JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Michael T. Griffith on July 26, 2025, 11:34:56 AM
-
The throat wound was an entrance wound. The wound was immediately below the larynx and above the shirt and tie. It was visible before JFK's shirt and tie were removed. The front shirt slits and the small nick on the left side of the tie knot were made by nurses as they hurriedly cut away JFK's clothing. We learned years ago when photos of the tie were released that there was no hole through the tie, only a small nick on the left edge of the tie knot.
Dr. Ronald Jones saw JFK's body before the clothes were removed. Interviewed for the 2023 Paramount documentary JFK: What the Doctors Saw, Dr. Jones said the throat wound was "visible" and that it was "just above where the shirt and tie was":
The first thing I noticed was a very small wound in his neck in the front. . . .
We could tell that the wound was in the front of the neck just above
where the shirt and tie was. So it was visible to you.
(18:12-18:19, 18:32-18:39)
In the same documentary, Dr. Joe D. Goldstrich, a fourth-year medical student at Parkland Hospital at the time, said he could see the neck wound when JFK's clothes were still on:
I do remember that very early on, even when his clothes were
still on, I saw the wound in his neck. (18:20-18:28)
He would not have been able to see the throat wound if it had been under/behind the tie knot and the front shirt slits.
Dr. Carrico told the WC that the throat wound was above the tie:
Dulles: Will you show us about where it was?
Dr. Carrico: Just about where your tie would be.
Dulles: Where did it enter?
Dr. Carrico: It entered?
Dulles: Yes.
Dr. Carrico: At the time we did not know --
Dulles: I see.
Dr. Carrico: The entrance. All we knew this was a small wound here.
Dulles: I see. And you put your hand right above where your tie is?
Dr. Carrico: Yes, sir. (3 H 361-362)
Plus, we have Carrico's 11/22/63 admission note, where he said the throat wound was "immediately below the larynx." A wound "immediately below" the larynx would be above the collar and above the shirt slits.
When Carrico spoke with Harold Weisberg in 1975, he confirmed that the throat wound was above the collar; he was “definite on this” (Weisberg, Never Again, 2007 edition, p. 241). Weisberg continued:
When I asked him if he saw any bullet holes in the shirt or tie, he was
definite in saying “No.” I asked if he recalled Dulles’s question and his
own pointing to above his own shirt collar as the location of the bullet hole.
He does remember this, and he does remember confirming that the hole
was above the collar. . . . (Never Again, p. 242)
Carrico also told Weisberg that the nurses used scalpels to remove the president’s shirt and tie because they were, understandably, in a big hurry, and that it was “likely” that the nurses made the slits and the nick in the tie, adding, “I saw neither the nick in the tie nor the cuts in the shirt before the nurses started cutting” (Weisberg, Post Mortem, pp. 375-376; http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/N%20Disk/New%20York%20Times/Item%2093.pdf, p. 4; https://www.google.com/books/edition/Matrix_for_Assassination/SC-wBAAAQBAJ?q=&gbpv=1#f=true, pp. 95-96; http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Book Images/Never Again - Draft/Never Again Draft.pdf (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Book Images/Never Again - Draft/Never Again Draft.pdf), p. 14)
Rockefeller Foundation fellow Henry Hurt, in his book Reasonable Doubt, notes that one of the nurses confirmed that nurses made the shirt slits when they hurriedly cut away JFK’s tie and shirt (p. 60).
Dr. Malcolm Perry diagnosed the throat wound as an entrance wound because it was small (3-5 mm in diameter), neat (no ragged edges), and punched-in, and because of the damage he saw beneath the throat wound. He believed the missile had entered the throat and then ranged downward into the chest.
Dr. Kemp Clark said that Dr. Perry discovered that the trachea was deviated, and that Perry believed the missile had ranged downward into the chest:
He discovered that the trachea was deviated so he felt that the
missile had entered the President's chest. (6 H 22)
Dr. Clark said that Dr. Perry also saw blood in the strap muscles of the neck and that Perry believed this was another indication that the bullet had entered the chest:
The part pertaining to the bullet entering the President's chest rests
on the reasons for the placing of the chest tubes which were being
inserted when I arrived. It was the assumption, based on the previously
described deviation of the trachea and the presence of blood in the
strap muscles of the neck that a wound or missile wound might have
entered the President's chest. (6 H 28)
Dr. Perry explained that in addition to the damage to the trachea and the blood in the strap muscles, he also found “free air and blood” in the “superior right mediastinum” (the upper-right part of the central compartment of the chest cavity), which further led him to believe the missile had entered the chest:
I made a transverse incision right through this wound and carried
it down to the superficial fascia, to expose the strap muscles overlying
the thyroid and the trachea. There was an injury to the right lateral
aspect of the trachea at the level of the external wound. The trachea
was deviated slightly to the left and it was necessary to divide the
strap muscles on the left side in order to gain access to the trachea.
At this point, I recall. Dr. Jones right on my left was placing a catheter
into a vein in the left arm because he handed me a necessary
instrument which I needed in the performance of the procedure.
The wound in the trachea was then enlarged to admit a cuffed
tracheotomy tube to support respiration. I noted that there was
free air and blood in the superior right mediastinum. Although I saw
no injury to the lung or to the pleural space, the presence of this free
blood and air in this area could be indicative of a wound of the right
hemithorax, and I asked that someone put a right chest tube in for
seal drain age. At the time I did not know who did this, but I have
been informed that Dr. Baxter and Dr. Paul Peters inserted the chest
tube and connected it to underwater drainage. (6 H 10)
Dr. Perry also noted there was considerable bruising in “the right lateral portion of the neck” and also the right upper mediastinum:
Mr. Specter. What did you observe, if anything with respect to bruising
in the interior portion of the President's neck?
Dr. Perry. There was considerable hematoma in the right lateral portion
of the neck and the right superior mediastinum, as I noted. (6 H 11)
The fact that this damage was on the righthand side of the superior (upper) mediastinum is important because the nick on the tie knot was on the left edge of the knot, an obviously impossible trajectory given the thickness of the knot and the fact that the knot was neatly centered in the middle of the collar band.
All of these facts enable us to more fully appreciate the ARRB disclosures about the back wound. We now know that on the night of the autopsy, the autopsy doctors were absolutely, completely, and totally certain that the back wound had no exit point. They established this with prolonged probing, both with fingers and with surgical probes, and even removed the chest organs and positioned the body “every which way” to facilitate and observe the probing. A medical technician at the autopsy reported that he could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity and that there was no exit point.
This explains another fact that we now know thanks to ARRB disclosures: the first draft of the autopsy report said the throat wound was caused by a fragment from the head shot.
-
The throat wound was an entrance wound.
Griffith,
You're so full of beans, I can smell you from here.
-
Griffith,
You're so full of beans, I can smell you from here.
And you are unserious. Your main purpose here seems to be to accuse anyone who doubts the WC of being a Russian disinformation agent, which is just plain weird and silly.
Now, let's see: The throat wound was only 3-5 mm in diameter. It was punched-in, not gashed out. It was neat, without ragged edges. There was more damage behind the wound than on the surface of the wound. These are all textbook, standard indications of an entrance wound, and Dr. Perry and the other Parkland staff had seen many more gunshot wounds than Humes and Boswell had seen.
Furthermore, the wound was located above the shirt slits and above the tie knot. So, obviously, no bullet exited the shirt slits, which is why there is no fabric missing from them, why the FBI found no metallic traces around them, and why there was no hole through the tie. These facts, in turn, are not at all surprising since we now know that the back wound had no exit point and that this was acknowledged in the first draft of the autopsy report.
We also now know, mainly thanks to ARRB disclosures, that Dr. Perry was severely pressured and badgered into changing his diagnosis of the throat wound from entrance wound to exit wound, but toward the end of his life he told a friend and fellow surgeon that the wound was definitely an entrance wound.
But you folks are simply in denial of all this evidence because it destroys your absurd single-bullet theory, which was only cooked up in desperation when the timing problem and the Tague wounding could not be ignored.
-
Your main purpose here seems to be to accuse anyone who doubts the WC of being a Russian disinformation agent.
Griffith,
People who, after five years or so of serious "study," still doubt the conclusions of the Warren Commission Report aren't necessarily witting "Russian disinformation agents" -- it's much more likely that they're simply "useful idiots" who've been zombified in general by sixty-six years (it started in 1959) of KGB* disinformation, "active measures," and mole-based strategic deception counterintelligence operations, and in particular by JFKA disinfo courtesy of Mark "KGB" Lane, Jim "Paese Sera" Garrison, and Oliver "Jim Garrison/Jim Marrs/Jim DiEugenio" Stone, et al. ad nauseam.
However, people like you who don't just "doubt the WC" but actively proselytize against it as much as you do are a different kind of animal altogether, IMHO.
Question: Does Vladimir Putin pay you, or do you do it for free?
*Today's SVR and FSB
-
The wound immediately below the larynx and above the shirt and tie.
Wrong again, Griffith!
(https://i.postimg.cc/4y9TJL7y/jfk-profile-and-autopsy-proving-SBF.gif)
JohnM
-
The throat wound was an entrance wound.
If the throat wound was an entrance wound, what happened to the bullet? What happened to the bullet that entered the back of the neck?
-
Wrong again, Griffith!
JohnM
So your answer to the fact that there was no hole through the tie, the fact that there was only a small nick on the left edge of the tie knot, the fact that the damage beneath the throat wound was to the right and below the throat wound, the fact that no metallic traces were found around the front shirt slits, the fact that the first draft of the autopsy report said the throat wound was caused by a fragment from the head shot, the fact that the throat wound was only 3-5 mm in diameter and was punched-in and had no ragged edges, the fact that Dr. Carrico and Dr. Jones said the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, the fact that the autopsy doctors established beyond any doubt that the back wound had no exit point (which is why the first autopsy report said the throat wound was the exit point for a fragment from the head shot), and the fact that Dr. Carrico confirmed that the nurses made the shirt slits and nicked the tie knot while they were hurriedly cutting away JFK's clothing--your answer to all of these facts is to offer another one of your bogus graphics?
-
Wrong again, Griffith!
(https://i.postimg.cc/4y9TJL7y/jfk-profile-and-autopsy-proving-SBF.gif)
JohnM
Hey John - So are we to believe we are looking at the very same Adam's Apple in both photos? These 2 images of the throat area do Not even look similar.
-
Hey John - So are we to believe we are looking at the very same Adam's Apple in both photos? These 2 images of the throat area do Not even look similar.
Storing,
Which photo do you think (sic) was altered by the evil, evil, evil Deep State bad guys?
Both of them?
Different question:
Which JFK is the imposter?
Both?
-
If the throat wound was an entrance wound, what happened to the bullet? What happened to the bullet that entered the back of the neck?
Throat wound: CIA-issued ice bullet that melted. No exit wound.
Shallow back wound: Bullet fell out somewhere. Possibly CE 399, the magic bullet. No, that won't work. Well, it fell out somewhere. No, wait, it was an ice bullet, too.
Alignment between back wound and throat wound: Pure coincidence, there is no connection.
I have this all on good authority from Cliff Varnell at the Ed Forum.
-
This explains another fact that we now know thanks to ARRB disclosures: the first draft of the autopsy report said the throat wound was caused by a fragment from the head shot.
We don't really "know" this, do we? There is nothing to this effect in the ARRB final report, which does highlight what was learned about the autopsy. Aren't what you are calling "ARRB disclosures" actually more like "Doug Horne's speculation" in this 1996 memorandum: https://documents3.theblackvault.com/documents/jfkfiles/NARA-Oct2017/ARRB/TEAMA/MEDICAL/CHAIN2.WPD.pdf.
-
Throat wound: CIA-issued ice bullet that melted. No exit wound.
Shallow back wound: Bullet fell out somewhere. Possibly CE 399, the magic bullet. No, that won't work. Well, it fell out somewhere. No, wait, it was an ice bullet, too.
Alignment between back wound and throat wound: Pure coincidence, there is no connection.
I have this all on good authority from Cliff Varnell at the Ed Forum.
Varnell eh?
It's a wonder that they never tried to save the lives of JFK's jacket and shirt at Parkland or that autopsies were not performed on them at Parkland. ;D
I can't remember if it was Varnell who said that Connally was probably swatting at a bee with his Stetson or if it was someone else. I'm thinking that it was Varnell though.
-
We don't really "know" this, do we? There is nothing to this effect in the ARRB final report, which does highlight what was learned about the autopsy. Aren't what you are calling "ARRB disclosures" actually more like "Doug Horne's speculation" in this 1996 memorandum: https://documents3.theblackvault.com/documents/jfkfiles/NARA-Oct2017/ARRB/TEAMA/MEDICAL/CHAIN2.WPD.pdf.
Griffith doesn't know it. He made it up.
-
Throat wound: CIA-issued ice bullet that melted. No exit wound.
Shallow back wound: Bullet fell out somewhere. Possibly CE 399, the magic bullet. No, that won't work. Well, it fell out somewhere. No, wait, it was an ice bullet, too.
Alignment between back wound and throat wound: Pure coincidence, there is no connection.
I have this all on good authority from Cliff Varnell at the Ed Forum.
I believe the shallow back wound bullet is supposed to be the bullet that SA Paul Landis claimed he found inside the JFK Limo. Landis also claimed to have placed that same bullet on a hospital gurney.
-
Try saying "Front Shirt Slits" real fast 5 times!
-
I believe the shallow back wound bullet is supposed to be the bullet that SA Paul Landis claimed he found inside the JFK Limo. Landis also claimed to have placed that same bullet on a hospital gurney.
Storing,
What do you mean by "supposed to be"?
"Supposed to be caused by"?
Is that what you're trying to say?
If so, why don't you think the entry wounds to JFK's upper-back / lower-neck and JBC's back were both caused by CE-399?
-
I believe the shallow back wound bullet is supposed to be the bullet that SA Paul Landis claimed he found inside the JFK Limo. Landis also claimed to have placed that same bullet on a hospital gurney.
Yes, it's too bad Landis didn't reveal his bombshell at the time. I will grant that the autopsy doctors' inability to trace the path of the bullet that caused the back wound is puzzling. I will grant Cliff Varnell's point that the alignment of the holes in the clothing with the throat wound is problematical (yes, I know all about the "bunching" argument regarding the clothes). Add in the condition of CE 399 for all the damage it is supposed to have done, together with Connally's insistence he was hit by a different shot, and the SBT is somewhat (or considerably more than somewhat) difficult to swallow. On the other hand, it's quite difficult to accept the back wound being a Carcano dud that found its target 80+ yards away and penetrated two layers of clothing and an inch or two of skin. In my past experience with reloading, in which I managed to create a fair number of duds, that isn't realistic dud performance.
I tend to think the SBT, with all its problems, is the most likely solution. There are so many variables as to EXACTLY how the rifle was positioned, EXACTLY what the particular cartridge was like, EXACTLY how the car was positioned and moving, EXACTLY how JFK's clothing was positioned (including the possible effect of his back brace), EXACTLY how JFK and Connally were positioned, and EXACTLY what the bullet did upon impact, transit and second and third impacts, for me to place much stock in forensic reconstructions supposedly showing the SBT is impossible. I do like to play around with alternative scenarios and am not convinced the SBT is absolutely essential to the LN narrative.
-
Yes, it's too bad Landis didn't reveal his bombshell at the time. I will grant that the autopsy doctors' inability to trace the path of the bullet that caused the back wound is puzzling. I will grant Cliff Varnell's point that the alignment of the holes in the clothing with the throat wound is problematical (yes, I know all about the "bunching" argument regarding the clothes). Add in the condition of CE 399 for all the damage it is supposed to have done, together with Connally's insistence he was hit by a different shot, and the SBT is somewhat (or considerably more than somewhat) difficult to swallow. On the other hand, it's quite difficult to accept the back wound being a Carcano dud that found its target 80+ yards away and penetrated two layers of clothing and an inch or two of skin. In my past experience with reloading, in which I managed to create a fair number of duds, that isn't realistic dud performance.
I tend to think the SBT, with all its problems, is the most likely solution. There are so many variables as to EXACTLY how the rifle was positioned, EXACTLY what the particular cartridge was like, EXACTLY how the car was positioned and moving, EXACTLY how JFK's clothing was positioned (including the possible effect of his back brace), EXACTLY how JFK and Connally were positioned, and EXACTLY what the bullet did upon impact, transit and second and third impacts, for me to place much stock in forensic reconstructions supposedly showing the SBT is impossible. I do like to play around with alternative scenarios and am not convinced the SBT is absolutely essential to the LN narrative.
The inability of the autopsy doctors to trace the path of the bullet through JFK's upper torso was probably due to the fact that rigor mortis had set in on JFK's corpse.
IIRC, the path was deduced by their physical examination of JFK's lung, etc, and is verified by hints of it in the X-rays.
-
The inability of the autopsy doctors to trace the path of the bullet through JFK's upper torso is probably due to the fact that rigor mortis had set in on JFK's corpse.
IIRC, the path was deduced by their physical examination of JFK's lung, etc, and is verified by hints of it in the X-rays.
That may well be (rigor mortis can affect the determination of a bullet path) but the doctors were puzzled and the fact that they didn't nail down the issue by dissecting the path is likewise puzzling. One might think "a back wound that goes nowhere" would have been puzzling enough to cause them to dissect the wound path (Finck later testified that some general ordered them not to). Gary Aguilar's oft-cited article, "HOW FIVE INVESTIGATIONS INTO JFK’S MEDICAL/AUTOPSY EVIDENCE GOT IT WRONG," contains a good discussion right up front about the issues with the back wound and throat wound at the autopsy: https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_1a.htm. In any event, it's all kind of a mess and doesn't inspire confidence in the SBT even if the SBT is, in fact, correct.
-
"[T]he fact that [the autopsy doctors] didn't nail down the issue by dissecting the path is likewise puzzling."
1) Going from memory, here, but didn't Admiral Burkley communicate to them that Jackie and Bobby, waiting upstairs, were getting impatient for them to finish? Or was it because he (or they) didn't want anyone to know that JFK had a serious problem with his adrenal glands?
2) When did they finally realize that there was a bullet wound in JFK's throat? The next day?
3) These are two examples of how the JFKA was "anomaly-replete," IMHO, readymade for the world-class humanitarian organization known as the KGB* to take advantage of via the likes of Joachim Joesten, Thomas G. Buchanan, Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, and Comrade Oliver Stone, et al. ad nauseum, so that someone like The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with Xxxx) could eventually be "elected" as our "President."
*Today's SVR and FSB
-
I do like to play around with alternative scenarios and am not convinced the SBT is absolutely essential to the LN narrative.
The Warren Commission said the same thing.
Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds.
They were wrong and so are you. IMHO.
Without the SBT there had to be more than one shooter.
I guess that I am what you have referred to as an SBT zealot.
-
The Warren Commission said the same thing.
Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds.
They were wrong and so are you. IMHO.
Without the SBT there had to be more than one shooter.
I guess that I am what you have referred to as an SBT zealot.
Spot on.
Equivocating Fancy Pants Lance (who said, "I'm not convinced the SBT is absolutely essential to the LN narrative") needs to learn to be more logical.
Unless, of course, he thinks it's plausible that CE-399 wasn't fired during the assassination, that only two shots were fired, that the dented shell found on the Sniper's Nest floor was one Oswald used for dry-firing purposes and/or to "protect" the chamber from moisture, and that the majority of witnesses who heard three shots were WRONG WRONG WRONG because one of those three loud sounds was either a motorcycle backfire, a tire blow-out, or a firecracker that was thrown by some rascal.
-
Hey John - So are we to believe we are looking at the very same Adam's Apple in both photos? These 2 images of the throat area do Not even look similar.
(https://i.postimg.cc/4y9TJL7y/jfk-profile-and-autopsy-proving-SBF.gif)
Royell,
In one photo, JFK is standing upright with full control of his muscles and very much alive, whereas in the other photo JFK is lying horizontally with no control of his muscles, a catastrophic headwound and a bullet which entered from behind and exited his lower neck.
(https://i0.wp.com/www.armoryblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/bullet-gelatin-slow-moiton.gif?resize=490%2C217)
JohnM
-
Spot on.
Equivocating Fancy Pants Lance (who said, "I'm not convinced the SBT is absolutely essential to the LN narrative") needs to learn to be more logical.
Unless, of course, he thinks it's plausible that CE-399 wasn't fired during the assassination, that only two shots were fired, that the dented shell found on the Sniper's Nest floor was one Oswald used for dry-firing purposes and/or to "protect" the chamber from moisture, and that the majority of witnesses who heard three shots were WRONG WRONG WRONG because one of those three loud sounds was either a motorcycle backfire, a tire blow-out, or a firecracker that was thrown by some rascal.
Something like your alternative scenario is no less implausible than the SBT. Because the JFKA is not my religion, I really don't care apart from the historical question of what actually happened. At least one respected LNer, the name escapes me, rejects the SBT.
Were you in Miss Adams third-grade class at Lineweaver Elementary in Tucson? That was the last time I recall anyone thinking names like Fancy Pants Lance were clever. There was little fat kid we used to call Paranoid Tommy, the Wee McCarthyite - could that have been you?
-
2) When did they finally realize that there was a bullet wound in JFK's throat? The next day?
Aguilar's article addresses that extensively. Long before the body got to Bethesda, pretty much the entire country knew, thanks to Dr. Perry's statements at the press conference that afternoon, that there was a throat wound - but, supposedly, no one at the autopsy did. Possible, I suppose, but problematical.
-
Yes, it's too bad Landis didn't reveal his bombshell at the time. I will grant that the autopsy doctors' inability to trace the path of the bullet that caused the back wound is puzzling. I will grant Cliff Varnell's point that the alignment of the holes in the clothing with the throat wound is problematical (yes, I know all about the "bunching" argument regarding the clothes). Add in the condition of CE 399 for all the damage it is supposed to have done, together with Connally's insistence he was hit by a different shot, and the SBT is somewhat (or considerably more than somewhat) difficult to swallow. On the other hand, it's quite difficult to accept the back wound being a Carcano dud that found its target 80+ yards away and penetrated two layers of clothing and an inch or two of skin. In my past experience with reloading, in which I managed to create a fair number of duds, that isn't realistic dud performance.
We're not talking about the autopsy doctors' "inability" to "trace the path" of the back wound bullet. They never tried to trace the wound's path. The only way to trace a wound's path is to dissect the wound, an Autopsy 101 procedure, but the autopsy doctors, incredibly, did not dissect the back wound or the throat wound (they falsely claimed they didn't know about the throat wound until after the autopsy, but the ARRB disclosures destroy that lie).
Connally did not insist he was hit by a different shot than JFK. He allowed that he may have been hit by the same shot that hit JFK, although he clearly doubted this was the case. What he insisted on was that he was not hit before Z229. This was the key part of his adamant position that he was not hit by the first shot. He studied high-quality prints of the Zapruder frames under high magnification for hours and concluded there was "no doubt about it" that he was not hit before Z229. After this, Connally remained adamant that he was not hit by the first shot.
A misfire bullet is a plausible explanation for the back wound's shallow depth and lack of an exit point. A misfired rifle bullet can have a velocity of 800 to 1,000 FPS, which could certainly enable the bullet to penetrate two layers of clothing and penetrate an inch or two of soft tissue. That is entirely possible.
No bullet in the known history of forensic science has done the damage attributed to CE 399 and emerged with only 3-4 grains of its substance missing and with its lands and grooves intact. Even Lattimer's rigged SBT reconstruction did not produce such virtually pristine bullets. The far more realistic AAT SBT simulation produced a severely damaged FMJ bullet.
I tend to think the SBT, with all its problems, is the most likely solution. There are so many variables as to EXACTLY how the rifle was positioned, EXACTLY what the particular cartridge was like, EXACTLY how the car was positioned and moving, EXACTLY how JFK's clothing was positioned (including the possible effect of his back brace), EXACTLY how JFK and Connally were positioned, and EXACTLY what the bullet did upon impact, transit and second and third impacts, for me to place much stock in forensic reconstructions supposedly showing the SBT is impossible. I do like to play around with alternative scenarios and am not convinced the SBT is absolutely essential to the LN narrative.
The SBT is not only the least likely solution but is impossible. The recent Knott Lab SBT trajectory analysis, the most sophisticated analysis ever done on the SBT, proves the theory is impossible.
The fact that the tie knot had no hole in it proves the SBT is impossible. The fact that the shirt slits were made by the nurses not only obviously refutes the SBT but it explains why the slits were below the collar band, why the FBI found no metallic traces around the slits, why there was no fabric missing from the slits: because no bullet exited the throat. This also explains why the throat wound was so small (3-5 mm), punched-in, and neat, and why the damage beneath/behind the throat wound was larger than the throat wound itself--all classic, textbook indications of an entry wound.
The ARRB medical evidence disclosures are historic, partly because they show that on the night of the autopsy, the autopsy doctors established beyond any doubt that the back wound had no exit point. Rigor mortis will not prevent probing of a back wound if you remove the chest organs and manipulate the body "every which way," which is what the autopsy doctors did: they removed the chest organs after the initial probing and then put the body in numerous positions to facilitate and observe the follow-up probing. They probed with fingers and with surgical probes. Witnesses at the autopsy table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the stomach lining. We now know that Dr. Finck, the only forensic pathologist among the autopsy doctors, also determined from his own probing that the back wound had no exit point. He stated this out loud during the autopsy. That's why the first draft of the autopsy report did not claim that the throat wound was made by the bullet that hit the back.
The SBT is crucial to any lone-gunman theory. If the SBT is wrong, then there had to be two gunman. That's the whole reason the WC cooked up the theory in the first place, since they could not admit that more than three shots were fired. If JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets, then you have at least four bullets: the bullet that hit JFK before Z207 and caused him to reach for his throat, the bullet that hit Connally at Z234-237, the bullet that hit the curb near James Tague, and the bullet that hit JFK's head. And this isn't counting the bullet that five witnesses saw hit the street early in the shooting, the bullet that hit the grass near a manhole cover on the south side of Elm Street (the hole was photographed and appeared in local newspapers the next day), the bullet that tore out 4 inches of concrete on the north side of Elm Street (the Aldredge bullet strike), and the bullet that visibly jolted JFK forward starting in Z226.
-
Something like your alternative scenario is no less implausible than the SBT.
Dear Lance,
The tinfoil-hat JFKA CT scenario I spelled out is so implausible as to be ridiculous, whereas the so-called Single Bullet Theory isn't implausible at all -- especially when one realizes that the reason JBC "reacted so much later than JFK" was because JFK's spinal column was nicked and JBC's wasn't.
In order to discount the SBT (and, by definition, become a tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist) one has to posit that each of the three bullets "hit," but none of them wounded both JFK and JBC.
Regardless, how, under this scenario, does one explain:
1) How it is that CE-399 was so unusually deformed
2) Why CE-399 had marks from Oswald's Carcano on it
3) How CE-399 ended up in Parkland Hospital
4) Where did the bullet that transited JFK's upper-back / lower-neck go when it exited JFK's throat?
5) How is it that the bullet that penetrated JBC's back didn't pass through JFK first?
6) Why seven witnesses (JFK, Jackie, Governor and Mrs. Connally, and Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman in the limo, and Rosemary Willis and Secret Service Agent George Hickey outside it) can be seen in the Zapruder film consciously reacting to the sounds of the first, missing-everything shot in less than half-a-second of each other (except for JBC who took 5 frames longer than the average), indicating that Oswald's first, missing-everything shot was at hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming.
Your buddy,
-- Tom (the big guy that you gratefully gave your lunch money to every day -- don't you remember?)
-
Gov Connally had a Collapsed Lung along with other multiple bullet(s) inflicted injuries. NOBODY with a collapsed lung is going to be turning around in their seat to check on whatever is going on behind them. Have you ever had the Wind knocked out of you? People in this state are literally gasping for air. Same goes for a collapsed lung.
-
Fancy Pants,
The tinfoil-hat JFKA CT scenario I spelled out is so implausible as to be ridiculous, whereas the so-called Single Bullet Theory isn't implausible at all -- especially when one realizes that the reason JBC "reacted so much later than JFK" was because JFK's spinal column was nicked and JBC's wasn't.
In order to discount the SBT (and, by definition, become a tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist) one has to explain:
1) How it is that three shells were found on the Sniper's Nest floor
2) Why the majority of witnesses said they heard three shots
3) How CE-399 was so unusually deformed
4) Why CE-399 had marks from Oswald's Carcano on it
5) How CE-399 ended up in Parkland Hospital
6) Why seven witnesses (JFK, Jackie, Governor and Mrs. Connally, and Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman in the limo, and Rosemary Willis and Secret Service Agent George Hickey outside it) can be seen in the Zapruder film consciously reacting to the sounds of the first, missing-everything shot in less than half-a-second of each other (except for JBC who took 5 frames longer than the average), indicating that Oswald's first, missing-everything shot was at hypothetical "Z-124," i.e., half-a-second before Zapruder resumed filming.
7) If Oswald fired all three shots and scored three "hits" but none of the bullets wounded both JFK and JBC, how do answer the following questions:
A) Where did the bullet that transited JFK's upper-back / lower-neck go when it exited JFK's throat?
B) How is it that the bullet that penetrated JBC's back didn't pass through JFK first?
Dear Paranoid Latter-Day McCarthyite,
As stated, I accept the SBT as the most likely explanation. That being said, it is highly problematical. The alignment of the holes in the clothing with the throat wound. The appearance of the throat wound as observed at Parkland. The condition and provenance of CE 399. The failure of the autopsy doctors to dissect the back wound. The continuing confusion over the location of the back wound and the need for Gerald Ford to make his convenient alteration to the draft of the Warren Report. The fact that the SBT was the brainchild of Arlen Specter, not of any medical or ballistics expert. The fact that umpteen attempts at forensic reconstruction have produced very differing conclusions. That's a lot of weird guano surrounding one rifle shot.
62 years after the fact, there is still heated debate about the number and timing of the shots. I say the SBT is possible, albeit not plausible. I say it is not impossible, albeit not likely. I am not, alas, a fanatic in either direction. I, unlike the fanatics (on both sides), simply don't "know" what happened or what is "impossible." Because I don't "know" as much as the fanatics (on both sides), I don't necessarily believe there is a straight line from concluding the SBT is incorrect to concluding there were two gunmen.
-
Dear Paranoid Latter-Day McCarthyite,
As stated, I accept the SBT as the most likely explanation. That being said, it is highly problematical. The alignment of the holes in the clothing with the throat wound. The appearance of the throat wound as observed at Parkland. The condition and provenance of CE 399. The failure of the autopsy doctors to dissect the back wound. The continuing confusion over the location of the back wound and the need for Gerald Ford to make his convenient alteration to the draft of the Warren Report. The fact that the SBT was the brainchild of Arlen Specter, not of any medical or ballistics expert. The fact that umpteen attempts at forensic reconstruction have produced very differing conclusions. That's a lot of weird guano surrounding one rifle shot.
62 years after the fact, there is still heated debate about the number and timing of the shots. I say the SBT is possible, albeit not plausible. I say it is not impossible, albeit not likely. I am not, alas, a fanatic in either direction. I, unlike the fanatics (on both sides), simply don't "know" what happened or what is "impossible." Because I don't "know" as much as the fanatics (on both sides), I don't necessarily believe there is a straight line from concluding the SBT is incorrect to concluding there were two gunmen.
Dear Lance,
Did Dr. Perry observe an abrasion collar (indicating entrance wound) around the bullet hole in JFK's throat?
Regarding Ford's heinous crime of "altering" the location of the entry wound in JFK's upper-back / lower-neck, did the "dot" on the autopsy cover sheet accurately reflect the measurements that were written down in the margin of that document?
The condition of CE-399 actually argues *for* the SBT.
How many medical or ballistics experts had opined on the number of shots, where they had come from, the damage (if any) that each one of them had wrought, and the number of seconds involved altogether when Specter "cooked up his cockamamie" SBT?
Your Big Buddy,
-- Tom
PS Although Joe McCarthy was basically right (pardon the pun), he was perverted (pardon the pun) by Roy Cohn.
As was, undoubtedly, your boy, The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx").
-
Forget the "dot" on the autopsy cover sheet. Just look at the JFK Autopsy BACK Photo. The pictured bullet hole is Not at the base of the neck. It's very clear.
-
Forget the "dot" on the autopsy cover sheet. Just look at the JFK Autopsy BACK Photo. The pictured bullet hole is Not at the base of the neck. It's very clear.
Storing,
The AUTOPSY photo was MISLEADING because JFK was a bit of a HUNCHBACK and because RIGOR MORTIS had ALREADY set IN.
Do'h.
-
Certain facts appear to be self-evident and beyond dispute:
-- No bullet exiting the front shirt slits could have nicked the left edge of the tie knot, given the thickness of the knot and given the fact that the knot was neatly centered between the edges of the collar band.
-- The fact that JFK's tie had no hole through it invalidates the single-bullet theory and proves that no bullet exited the throat. A bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the middle part of the tie knot, but we now know that the tie had no hole in it.
-- A throat wound behind/underneath the shirt slits would not have been visible until JFK's shirt and tie were removed, not even partly visible. Yet, three doctors said they saw the throat wound before the shirt and tie were removed, and two of them specified the wound was immediately above the shirt and tie.
-- The FBI found no metallic traces around the shirt slits because no bullet exited the slits and because the slits were cut by the nurses as they hurriedly removed JFK's clothing, as Dr. Carrico and one of the nurses confirmed.
-- Lone-gunman theorists cannot explain the three small puncture wounds in JFK's right cheek. Those wounds are strong evidence that more than one gunman fired at JFK.
-- Lone-gunman theorists cannot explain the back-of-head bullet fragments on the outer table of the skull some 4 inches above the EOP seen on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays. Those fragments are powerful evidence that more than one gunman fired at JFK.
-- Lone-gunman theorists cannot explain the autopsy doctors' stunning failure to mention in the autopsy report the high fragment trail seen on the extant skull x-rays. They could not have missed it, and they surely did not "mistake" it for a trail that started at least 2 inches lower at the EOP and ranged upward to the right orbit.
-- Lone-gunman theorists cannot explain the fact that the extant skull x-rays do not show the low fragment trail that the autopsy doctors described in the autopsy report and that they reaffirmed after viewing the autopsy materials for five hours in November 1966. They could not have "mistaken" the low fragment trail for the differently angled and much higher fragment trail seen on the extant skull x-rays. The high fragment trail's lowest point is at least 2 inches above the EOP and on the opposite end of the skull, while its highest point is over 4 inches above the EOP and does not even extend to the rear outer table of the skull.
-
Certain facts appear to be self-evident and beyond dispute:
-- No bullet exiting the front shirt slits could have nicked the left edge of the tie knot, given the thickness of the knot and given the fact that the knot was neatly centered between the edges of the collar band.
-- The fact that JFK's tie had no hole through it invalidates the single-bullet theory and proves that no bullet exited the throat. A bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the middle part of the tie knot, but we now know that the tie had no hole in it.
Here's another GIF comparison from a completely different angle that absolutely destroys your latest lame "certain fact".
(https://i.postimg.cc/5NdhfMWV/jfk-tie-height-c.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/h4dFFtws/jfk-tie-height.gif)
JohnM
-
Hey John - How do you explain the claim that 3 Dr's reported seeing the throat wound BEFORE the JFK shirt/tie was removed? Also, based on your diagram of the bullet path, where would the bullet impact Gov Connally or the jump seat? This is why the SBT does Not work. You line up the shot to match the JFK throat wound and it then does Not line up with striking just above the jump seat and the back/armpit of Gov Connally. You have presented only a portion of this equation.
-
Here's another GIF comparison from a completely different angle that absolutely destroys your latest lame "certain fact".
JohnM
More of your bogus graphics. I notice you didn't use any of the photos that we have of JFK in the limo in Dallas shortly before the shooting. Why was that? We both know why.
Even in your silly "GIF comparison," we can plainly see that any bullet exiting the shirt slits would have had to tear through the tie, but the released tie photos prove there was no hole in the tie.
I also notice you said nothing about the fact that three Parkland doctors said the throat wound was visible before JFK's clothes were removed. This would not have been the case if the throat wound had been behind/beneath the shirt slits. Surely even you can see this.
I further notice that you said nothing about the fact that the FBI found no metallic traces around the shirt slits but did find metallic traces around the rear clothing holes, and that the slits had no fabric missing from them. If a bullet had exited the slits, (1) it would have left metallic traces around the edges of the slits, and (2) it would have removed fabric, just as fabric was removed from the rear clothing holes.
Honestly, dealing with SBT believers is like dealing with cultists or with those who claim the Moon landings were faked and/or that 9/11 was an inside job. Even when confronted with undeniable and conclusive evidence that disproves your theory, you refuse to abandon it.
-
Kennedy at Love Field wearing the exact same shirt and tie as when he was shot and as can be clearly seen in every example I have presented, the exiting bullet by definition has to pass at the same height as JFK's tie knot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/9fXC5Nj5/JFK-Love-Field-x-autopsy-4.gif)
To suggest that Kennedy's professionally fitted shirt and tie were somehow excessively lowered at the time of impact is sheer lunacy. In the following GIF, which vividly demonstrates Kennedy and Connally's violent simultaneous reaction we can easily see JFK's expertly fitted shirt and tie is seated at precisely the same height as every other photo/film taken of Kennedy.
(https://i.postimg.cc/qMQKHSP4/109-Z225-Z226-Toggling-Clip.gif)
JohnM
-
I further notice that you said nothing about the fact that the FBI found no metallic traces around the shirt slits but did find metallic traces around the rear clothing holes, and that the slits had no fabric missing from them. If a bullet had exited the slits, (1) it would have left metallic traces around the edges of the slits,
"The nine representative rounds of 9mm Luger ammunition were fired into 100% white cotton t-shirts,
fitted over a device to approximate body torso thickness, at a muzzle to target distance of six feet (72 inches) in
a manner that created an entrance hole in the front and an exit hole in the back of the t-shirt for each shot. All
nine bullet entrance holes and exit holes were subjected to XRF analysis. Entrance hole residues ranged in
lead concentration levels from 190 parts per million (ppm) to over 1,000 ppm while exit hole residue lead
levels ranged from zero to 74 ppm. In all cases, entrance hole lead concentrations were at least six times
higher than exit hole lead levels"
https://www.aafs.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/AAFS-2009-A181.pdf
-
Hey John - How do you explain the claim that 3 Dr's reported seeing the throat wound BEFORE the JFK shirt/tie was removed? Also, based on your diagram of the bullet path, where would the bullet impact Gov Connally or the jump seat? This is why the SBT does Not work. You line up the shot to match the JFK throat wound and it then does Not line up with striking just above the jump seat and the back/armpit of Gov Connally. You have presented only a portion of this equation.
Which 3 Doctors are you talking about?
If you look through all of Carrico's WC testimony, you'll find this:
Mr. SPECTER - What did you observe as to the President's condition upon his arrival?
Dr. CARRICO - He was lying on a carriage, his respirations were slow, spasmodic, described as agonal.
Mr. SPECTER - What do you mean by "agonal" if I may interrupt you for just a moment there, Doctor?
Dr. CARRICO - These are respirations seen in one who has lost the normal coordinated central control of respiration. These are spasmodic and usually reflect a terminal patient.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you continue to describe your observations of the President?
Dr. CARRICO - His-- the President's color--I don't believe I said--he was an ashen, bluish, grey, cyanotic, he was making no spontaneous movements, I mean, no voluntary movements at all. We opened his shirt and coat and tie and observed a small wound in the anterior lower third of the neck, listened very briefly, heard a few cardiac beats, felt the President's back, and detected no large or sucking chest wounds, and then proceeded to the examination of his head. The large skull and scalp wound had been previously observed and was inspected a little more closely. There seemed to be a 4-5 cm. area of avulsion of the scalp and the skull was fragmented and bleeding cerebral and cerebellar tissue. The pupils were inspected and seemed to be bilaterally dilated and fixed. No pulse was present, and at that time, because of the inadequate respirations and the apparent airway injury, a cuffed endotracheal tube was introduced, employing a larynzoscope. Through the larynzo scope there seemed to be some hematoma around the larynx and immediately below the larynx was seen the ragged tracheal injury. The endotracheal tube was inserted past this injury, the cuff inflated, and the tube was connected to a [Bennet] respirator to assist the inadequate respiration.
In this account, Carrico said that they didn't see the throat wound until after the shirt, coat, and tie had been "opened." This implies that it wasn't visible until they were removing the clothing.
Perry, who came in at the same time as Jones said that Carrico was already "attaching the Bennett apparatus to an endotracheal tube in place to assist his respiration," so Jones could not have seen the wound before the shirt coat and tie had already been moved out of the way. IIRC Goldstritch said he came in with Clark. But Clark, in his own testimony, said that at the time he entered TR1, Perry was already working on the tracheotomy after taking over from Carrico.
-
Kennedy at Love Field wearing the exact same shirt and tie as when he was shot and as can be clearly seen in every example I have presented, the exiting bullet by definition has to pass at the same height as JFK's tie knot.
(https://i.postimg.cc/9fXC5Nj5/JFK-Love-Field-x-autopsy-4.gif)
To suggest that Kennedy's professionally fitted shirt and tie were somehow excessively lowered at the time of impact is sheer lunacy. In the following GIF, which vividly demonstrates Kennedy and Connally's violent simultaneous reaction we can easily see JFK's expertly fitted shirt and tie is seated at precisely the same height as every other photo/film taken of Kennedy.
(https://i.postimg.cc/qMQKHSP4/109-Z225-Z226-Toggling-Clip.gif)
JohnM
You seem to have forgotten the "bunching" issue with respect to the Shirt and coat. It could apply here too.
-
You seem to have forgotten the "bunching" issue with respect to the Shirt and coat. It could apply here too.
The rear of JFK's jacket bunching in the following way is independent of the collar and tie, which are fixed securely around the neck.
(https://i.postimg.cc/vB0MbtHc/jacket-bunch-elm-st-love-field.gif)
We can't see the underlying shirt but there is evidence that Kennedy's shirt demonstrated a near identical bunching.
(https://i.postimg.cc/m2sDj81G/Lowe-JFKphoto1-zpsa4d20835.jpg)
Explain how you believe a similar bunching can occur to the front of the collar and tie?
(https://i.postimg.cc/3RzhkJmT/JFK-in-Limo-in-Dallas.jpg)
JohnM
-
The rear of JFK's jacket bunching in the following way is independent of the collar and tie, which are fixed securely around the neck.
How many times are you going to post this bogus "evidence" and ignore the objections to it? Again:
1. Willis slide 5, taken almost at the moment of impact of the first hit, shows JFK's coat lying virtually flat on his back.
2. The modest bunching seen in your GIF could not possibly have produced the 5-inch difference between the rear clothing holes and the WC's location for the back wound. This is not to mention that the modest bunching does not even reach the shirt collar.
We can't see the underlying shirt but there is evidence that Kennedy's shirt demonstrated a near identical bunching.
And I'll again point out:
1. The photo you're using shows Kennedy in a very different position than the position he was in when he was shot. In your photo, he's leaning far forward with his elbows and forearms on his legs. In the motorcade, he was reclining back against the seat, and his back never came off the seat until after he began to react to the first hit. Most of JFK's shirt was pinned against the back seat by his torso until he began to react to the first wound.
2. The photo you're using shows JFK wearing only a shirt and no coat, so there was nothing to keep the shirt from bunching. This was not the case during the motorcade.
3. The close alignment of the rear clothing holes means that the shirt and coat would have had to bunch in nearly perfect correspondence, virtually millimeter-for-millimeter correspondence, an absurd proposition.
Explain how you believe a similar bunching can occur to the front of the collar and tie? JohnM
Huh? Explain how a bullet exiting the shirt slits could have missed tearing through the tie. Even your third photo shows that the top part of the tie was neatly centered between the edges of the collar band. We know the slits were below the interior collar band and parallel with the bottom half of the exterior collar band. There is no way a bullet exiting those slits could have avoided tearing through the tie, but we know there was no hole through the tie, only a small nick on the left edge of the knot.
Explain how a bullet exiting the shirt slits could have magically weaved around the bulk of the tie knot and nicked the left edge. It's just nonsense.
I see that Mitch Todd has misleadingly cherry-picked part of Dr. Carrico's testimony, ignoring the part where Carrico specified to WC member Dulles that the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, and ignoring Carrico's detailed interview with Harold Weisberg in which Carrico confirmed that the throat wound was above the shirt and tie, that he saw the throat wound before the clothes were removed, and that he saw no slits in the shirt until after the nurses began cutting away JFK's clothing.
In the segment quoted by Mitch Todd, Carrico was not saying he did not see the throat wound until after the clothing had been removed. The "we" referred to those in the room, including those who had entered the room after the clothing had been cut away. Dr. Ronald Jones specified that he saw the throat wound above the shirt and tie before the clothing was removed. So did Dr. Goldstrich. I quote from the OP:
Dr. Ronald Jones saw JFK's body before the clothes were removed. Interviewed for the 2023 Paramount documentary JFK: What the Doctors Saw, Dr. Jones said the throat wound was "visible" and that it was "just above where the shirt and tie was":
The first thing I noticed was a very small wound in his neck in the front. . . .
We could tell that the wound was in the front of the neck just above
where the shirt and tie was. So it was visible to you.
(18:12-18:19, 18:32-18:39)
In the same documentary, Dr. Joe D. Goldstrich, a fourth-year medical student at Parkland Hospital at the time, said he could see the neck wound when JFK's clothes were still on:
I do remember that very early on, even when his clothes were
still on, I saw the wound in his neck. (18:20-18:28)
There is no way Jones and Goldstrich could have seen the throat wound if it had been beneath/behind the shirt slits. This raises another problem: the shirt slits were simply too low to explain the throat wound.
-
The rear of JFK's jacket bunching in the following way is independent of the collar and tie, which are fixed securely around the neck.
(https://i.postimg.cc/vB0MbtHc/jacket-bunch-elm-st-love-field.gif)
We can't see the underlying shirt but there is evidence that Kennedy's shirt demonstrated a near identical bunching.
(https://i.postimg.cc/m2sDj81G/Lowe-JFKphoto1-zpsa4d20835.jpg)
Explain how you believe a similar bunching can occur to the front of the collar and tie?
(https://i.postimg.cc/3RzhkJmT/JFK-in-Limo-in-Dallas.jpg)
JohnM
Come on John. If the shirt can "bunch" in the back, it can do so also in the front. If a shirt is a "tailored" fit, it "bunches" nowhere, front or back. Be objective.
-
I further notice that you said nothing about the fact that the FBI found no metallic traces around the shirt slits but did find metallic traces around the rear clothing holes
"If a bullet goes through multiple layers of cloth, bullet wipe may be present only around the defect in the cloth that was perforated first." -- pages 354 and 355 of Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques. by Vincent J. M. Di Maio, M.D.