy skull x-rays: McDonnel, Seaman, Fitzpatrick, Ubelaker, Fisher, Chesser, Mantik, Aguilar, Morgan, Carnes, Moritz, Lindenberg, Robertson, etc., etc.
And again, this brings up the question as to how old were the test skulls? How much had they dried up? Was the density of the bone still twice the density of water, as it is with living bone?
Now, on the question of why we don’t small lead fragments within the test skull X-Rays, like we do with JFK’s head X-Rays. You do realize that these test skulls were bare skulls, don’t you? How can I explain this to you? The test skulls were similar to your own head. There was nothing between the ears. There was no organic material, like the brain, that the badly deformed bullet would travel through, which strips off small fragments as the bullet with its exposed lead core moves through the brain. And even if, somehow, such fragments were created, they would not remain suspended in space within an empty skull. So, we should not expect to see any X-Ray of a test skull to look identical to an X-Ray of JFK’s skull, with both showing a trail of fragments along the bullet’s path.
We know that with the test result of Skull # 8170, a bullet will get very badly mangled upon striking a skull, even of just a bare skull which has, no doubt, undergone some drying after death. So, if some skulls have dried out enough so that they no longer can mangle a WCC/MC bullet, that doesn’t matter. All that counts is what the skull of a still living man will do to such a bullet.
So I guess you're saying that all the head-shot ballistics tests are meaningless because they did not involve a live person's skull! Yeah, right. The problem is that those tests show that the JFK head-shot bullet did not behave like an FMJ bullet.
FYI, in Olivier's ballistics tests for the WC, the skulls were coated with a gelatin thick enough to simulate scalp, and the skulls were also filled with gelatin to simulate brain tissue (5 H 87).
And, as we have discussed, the 10 bullets that were fired into those skulls produced only about 30 fragments, for an average of three fragments per bullet. Not one of them blew up into dozens of fragments. Not one of them magically deposited two fragments (much less two mid-section fragments) on the outer table of the skull.
I'll have to read more about Lattimer's head-shot ballistics test. If he failed to wrap or coat the skulls, that would be a surprising oversight. If he failed to put any kind of tissue simulant in the skulls, that would be another surprising oversight.
I once again invite you to cite a single case in the known history of forensic science where an FMJ bullet struck a live person's skull and (1) shattered into dozens of fragments, (2) left two fragments 1 cm below or 9 cm above the entry point, and (3) also ejected its nose and tail from the skull. Find me just one case where this has occurred. Just one.
-
Ah, such fun stuff!!
-
By the way, Lucien Haag, cited by lone-gunman theorists as a ballistics expert, admitted in his 2014 article that when he shot fiber-glass-wrapped melons with FMJ bullets, not one of them fragmented. He acknowledged that the bullets "failed to expand or fragment during their penetration of the melons" and that "the melons (which were free to move) remained in place, and the entry and exit holes were small."
So did Haag admit that his tests proved that the lone-gunman theory's head-shot bullet did not behave like an FMJ bullet? No, but, oddly enough, he did admit that after his first set of tests (the ones where the FMJ bullets did not fragment), he did another set of tests in which he first cut off part of the bullets' noses to expose their lead cores! Think I'm exaggerating? Let me quote him:
"The noses of subsequent WCC Carcano bullets were slightly compromised to expose the soft lead cores for the subsequent shots. Just as with an impact to thick bone, these modified bullets immediately deformed and fragmented as they entered the melons, resulting in large exit defects and the expulsion of large quantities of the internal contents."
As I have said, the Haags are quacks, or frauds, when it comes to the JFK case. Below is a critique of Haag's article on the lone-gunman theory's missed shot written by forensic scientist Frank DeRonia. DeRonia earned a Master's degree in metallurgy from Columbia University and worked in the FBI's crime lab for over 20 years. After he retired from the FBI, he continued to provide forensic metallurgy and engineering services through his company Forensic Metallurgy Associates. He has been accepted as a forensic expert on more than 150 occasions in more than 30 states (in both federal and state courts).
"Lucien Haag’s Flawed Analysis of the First Shot Fired in the JFK Assassination"
https://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2016/11/haag.html
-
So did Haag admit that his tests proved that the lone-gunman theory's head-shot bullet did not behave like an FMJ bullet? No, but, oddly enough, he did admit that after his first set of tests (the ones where the FMJ bullets did not fragment), he did another set of tests in which he first cut off part of the bullets' noses to expose their lead cores! Think I'm exaggerating? Let me quote him:
"The noses of subsequent WCC Carcano bullets were slightly compromised to expose the soft lead cores for the subsequent shots. Just as with an impact to thick bone, these modified bullets immediately deformed and fragmented as they entered the melons, resulting in large exit defects and the expulsion of large quantities of the internal contents."
Sounds like he was creating hollow point or frangible rounds to see what would happen, sounds like he learned that he was wrong about the head shot.
-
I thought it would be instructive to take a quick look at one of Dr. John Lattimer’s articles on the medical evidence. We will look at his article titled “Observations Based on a Review of the Autopsy Photographs, X-Rays, and Related Materials of the Late President John F. Kennedy,” published in Resident and Staff Physician in May 1972.
Let us start with what Dr. Lattimer said about the numerous bullet fragments seen in the autopsy skull x-rays. Be advised that he accepted the Clark Panel’s cowlick entry wound, which was a whopping 10 cm/4 inches higher than where the autopsy doctors said it was.
CLUSTER of FRAGMENTS -- An elongated (4 cm) cluster of about 19 tiny metallic fragments in the front of the head was scattered along a line from the anterior edge of the large head wound of exit, back in the direction of the wound of entrance. Four or five similar tiny metallic fragments were embedded in the bone near the anterior edge of the wound of exit and a half-round 1 cm notch in the corner of the largest loose fragment of skull also had a crescent of tiny metallic particles arranged around it. . . .
Several other tiny fragments were scattered between the wound of entry and the wound of exit. . . .
The x-rays of the head taken before the start of the autopsy, revealed at least 35 small metal fragments, mostly less than 1 mm in diameter, scattered throughout the right side of the top of the head.
Comment: Lattimer’s wording can be confusing, but if you look at his diagram (Figure 7), he puts the cluster of 19 fragments to the right of the right ear, and part of the cluster seems to extend into the frontal region.
So far, not a single ballistics test done with FMJ bullets and simulated or cadaverous human skulls has produced an FMJ missile that fragmented into 35 or more fragments, and forensic science knows of no head-shot case where an FMJ bullet behaved in this manner.
BULLET FRAGMENT IN FRONT OF BRAIN -- The second largest metallic fragment (7 mm x 3 mm but crescentic) had come to rest in the front margin of the brain just above the top of the frontal sinus on the right. . . .
The largest was a 6.5 mm rounded fragment stuck on the sharp margin of the bone at the wound of entry into the back of the skull.
Comment: Lattimer badly misread the AP x-ray as showing the 6.5 mm object to be in the back of the head, when in fact it is near the right eye. The Clark Panel, the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel, and the HSCA medical panel made the same mistake, a mistake that was not corrected until Dr. David Mantik, a radiation oncologist and physicist, examined the x-rays at the National Archives and took optical density measurements with an optical densitometer. The three ARRB medical experts, one of whom was a forensic radiologist, confirmed Dr. Mantik’s finding, as have Dr. Gary Aguilar, Dr. Michael Chesser, Dr. Joseph Riley, and a number of other experts. We now know that the 6.5 mm object is a ghosted image that a forger placed on the AP x-ray. It was ghosted over the image of one of the two smaller, genuine fragments in the rear outer table of the skull.
THE WOUND OF ENTRY IN THE HEAD -- The head "wound-of-entry" could be clearly seen In four of the color photographs to consist of an ovoid penetrating wound of the back of the head about 7 x 15 mm in size, and about 2 cm to the right of the midline, high up above the hairline and where the calvarium was starting to curve forward.
Comment: If the cowlick entry wound could “clearly be seen” in four of the autopsy photos, how in the world did the autopsy doctors miss it? The three ARRB medical experts saw no such wound when they examined the original autopsy photos, and they noted that no such wound appears in the skull x-rays, a finding that Dr. Mantik and several other experts have confirmed. When the HSCA showed the autopsy doctors the autopsy photos, the doctors rejected the claim the cowlick wound could be seen in the photos.
So what in the world is going on here? Either the autopsy doctors were legally blind and unbelievably incompetent or the extant autopsy photos that show the back of the head intact have been altered. The autopsy doctors had the body in front of them for over three hours. They handled the head repeatedly. It is absurd to argue that they somehow “mistook” a wound in the cowlick for a wound that was 4 inches lower at the EOP, especially when they had the EOP itself and the hairline as reference points. Such a colossal, mind-boggling “mistake” is just not plausible or believable.
This, of course, raises the issue of the fragment trail in the autopsy skull x-rays. The fragment trail that Lattimer, the Clark Panel, and the HSCA FPP identified is high in the skull. But the autopsy doctors mentioned no such fragment trail in the autopsy report, nor in their testimony. Instead, they described a much lower fragment trail, one that started at the EOP and went to a point just above the right eye. However, no such low fragment trail appears in the extant autopsy skull x-rays.
Again, what in the world is going on here? Were the autopsy doctors once again legally blind and mind-bogglingly incompetent? Didn’t they see the very noticeable high fragment trail on the skull x-rays? If so, why didn’t they mention it in the autopsy report or in their testimony? And why do the extant skull x-rays show no trace of the low fragment trail described in the autopsy report? These are enormous discrepancies that raise unsolvable problems for those who argue that the autopsy materials have not been altered.
It is just not credible to suggest that all three autopsy doctors, plus the radiologist, somehow “mistook” the fragment trail now seen on the skull x-rays for a trail that started at the EOP, especially on the lateral x-rays, where the difference between a top-of-head fragment trail and an EOP-to-right-eye fragment trail would have been obvious even to a first-year medical student.
The conspirators who were handling the medical cover-up were faced with two severe problems: (1) the bullet that struck just above the EOP could not have come from the Oswald window, and (2) the high fragment trail, with its cluster of fragments in the front part of the skull, suggested a frontal shot. It appears that they first opted to ignore the high fragment trail but that later they decided that the EOP entry site was a more severe problem.
Therefore, they ensured that the autopsy report said nothing about the high fragment trail; but, later, they changed their minds and attempted to change the location of the rear head entry wound and added the 6.5 mm object, in order to avoid the EOP site’s impossible trajectory and to attempt to explain the high fragment trail. Their alterations fooled the Clark Panel, the Rockefeller Commission’s medical panel, and the HSCA FPP (but not some of the FPP’s outside consultants, who raised questions about the cowlick entry site and who noted the presence of a second fragment on the back of the head).
Here is a link to Lattimer’s article:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1fa2/bee3d41bc4815f0874d9dd74598ad4fcb55e.pdf
-
I think with so much conflicting information and Lattimers mistakes and confusing description I need to get out of the minutia and get above it all. What do we know? A frangible round hit JFK in the back of the head depositing small fragments inside the head. There were FMJ 2 fragments on the back of the head from the ricochet and several seen on the interior on an x-ray admittedly placed there by Jerrol Custer as ordered to do so by Dr Ebersole. A frangible round could have also come from the front.
So again we have to ask what was the source of the frangible round from the back?
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
-
I think with so much conflicting information and Lattimers mistakes and confusing description I need to get out of the minutia and get above it all. What do we know? A frangible round hit JFK in the back of the head depositing small fragments inside the head. There were FMJ 2 fragments on the back of the head from the ricochet and several seen on the interior on an x-ray admittedly placed there by Jerrol Custer as ordered to do so by Dr Ebersole. A frangible round could have also come from the front.
So again we have to ask what was the source of the frangible round from the back?
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.
Oh, Lattimer's research is loaded with errors--and not just minor errors, but rather severe errors. For example, if you look at the rest of Lattimer's article, he includes an SBT diagram that shows the back wound noticeably above the throat wound, even farther above the throat wound than the WC placed it (Figure 2).
Lattimer also describes Oswald's alleged bullets as "high-speed bullets" and gives their speed as 2200 fps, but the alleged murder weapon was a low-/medium-velocity rifle, so it would not have fired any "high-speed bullets." Plus, 2200 fps is not considered to be "high speed" for rifle bullets anyway. 2200 fps is toward the lower end of the scale for rifle muzzle velocities (the M-1 had a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps; the AR-15 had a muzzle velocity of 3300 fps).
Yet, Lattimer is one of the WC apologists' top "experts."
And, yes, the key point is that the ammo that hit JFK in the head behaved nothing like FMJ ammo but behaved very much like frangible ammo.
-
So if JFK had a 6mm hole in the back of his head and frangible fragments in his head from that shot then it's a safe assumption the bullet came from behind.(https://i.postimg.cc/BnmKxr8r/images-m16.jpg)
See anything that might give you an idea where it might have come from?
-
Oh, Lattimer's research is loaded with errors--and not just minor errors, but rather severe errors. For example, if you look at the rest of Lattimer's article, he includes an SBT diagram that shows the back wound noticeably above the throat wound, even farther above the throat wound than the WC placed it (Figure 2).
The back wound was higher than the throat wound, as is clear from the autopsy photographs.
Besides, a lower back wound makes no sense. The clothes definitely show the bullet came from the back.
Also, if from the front, who would be shooting through the windshield? A minor deflection would cause a miss.
Lattimer also describes Oswald's alleged bullets as "high-speed bullets" and gives their speed as 2200 fps, but the alleged murder weapon was a low-/medium-velocity rifle, so it would not have fired any "high-speed bullets." Plus, 2200 fps is not considered to be "high speed" for rifle bullets anyway. 2200 fps is toward the lower end of the scale for rifle muzzle velocities (the M-1 had a muzzle velocity of 2800 fps; the AR-15 had a muzzle velocity of 3300 fps).
There is no definitive definition as to what the threshold is for a high-speed bullet. A reasonable threshold is the speed of sound. Most handguns are subsonic. I believe all rifles are supersonic, above 1150 feet per second. So the 2160 feet per second WCC/MC can be called a “high speed” bullet.
Yet, Lattimer is one of the WC apologists' top "experts."
I haven’t said so for some time. Since he has died. But yes, he was one of the top experts on medical questions. And for a non-ballistic expert, pretty knowledgeable about the ballistics of the case.
And, yes, the key point is that the ammo that hit JFK in the head behaved nothing like FMJ ammo but behaved very much like frangible ammo.
Where is the ballistic expert who says the bullets behaved nothing like WCC/MC bullets? I don’t care about what other FMJ bullets do.
Do all FMJ bullets have the same muzzle velocity?
Do all FMJ have the same threshold velocity above which they will be damaged by human bone?
Do all FMJ bullets have the same shape, same copper alloy, same thickness of the jacket, same length, same rotation rate, etc.?
It doesn’t matter what other, non WCC/MC FMJ bullets do. Only what WCC/MC bullet do.
Where is the ballistic expert who says the bullets behaved nothing like WCC/MC bullets?
The question you always dodge.
-
Joe,
“Hence, some differences between the bullet that went through Skull # 8170 and President Kennedy. The bullet that went through President Kennedy’s head broke up into 3 fragments. The Skull # 8170 bullet remained in one extremely mangled fragment that did not quite separate into multiple fragments, but came close to doing so, as one can see from Figure 20 on Page 122 from Larry SPersonivan’s book “The JFK Myths”. Also, while a string of tiny fragments was left in President Kennedy’s head, there was no string of tiny fragments left within Skull # 8170, suspended in air. Nor should we expect to see such.”
I am not a ballistic expert, but I would say the difference is between a WCC/MC with the lead core exposed, moving through brain tissue, and a similar bullet moving through thin air.
As Larry SPersonivan explained in his book, “The JFK Myths”, but bullet broke into at least 3 fragments while moving through the brain, with smaller fragments being stripped off along the way. I am paraphrasing here with my own words to give the jest of what I recalled he was saying.
And were two of these fragments deposited on the outside back of his head?
And I don’t know anything about any fragments being deposited on the outside of the back of the head.
And where was the third frag found?
The third fragment was never found. It probably just cleared the windshield, nicked Mr. Tague and continued flying through the air and was never found.
A string of tiny fragments found in JFK’s head and not in skull #8170. This is because #8170 was shot with a FMJ round and JFK was shot with a frangible round.
Moving through thin air, a WCC/MC is not going to leave a string of tiny fragments within Skull # 1870. But would do so within a skull filled with a brain.
Find me a professional ballistic expert who disagrees with any of this. The CTers have not found one, anywhere in the world, for over 56 years.
-
I am not a ballistic expert, but I would say the difference is between a WCC/MC with the lead core exposed, moving through brain tissue, and a similar bullet moving through thin air.
As Larry SPersonivan explained in his book, “The JFK Myths”, but bullet broke into at least 3 fragments while moving through the brain, with smaller fragments being stripped off along the way. I am paraphrasing here with my own words to give the jest of what I recalled he was saying.
And I don’t know anything about any fragments being deposited on the outside of the back of the head.
The third fragment was never found. It probably just cleared the windshield, nicked Mr. Tague and continued flying through the air and was never found.
Moving through thin air, a WCC/MC is not going to leave a string of tiny fragments within Skull # 1870. But would do so within a skull filled with a brain.
Find me a professional ballistic expert who disagrees with any of this. The CTers have not found one, anywhere in the world, for over 56 years.
Find me a professional ballistic expert who disagrees with any of this. The CTers have not found one, anywhere in the world, for over 56 years.
That's not all CTers haven't found in over 56 years
-
Interesting video I had never seen before by a Student Doctor at Parkland, who was one of the first medics to see JFK wheeled in and his head wounds.
Seems to confirm what the rest of the Parkland doctors said that there was big wound in the back of the head.
Relevant details start at 3.00 point of the video.
-
The back wound was higher than the throat wound, as is clear from the autopsy photographs.
There's no publicly available autopsy photo that shows these wounds relative to each other.
-
As Larry SPersonivan explained in his book, “The JFK Myths”, but bullet broke into at least 3 fragments while moving through the brain, with smaller fragments being stripped off along the way.
How would Larry SPersonivan know how many fragments JFK's head shot broke into?
-
There's no publicly available autopsy photo that shows these wounds relative to each other.
Wrong, Joe. Here's a photo of the FBI (read government) reenactment event. They had access to all materials including the autopsy report. Notice the stickers they're putting on the Kennedy stand in. Because there was no back throat wound, the sticker on the back of the neck is higher than the upper back entrance wound.
The autopsy photo of the back shows no wound on the back of the neck, but does show the upper back wound. Therefore, the higher up sticker represents the front of the throat wound, the same wound that Perry cut into for the tube.
So there's plenty of evidence that both of these wounds couldn't possibly be caused by the same bullet. Hence, the fudging and massaging of the record by the lawyers to come up with a way to show that one bullet magically created all wounds.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4gdWxEAnONc/XdgYq04sAqI/AAAAAAAAFdE/5vYcXgq0EgU1pGsHfVT67PHfvbXREt7JQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg)
-
Wrong, Joe. Here's a photo of the FBI (read government) reenactment event. They had access to all materials including the autopsy report. Notice the stickers they're putting on the Kennedy stand in. Because there was no back throat wound, the sticker on the back of the neck is higher than the upper back entrance wound.
The autopsy photo of the back shows know wound on the back of the neck, but does show the upper back wound. Therefore, the higher up sticker represents the front of the throat wound, the same wound that Perry cut into for the tube.
So there's plenty of evidence that both of these wounds couldn't possibly be caused by the same bullet. Hence, the fudging and massaging of the record by the lawyers to come up with a way to show that one bullet magically created all wounds.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4gdWxEAnONc/XdgYq04sAqI/AAAAAAAAFdE/5vYcXgq0EgU1pGsHfVT67PHfvbXREt7JQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg)
Jerry Organ has schooled you on this so many times that it's not even funny.
-
Jerry Organ has schooled you on this so many times that it's not even funny.
Jerry Organ doesn't know enough about the case to school anyone on anything. He keeps posting goofy graphics even after the egregious errors in the graphics have been pointed out to him. He'll make a claim; the claim will be refuted; and then the next day he'll repeat the claim and will make no effort to even address the counter-arguments.
The dot on the agent's jacket was intended to show the location of the back wound based on the holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat, a perfectly logical, credible thing to do, especially since the clothing holes put the back wound where it was put by the death certificate (marked "verified"), by the autopsy face sheet (also marked "verified"), by the Sibert and O'Neill report on the autopsy, by the FBI report on the autopsy, by Rankin's comment during the 1/27/64 WC executive session, by Clint Hill's description of the wound, by Roy Kellerman's description of the wound, and by Dr. John Ebersole's description of the wound.
The HSCA FPP moved the back wound down by about 1.5 inches and to the left by about 1 inch from where the WC placed the wound. The HSCA FPP's placement was closer to the truth. Yet, Canning, the HSCA's trajectory expert, could not even begin to get the SBT's trajectories to work without ditching the FPP's placement and going with the WC's placement.
And to bring the conversation back to the topic of the thread, allow me to add that no FMJ bullet in any ballistics test or in any known forensic case has burst into dozens of fragments, much less deposited two mid-section fragments on the outer table of the skull while ejecting the nose and tail from the skull. Not on this planet.
-
Jerry Organ doesn't know enough about the case to school anyone on anything. He keeps posting goofy graphics even after the egregious errors in the graphics have been pointed out to him. He'll make a claim; the claim will be refuted; and then the next day he'll repeat the claim and will make no effort to even address the counter-arguments.
The dot on the agent's jacket was intended to show the location of the back wound based on the holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat, a perfectly logical, credible thing to do, especially since the clothing holes put the back wound where it was put by the death certificate (marked "verified"), by the autopsy face sheet (also marked "verified"), by the Sibert and O'Neill report on the autopsy, by the FBI report on the autopsy, by Rankin's comment during the 1/27/64 WC executive session, by Clint Hill's description of the wound, by Roy Kellerman's description of the wound, and by Dr. John Ebersole's description of the wound.
The HSCA FPP moved the back wound down by about 1.5 inches and to the left by about 1 inch from where the WC placed the wound. The HSCA FPP's placement was closer to the truth. Yet, Canning, the HSCA's trajectory expert, could not even begin to get the SBT's trajectories to work without ditching the FPP's placement and going with the WC's placement.
And to bring the conversation back to the topic of the thread, allow me to add that no FMJ bullet in any ballistics test or in any known forensic case has burst into dozens of fragments, much less deposited two mid-section fragments on the outer table of the skull while ejecting the nose and tail from the skull. Not on this planet.
Martin Fackler
http://www.rkba.org/research/fackler/wrong.html
-
Jerry Organ doesn't know enough about the case to school anyone on anything. He keeps posting goofy graphics even after the egregious errors in the graphics have been pointed out to him. He'll make a claim; the claim will be refuted; and then the next day he'll repeat the claim and will make no effort to even address the counter-arguments.
The dot on the agent's jacket was intended to show the location of the back wound based on the holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat, a perfectly logical, credible thing to do, especially since the clothing holes put the back wound where it was put by the death certificate (marked "verified"), by the autopsy face sheet (also marked "verified"), by the Sibert and O'Neill report on the autopsy, by the FBI report on the autopsy, by Rankin's comment during the 1/27/64 WC executive session, by Clint Hill's description of the wound, by Roy Kellerman's description of the wound, and by Dr. John Ebersole's description of the wound.
The HSCA FPP moved the back wound down by about 1.5 inches and to the left by about 1 inch from where the WC placed the wound. The HSCA FPP's placement was closer to the truth. Yet, Canning, the HSCA's trajectory expert, could not even begin to get the SBT's trajectories to work without ditching the FPP's placement and going with the WC's placement.
And to bring the conversation back to the topic of the thread, allow me to add that no FMJ bullet in any ballistics test or in any known forensic case has burst into dozens of fragments, much less deposited two mid-section fragments on the outer table of the skull while ejecting the nose and tail from the skull. Not on this planet.
You need to start using reductive thinking, Mike. Look at the photos below - there is absolutely no evidence on the clothing that ANY holes were that high up on either the jacket or the shirt. And by saying "that high up" I mean for the stand in to have that sticker on the back of the neck. Where you got the above malarkey I have no idea.
Why do you think they were even in Dealey Plaza that day? Obviously to figure out among other things the trajectory of the shots based on various criteria: 1. Because of the fake sniper's nest "evidence" (e.g., boxes, shells and so on); 2. Because of the wounds based on the autopsy; 3. Because of the clothing evidence.
So they put the stickers on the stand in based on the autopsy photo of the upper back wound, which is correct. But I'll say it again - there is *no rear neck wound* where that upper sticker is. There's no wound showing in any of the autopsy photos where that sticker is, nor are there any holes in the clothing where the hole is. They had a mandate to prove only one shooter shot one shot and it went through both men. Therefore, they put that upper neck sticker there to see the trajectory of this single shot going through the back wound and coming out the other side of the neck.
And as we all know, that's impossible to have taken place because no shot comes from a downward angle and goes *upward* out of the neck and goes on to JBC. And further, we also all know that that back wound did not even terminate anywhere in the body.
So reductive thinking is the key here, Mike, and I'd be very careful about spreading baloney like your quote above. Also be careful about muddying the waters when someone is right about this.
(https://grassyknoll.us/sites/default/files/images/Back%20Wound/jfkcoat.png)
(https://grassyknoll.us/sites/default/files/images/Back%20Wound/JFK%20Shirt%2C%20back.jpg)
(https://i.postimg.cc/zG3LTLb1/jfk-bloody-shirt-comparison-1.jpg)
-
You need to start using reductive thinking, Mike. Look at the photos below - there is absolutely no evidence on the clothing that ANY holes were that high up on either the jacket or the shirt. And by saying "that high up" I mean for the stand in to have that sticker on the back of the neck. Where you got the above malarkey I have no idea.
Why do you think they were even in Dealey Plaza that day? Obviously to figure out among other things the trajectory of the shots based on various criteria: 1. Because of the fake sniper's nest "evidence" (e.g., boxes, shells and so on); 2. Because of the wounds based on the autopsy; 3. Because of the clothing evidence.
So they put the stickers on the stand in based on the autopsy photo of the upper back wound, which is correct. But I'll say it again - there is *no rear neck wound* where that upper sticker is. There's no wound showing in any of the autopsy photos where that sticker is, nor are there any holes in the clothing where the hole is. They had a mandate to prove only one shooter shot one shot and it went through both men. Therefore, they put that upper neck sticker there to see the trajectory of this single shot going through the back wound and coming out the other side of the neck.
And as we all know, that's impossible to have taken place because no shot comes from a downward angle and goes *upward* out of the neck and goes on to JBC. And further, we also all know that that back wound did not even terminate anywhere in the body.
So reductive thinking is the key here, Mike, and I'd be very careful about spreading baloney like your quote above. Also be careful about muddying the waters when someone is right about this.
I think the dot on the agent's back in the photo is at right about T3. I think you have to account for the agent's posture--he's leaning forward by a fair amount. So I think the dot is placed pretty close to where it should be.
-
I am not a ballistic expert, but I would say the difference is between a WCC/MC with the lead core exposed, moving through brain tissue, and a similar bullet moving through thin air.
As Larry SPersonivan explained in his book, “The JFK Myths”, but bullet broke into at least 3 fragments while moving through the brain, with smaller fragments being stripped off along the way. I am paraphrasing here with my own words to give the jest of what I recalled he was saying.
I am not a ballistics expert either but I do know that a FMJ bullet will go through both sides of a skull and not break up
Please see this experiment using pigs heads. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4013744/
And I don’t know anything about any fragments being deposited on the outside of the back of the head.
The two fragments were from the ricochet round that hit the pavement. They were embedded in the back of his head.
Moving through thin air, a WCC/MC is not going to leave a string of tiny fragments within Skull # 1870. But would do so within a skull filled with a brain.
Just the opposite, remember the gelatin experiments. The FMJ bullet would go through the skull and passes through the brain like in the gelatin and goes through the other side of the skull. So it would not have an opportunity to leave any fragments on the interior of the skull.
Find me a professional ballistic expert who disagrees with any of this. The CTers have not found one, anywhere in the world, for over 56 years
Don’t need a ballistics expert. Common logic tells you just by what I told you about the FMJ round going through the head, and the pig head experiment.