JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: David Von Pein on September 13, 2025, 06:38:49 AM
-
Virtually all conspiracy theorists who are of the opinion that President John F. Kennedy met his violent death on November 22, 1963, as the result of an evil, elaborate plot orchestrated and carried out by ________ (the roster of potential assassins and conspirators is nearly endless to use in this blank space), are also of the opinion that Mr. Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission he worked for in the year 1964 were all wet and/or full of stinky fecal matter when it comes to the three words that have sparked debate the world over since the President's assassination -- the "Single-Bullet Theory".
But if conspiracists could shake loose the forever-strangling "All Evidence In The JFK Case Must Have Been Faked And/Or Tampered With" albatross that hangs around their necks, they could easily see that any theory that needs to be substituted for the Single-Bullet Conclusion lacks all credibility and can easily be shot full of holes via common sense alone.
Forgive the heavy dose of sarcasm that follows, but I think it is appropriate given the subject matter. I've put on my Arlen Specter hat when writing the comments below, which are comments that serve as a "faux notebook" of Mr. Specter's in a sense, as Arlen tries to figure out what the devil really occurred on Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, on 11/22/63. (And for the sake of my imaginary "Specter Notes", the dreaded "SBT" is NOT to be considered as an option for even a brief moment.)
I can just hear Mr. Specter now, as he attempts to explain the simultaneous wounding of President Kennedy and Governor John B. Connally in a Non-SBT manner -- which, of course, would be in a manner that needs to reconcile an incredible THREE-SHOTS-LOOK-LIKE-ONE shooting that the Houdini-like riflemen seemingly pulled off in Dealey Plaza.
In such a make-believe scenario, Arlen's notebook just might be filled with comments like this (as of early September 1964, just before the Commission hands over its Final Report to President Johnson):
[Arlen Specter Simulation On...]
We here at the Warren Commission have come to the conclusion that President Kennedy and Governor Connally were struck by three separate bullets (not counting the JFK head shot). These three bullets all disappeared (somehow), without a single one being recovered and placed into evidence.
Regarding the subject of bullets -- The Commission discounts Bullet #CE399 as being connected to the actual shooting in any fashion whatsoever....because we've been told by people with far greater minds and resources than that which the Commission possesses that Bullet 399 was "planted" in Parkland Hospital by some unknown conspirator (or it was "switched" with the "real" Parkland bullet by the FBI....or by somebody else unknown) in order to mislead the investigators and in order to falsely implicate one Lee Harvey Oswald in the President's demise.
Therefore, the Commission has no choice but to accept this rumor of bullet-planting (or bullet-switching) as being an ironclad, undeniable fact, even though the Commission has no solid, verifiable evidence to back up such allegations of evidence tampering. But, I'm obliged to go with the flow and just assume that said bullet was a plant. Oh, well. So be it.
We at the Commission are at a loss to explain where all of these three missing projectiles vanished to. But I guess we'll just have to assume that they all just magically evaporated into a puff of smoke just after the THREE (unknown and unseen) separate gunmen squeezed off these rounds into the two victims.
We at the Commission are also at a loss to explain just how the bullet which entered Mr. Connally's back created an elongated entry wound without having hit President Kennedy (or some solid object) first. But, we'll just have to assume, I guess, that the bullet started tumbling in mid-air after having hit nothing but Dallas, Texas, atmosphere between the rifleman's weapon and the Governor's back.
Also...we at the Warren Commission are somewhat stumped as to WHY two separate bullets completely stopped after striking JFK's neck and back, with neither bullet causing an exit wound after entering, and with neither of these two bullets striking any hard or bony substances within the President's body. Another obligatory "Oh, well" is needed here it would appear. (Along with a vigorous shrugging of the shoulders, signifying complete and utter bewilderment regarding this matter, a matter that all conspiracy theorists think is totally unimportant and, therefore, doesn't mean a darn thing.)
The rest of the Commission staff and I are also unable to explain the fact that the autopsy report (signed by three doctors) unambiguously determined (on
page #6 of its report) that the bullet which struck JFK in his upper back positively emerged from the front of his neck and then went....well....where the hell did it go? It must have gone someplace. But I've been told by conspiracy theorists that I can't rely on a "Single-Bullet Conclusion"; so the answer must rest elsewhere.
And we know the bullet did not do any damage to the interior of the limousine, because the FBI's Bob Frazier testified to that fact during our interview with him. (Note -- Check on Mr. Robert A. Frazier's credibility...he may be "in" on the "cover-up" too, just like hundreds of others like him, who are bent on keeping the truth of President Kennedy's death a secret no matter what.)
Oh well, we'll just leave this additional little problem to greater minds in future generations. For right now, I'll just pretend this snafu concerning the autopsy report (saying that a bullet exited JFK's throat) doesn't exist at all.
The Commission's members and staff are also a little puzzled as to how in the world Governor Connally was struck by a separate shot in the back, even though he was seated almost directly in front of JFK in the car.
Given the bullet's entry point on Mr. Connally's back and its downward and slightly right-to-left course through the Governor's body, it would seem to us at the Commission that this bullet would have probably had to have passed through someone sitting behind the Governor prior to striking Mr. Connally.
But, various conspiracy theorists have told us that this one-bullet scenario must be impossible, so I guess we'll have to think of a non-SBT way for this bullet to get to Connally by not travelling through the man sitting behind Mr. Connally. Oh well...we'll try another theory I guess.
Another "Commission Stumper" for us dumbbells in Washington is the amazing "lining up" of the three wounds on the two victims -- with the back wounds on the President and Governor Connally, plus the wound on the front of JFK's neck, seemingly lining up pretty doggone close to being at an approximate 17-degree downward angle through the men, which is, as it turns out by gosh, an angle that leads back to a sixth-floor window in a building where a certain rifle with the serial number C2766 was found at 1:22 PM on November 22 (just 52 minutes after JFK and John Connally were shot by these [at least] three separate gunmen in Dealey Plaza).
Oh well, just a pure coincidence I guess. I'll mark it down as such a coincidence...but I want these incredible shooters/marksmen on MY side in the next war, by golly, I'll tell ya that right now!
We at the Commission, after looking long and hard at the Abraham Zapruder home movie of the assassination, are also a tad bit perplexed at just exactly HOW these THREE SEPARATE (ace) shooters in Dallas were able to fire their respective weapons in perfect, or near-perfect, synchronization from their three separate locations within Dealey Plaza so to have struck the two victims with these three shots/bullets at a point in time (per the Zapruder home movie) to make it appear that both men were struck initially by bullets at an identical point in time.
(Note -- Maybe the film has been "altered" in some manner....consult a certain "Mr. Fetzer" for further information on this possibility; because, sans alteration of said motion picture and sans a whole bunch of people running around covering up the real evidence, it looks to most of the Commission members and its staff as if this three-bullet scenario is a real turd of an idea.)
The Commission is also in a quandary over the Neutron Activation Analysis, which concluded that the Connally wrist fragments "most likely" came from bullet CE399 found at Parkland. [This "NAA" item is a bonus item. Since Vincent Guinn's NAA analysis did not occur until the 1970s, we can just pretend that Mr. Specter added this item to his notebook at a later date.]
But, if the Warren Commission is to believe the words of valid and bona fide conspiracy researchers who have studied this case long and hard, then Commission Exhibit #399, as I discussed earlier, was "planted" by evil henchmen in the hospital.
(Note -- Figure out a way to make myself believe that there was ANY way on this Earth that some crazy, suicidal conspirator(s) would have had a desire to risk blowing the conspiracy plot wide open by planting a bullet on a stretcher at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas before 2:00 PM (Central Standard Time) on 11/22/63, a time when Governor Connally was still in the operating room and, hence, no plotters had the slightest friggin' idea where all the "real" bullets connected with the assassination were located. Then call Vince Bugliosi in Minnesota or L.A. -- I need to talk to someone with a grip on reality here.)
[Specter Simulation Off]
The above serves as a paraphrased transcript of Arlen Specter's probable notes regarding an alternative to the Single-Bullet Theory--dated September 8th, 1964 [with an addendum added in 1978 for the NAA stuff]. Exact verbiage may vary from final notebook of Mr. Specter. But rest assured, whatever the final verbatim version of such a notebook would have looked like, the end result would have been undoubtedly just as laughable and impossibly ridiculous.
The Single-Bullet Theory is so obviously the most logical (and almost certainly correct) version of the wounding of both President John F. Kennedy and Governor John Connally....and for so many different and interconnected reasons (most of which are outlined in tongue-in-cheek style above).
Even the "evidence" which ISN'T present in the JFK murder case (but SHOULD definitely be in existence if the SBT is a false scenario) is telling us that the Commission's single-bullet conclusion almost HAS to be accurate -- e.g., no bullets found in the victims; no other bullets in evidence except CE399; no damage to the limo's back-seat areas; plus: virtually no damage done to the interior portions of JFK's upper back and neck (i.e., no broken bones and no hard, bony structures being struck by either of the TWO projectiles that conspiracists believe entered these regions of the President's body and failed to exit).
The total absence of injuries within President Kennedy's neck and back is enough--all by itself--to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that just a single bullet made a clean getaway through JFK's body, without pausing to do any substantial damage whatsoever.
David Von Pein
March 2006
-----------------------------------
More at the links below:
https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/02/single-bullet-theory-notebook.html
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30522-arlen-specters-sbt-notebook-dvps-tongue-in-cheek-version
-
I'm guessing that Specter's SBT notebook says nothing about the fact that no bullet could have exited the shirt slits because there was no hole through the tie.
Why JFK's Tie and Shirt Slits Destroy the Single-Bullet Theory
https://sites.google.com/view/jfkshirtandtiedestroysbt/home
I'm also guessing that Specter's SBT notebook says nothing about the fact that Connally's back wound was the same width as JFK's rear head entry wound (1.5 cm) and that the wound tunnel through Connally's chest was small, so narrow that when the bullet destroyed 5 inches of rib bone it did little damage to the surrounding tissue, clearly proving that the bullet was not traveling sideways when it hit Connally and when it tore through his chest.
Big Lie About a Small Wound in Connally's Back
https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/BigLieSmallWound/BigLieSmallWound.htm
-
I'm guessing that Specter's SBT notebook says nothing about the fact that no bullet could have exited the shirt slits because there was no hole through the tie.
Dear Comrade Griffith,
Was JFK's tie removed with a pair of scissors, or did someone hack away wildly at it with a scalpel?
-- Tom
-
Whatever its problems, the SBT is an attempt to deal with the best evidence - the timing of the shots, the eyewitness and earwitness testimony, the Z film, the holes in the clothing, the back wound, the throat wound, Connally's wounds, the bullet fragments, CE 399. CTers put each of these under their electron microscopes and come up with any number of "impossibilities" that aren't really impossibilities, as shown by the fact that the HSCA Firearms Panel reached the same conclusion as the WC regarding the SBT and that other forensic and ballistic experts have done likewise.
CTers collectively have numerous, wildly disparate alternative scenarios - picket fence, sewer drain, Triple Overpass, other shooters in the TSBD, no shooters in the TSBD, Dal-Tex Building, County Records Building, multiple two- or three-man sniper teams all around the Plaza, Umbrella Man, SS Agent Hickey, yada yada yada yada yada. Alas, nothing resembling evidence supports these. Indeed, the absence of supporting evidence is the problem. The attack on the SBT is all "supposed problems with the SBT," not "better explanations supported by better evidence." The fact that the SBT is not "impossible" is underscored by the HSCA Firearms Panel reaching the same conclusion. I just pointed out on another thread that Andy Purdy, a CTer and one of the driving forces in the formation of the HSCA, admitted recently that "the entire staff wanted and expected to find a conspiracy" and were "shocked" when the Firearms Panel agreed with the WC - but they did.
As I've stated, I like to play around with alternative scenarios and the possibility the SBT isn't essential to the LN narrative. I wish those more qualified than I would take a stab at this (John Orr's theory seemingly eliminates a lot of issues surrounding CE 399). But the fact remains that the SBT is the best explanation at this time, has been validated numerous times, and CTers have nothing better to offer. "The SBT has problems" isn't an alternative theory. CTers would have to show that the SBT is utterly impossible - I give Cliff Varnell credit for recognizing this reality - but if it were utterly impossible if would not have been validated by the HSCA and other experts. The annals of forensic accident and gunshot reconstruction are filled with "How the hell did THAT happen???" improbabilities and outliers, but the experts don't abandon the theory that best explains the best evidence on the basis of those outliers.
As Sherlock Holmes said, ""When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Improbable as it may be, the SBT remains the truth unless someone can show - unlikely at this stage - that it is actually impossible.
-
Whatever its problems, the SBT is an attempt to deal with the best evidence - the timing of the shots, the eyewitness and earwitness testimony, the Z film, the holes in the clothing, the back wound, the throat wound, Connally's wounds, the bullet fragments, CE 399. CTers put each of these under their electron microscopes and come up with any number of "impossibilities" that aren't really impossibilities, as shown by the fact that the HSCA Firearms Panel reached the same conclusion as the WC regarding the SBT and that other forensic and ballistic experts have done likewise. Even CTer John Orr, the driving force behind the Knott Lab study, has basically the SBT but with a fragment from the head shot causing Connally's wrist wounds.
CTers collectively have numerous, wildly disparate alternative scenarios - picket fence, sewer drain, Triple Overpass, other shooters in the TSBD, no shooters in the TSBD, Dal-Tex Building, County Records Building, multiple two- or three-man sniper teams all around the Plaza, Umbrella Man, SS Agent Hickey, yada yada yada yada yada. Alas, nothing resembling evidence supports these. Indeed, the absence of supporting evidence is the problem. The attack on the SBT is all "supposed problems with the SBT," not "better explanations supported by better evidence." The fact that the SBT is not "impossible" is underscored by the HSCA Firearms Panel reaching the same conclusion. I just pointed out on another thread that Andy Purdy, a CTer and one of the driving forces in the formation of the HSCA, admitted recently that "the entire staff wanted and expected to find a conspiracy" and were "shocked" when the Firearms Panel agreed with the WC - but they did.
As I've stated, I like to play around with alternative scenarios and the possibility the SBT isn't essential to the LN narrative. I wish those more qualified than I would take a stab at this (Orr's more-or-less SBT theory seemingly eliminates a lot of issues surrounding CE 399). But the fact remains that the SBT is the best explanation at this time, has been validated numerous times, and CTers have nothing better to offer. "The SBT has problems" isn't an alternative theory. CTers would have to show that the SBT is utterly impossible - I give Cliff Varnell credit for recognizing this reality - but if it were utterly impossible if would not have been validated by the HSCA and other experts. The annals of forensic accident and gunshot reconstruction are filled with "How the hell did THAT happen???" improbabilities and outliers, but the experts don't abandon the theory that best explains the best evidence on the basis of those outliers.
As Sherlock Holmes said, ""When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." Improbable as it may be, the SBT remains the truth unless someone can show - unlikely at this stage - that it is actually impossible.
Here’s a snippet from “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, page 232:
By late April, we were ready to focus again on the course of the bullets and the cause of the injuries suffered by Kennedy and Connally. We all recognized that the commission members were likely to find the single-bullet theory “implausible” at best.
Three decades later, Liebeler characterized the staff’s challenge in these terms: Plausibility has no innate qualities. It depends on what alternative hypotheses are available. The question must always be: “Plausible as compared to what?” Explanations dubious at first look better if all other possibilities are even more unlikely. The staff opted for the single bullet theory because all the alternatives were more implausible. They opted for it, in other words, because they believed it best explained what actually happened.38
After over six decades of scrutiny the SBT still stands. At some point it became more than a theory. To me it is now the single bullet fact.
-
Here’s a snippet from “History Will Prove Us Right” by Howard Willens, page 232:
By late April, we were ready to focus again on the course of the bullets and the cause of the injuries suffered by Kennedy and Connally. We all recognized that the commission members were likely to find the single-bullet theory “implausible” at best.
Three decades later, Liebeler characterized the staff’s challenge in these terms: Plausibility has no innate qualities. It depends on what alternative hypotheses are available. The question must always be: “Plausible as compared to what?” Explanations dubious at first look better if all other possibilities are even more unlikely. The staff opted for the single bullet theory because all the alternatives were more implausible. They opted for it, in other words, because they believed it best explained what actually happened.38
After over six decades of scrutiny the SBT still stands. At some point it became more than a theory. To me it is now the single bullet fact.
Bravo!
-
I corrected what I had said above about John Orr. He does not basically accept the SBT at all. He has CE 399 striking JBC in the back and ending up in his thigh, but JBC's wrist wounds being caused by a fragment from the head shot.
The wrist wound thing intrigues me. It would seemingly eliminate a lot of the issues with the condition of CE 399 (the wrist fragments are not from it) and JBC's confusion as to when he was hit (because he was hit twice), while doing no real violence to the SBT. CE 399 would do everything the SBT says except cause JBC's wrist wounds.
-
The wrist fragments are not from CE-399.
Dear Lance,
Why do you say that?
Should I read Orr's theory?
-- Tom
-
Dear Lance,
Why do you say that?
Should I read Orr's theory?
-- Tom
Yes, I think Orr's theory is well worth reading even if one concludes he's dead wrong. He certainly put extensive work into it, and he is the one who commissioned the Knott Lab study even though he now distances himself from it. As I recall, one key point is that JBC's doctors seemed to think the wrist wounds had been caused by a sharp or jagged missile, which doesn't sound like CE 399.
-
As I recall, one key point is that doctors seemed to think the wrist wounds had been caused by a sharp or jagged missile, which doesn't sound like CE 399.
Dear Lance,
Dr. Charles Gregory (the guy operated on JBC's wrist) said that wound looked as though the bullet (or "missile") had entered the back of his hand and exited from the palm side, that JBC's rib sustained a lot more damage than his radial bone did, and he suggested that the bullet (or "missile") had to be irregular in shape because it had carried some fibers from JBC's clothing into the wound.
I can't seem to find it at the moment, but IIRC, one of the doctors who attended to JBC said that the "irregular" shape of the missile that carried the fibers into the wrist wound was probably the sharp or angular base of CE-399, itself, as opposed to its non-fiber-carrying round nose.
Dr. Robert Shaw, who was familiar with the wound to JBC's wrist, postulated that the bullet "didn't pass through it, but struck it."
Which is what we see its doing rear-end-first in the animation I posted here a few weeks ago.
-- Tom
-
Dear Lance,
Dr. Charles Gregory (the guy operated on JBC's wrist) said that wound looked as though the bullet (or "missile") had entered the back of his hand and exited from the palm side, that JBC's rib sustained a lot more damage than his radial bone did, and he suggested that the bullet (or "missile") had to be irregular in shape because it had carried some fibers from JBC's clothing into the wound.
I can't seem to find it at the moment, but IIRC, one of the doctors who attended to JBC said that the fiber-carrying "irregular" shape of the missile that carried the fibers into the wrist wound was probably the sharp or angular base of CE-399 as opposed to its non-fiber-carrying round nose.
Dr. Robert Shaw, who was familiar with the wound to JBC's wrist, postulated that the bullet "didn't pass through it, but struck it."
Which is what we see in the animation I posted here a few weeks ago.
-- Tom
Orr deals with JBC's wrist injuries at pp. 29-32: http://www.mountainrivercabins.com/JohnOrrReport.pdf. He addresses Dr. Gregory as well as the FBI saying that the hole in JBC's coat sleeve appeared to have been made by a "mutilated" bullet.
-
Orr deals with JBC's wrist injuries at pp. 29-32: http://www.mountainrivercabins.com/JohnOrrReport.pdf. He addresses Dr. Gregory as well as the FBI saying that the hole in JBC's coat sleeve appeared to have been made by a "mutilated" bullet.
Dear Lance,
Wouldn't the "sharp" "angular" "squared-off" base of CE-399 be "mutilated" in comparison to its smooth, round nose, especially if said base was already extruding lead core when it penetrated said coat sleeve?
-- Tom
-
Dear Lance,
Wouldn't the "sharp" "angular" "squared-off" base of CE-399 be "mutilated" in comparison to its smooth, round nose, especially if said base was already extruding lead core when it penetrated said coat sleeve?
-- Tom
I have no idea. Perhaps you can take it up with Orr. What is the obsession with making CE 399 the sole culprit if the wrist injuries being attributable to a fragment actually makes more sense from the LN/SBT perspective?
-
I have no idea. Perhaps you can take it up with Orr. What is the obsession with making CE 399 the sole culprit if the wrist injuries being attributable to a fragment actually makes more sense from the LN/SBT perspective?
Dear Lance,
The idea that a bullet fragment from the fatal head shot wounded JBC's wrist makes beau coup less sense than the idea that CE-399 passed through JFK's neck from back-to-front, started "yawing" / "tumbling' when it exited his throat, penetrated JBC's back (leaving an elliptical entry wound), shattered his fifth rib, exited his chest, continued tumbling, and . . . gasp . . . fractured his radial bone by hitting it rear-end first while "twirling" / "tumbling" (depositing in the wound some fibers from JBC's coat sleeve -- which it had penetrated at least semi-backwards -- in the process).
Unless, of course, if you actually believe that the bullet fragment that fractured JBC's radial bone was just one of at least four rather massive bullet fragments from said fatal head shot, which, taken altogether, 1) very likely dented the limo's chrome, 2) very likely cracked the limo's windshield, 3) probably struck the curb down by James Tague, and . . . yes, yes, yes!!! . . . 4) definitely, definitely, definitely fractured his radial bone!
LOL!
-- Tom
-
Dear Lance,
The idea that a bullet fragment from the fatal head shot wounded JBC's wrist makes beau coup less sense than the idea that CE-399 passed through JFK's neck from back-to-front, started "yawing" / "tumbling' when it exited his throat, penetrated JBC's back (leaving an elliptical entry wound), shattered his fifth rib, exited his chest, continued tumbling, and . . . gasp . . . fractured his radial bone by hitting it rear-end first while "twirling" / "tumbling" (depositing in the wound some fibers from JBC's coat sleeve -- which it had penetrated at least semi-backwards -- in the process).
Unless, of course, if you actually believe that the bullet fragment that fractured JBC's radial bone was just one of at least four rather massive bullet fragments from said fatal head shot, which, taken altogether, 1) very likely dented the limo's chrome, 2) very likely cracked the limo's windshield, 3) probably struck the curb down by James Tague, and . . . yes, yes, yes!!! . . . 4) definitely, definitely, definitely fractured his radial bone!
LOL!
-- Tom
Does it make beaucoup (my family is from New Orleans, bub - beaucoup is one word) less sense because you say so or because this is what the evidence shows? John Orr was a DOJ antitrust lawyer when he did his analysis that he then submitted to the AG, and I am inclined to take him more seriously than someone who thinks the KGB runs America. (Having been an antitrust lawyer for a Fortune 100 corporation, I can tell you this is not where dummies go to practice law.) His theory is that a KGB drone equipped with magnets sucked the fragment out of the limo before it was found - no, wait, I'm confusing Orr with you. In fact, his theory is that the fragment remained in the limo but was lost in the frantic removal of JBC at Parkland. I don't know if Orr is right and don't really care. The fact is, the wrist wounds are the biggest problem for CE 399, JBC's recollections are among the biggest problems for the SBT, and Orr's theory is seemingly helpful in both regards while doing no violence to the LN/SBT narrative.
-
Does it make beaucoup (my family is from New Orleans, bub - beaucoup is one word) less sense because you say so or because this is what the evidence shows? John Orr was a DOJ antitrust lawyer when he did his analysis that he then submitted to the AG, and I am inclined to take him more seriously than someone who thinks the KGB runs America. (Having been an antitrust lawyer for a Fortune 100 corporation, I can tell you this is not where dummies go to practice law.) His theory is that a KGB drone equipped with magnets sucked the fragment out of the limo before it was found - no, wait, I'm confusing Orr with you. In fact, his theory is that the fragment remained in the limo but was lost in the frantic removal of JBC at Parkland. I don't know if Orr is right and don't really care. The fact is, the wrist wounds are the biggest problem for CE 399, JBC's recollections are among the biggest problems for the SBT, and Orr's theory is seemingly helpful in both regards while doing no violence to the LN/SBT narrative.
Surely you beaugest.
-
The fact is, the wrist wounds are the biggest problem for CE 399, JBC's recollections are among the biggest problems for the SBT, and Orr's theory is seemingly helpful in both regards while doing no violence to the LN/SBT narrative.
Does Mr. Orr think, therefore, that it is just a rather amazing coincidence when John Connally's right arm goes flying upward at a point in time in the Zapruder Film which was within a split second of Connally being struck by a bullet? [See the Z-Film clips below.]
And this right arm / hat flying upward movement is occurring, of course, several seconds before any fragments from the JFK head shot could have possibly hit Connally's wrist.
I suppose the argument can be made that John Connally's right arm/hat flip had nothing at all to do with the bullet that was striking the Texas Governor at that exact moment (or pretty close to that exact moment in time anyway), but given the fact that we know that Connally's right wrist was injured during the shooting, it's difficult for me to believe that the very rapid and jerky movement that we can see occurring with Mr. Connally's right arm is somehow not due to the fact that a rifle bullet has just struck JBC's right wrist. Wouldn't you agree, Lance?
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2MoS6tSGBbliWCaf7Hs6XenMsv536KJZA-HyqKyOcZLTamvgkfQgUXLeRb_me5XEJtWbjlKTPMGzcrXz0YZuTH_HTOiZVxe1DPA8qfDWtLPlpA3pGCTPUSdptNFlUfD3YC0iaDGgVseI/s1600/Z225-Z226.gif)
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLWifxHHDifUUe21itmKX0GTvN440SReyouzX3mvpO2CYavwwKa55xbJrlV0aHgpJfGYQPbCmC8kYc2WKVJi3QufrJLcccjdc9a6WBEAlhaNEsXgwtZlg7x4RoyHsDIewOC0AvfaLkYb7o/s530/Zapruder-Film-In-Motion-Clip.gif)
Also See:
http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com / The Ultimate In SBT Denial (http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/01/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-887.html)
-
People are questioning me like I'm John Orr or am endorsing his theory. Did anyone actually read his analysis? He discusses this aspect at pp. 15-19.
He believes Oswald's first shot was fired at Z204 and his second shot 1.75 seconds later at Z236. He says the second shot hit JBC in the back near the right armpit at Z237 and that this is responsible for the reactions we see at Z238. He says that JBC himself thought the shot that hit him was within a couple of frames of Z234. If we can trust Michael Griffith's work on this, both JBC's chest surgeon Dr. Shaw and wrist surgeon Dr. Gregory placed the strike right about here as well. Orr has the third shot fired by a Mafia pro at Z312, 4.15 seconds after the second, and a fourth shot by Oswald immediately thereafter that missed completely.
And that's all I'm going to say about that! The shots are all such a Rohrshach test of films, photos, the dictabelt and earwitness and eyewitness testimony that my eyes glaze over and my brain shuts down. I simply find the notion that JBC's wrist wounds may have been caused by a fragment from the head shot to have considerable explanatory power even for the LN/SBT narrative and for this possibility to at least be worth considering unless it can be shown to be flatly impossible. Why there would any visceral LN reaction against this possibility is hard for me to understand.
-
I think it's fairly easy to establish the moment in the Zapruder Film when John Connally was struck by the bullet that hit him. I've collected several relatively good-quality clips from the Z-Film, and after looking over and over again at the zoomed-in frames showing Connally, it's pretty clear (to me anyway) that Mr. Connally is definitely reacting to an external stimulus (a bullet) in the frames immediately after Z224. There's shoulder-shrugging, hat-flipping, mouth-opening, lapel-bulging, eyes closing, and grimacing all happening between frames 225 and 230.
And yet I'm supposed to believe Connally wasn't even hit at all until Z237? That's ridiculous. (IMHO.)
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiapd-TjdD1nt-MuOvLCpdVpfx8deGbafmNhXsgtxDMCNvCSoE-qeg40I8YUSeLo8qjaq6fWqQyCFmLdx5JNSRT77O3BcuWabHEcF2HJId9zJck3CKOFUxQYXMT9Y-bl015sEmJn7ae81Fp/s1600/Z224-Z225-Zapruder-Film-Clip.gif)
(https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2MoS6tSGBbliWCaf7Hs6XenMsv536KJZA-HyqKyOcZLTamvgkfQgUXLeRb_me5XEJtWbjlKTPMGzcrXz0YZuTH_HTOiZVxe1DPA8qfDWtLPlpA3pGCTPUSdptNFlUfD3YC0iaDGgVseI/s1600/Z225-Z226.gif)
-
I corrected what I had said above about John Orr. He does not basically accept the SBT at all. He has CE 399 striking JBC in the back and ending up in his thigh, but JBC's wrist wounds being caused by a fragment from the head shot.
The wrist wound thing intrigues me. It would seemingly eliminate a lot of the issues with the condition of CE 399 (the wrist fragments are not from it) and JBC's confusion as to when he was hit (because he was hit twice), while doing no real violence to the SBT. CE 399 would do everything the SBT says except cause JBC's wrist wounds.
Why do you say that the wrist fragments are not from CE-399?
-
Yes, I think Orr's theory is well worth reading even if one concludes he's dead wrong. He certainly put extensive work into it, and he is the one who commissioned the Knott Lab study even though he now distances himself from it. As I recall, one key point is that JBC's doctors seemed to think the wrist wounds had been caused by a sharp or jagged missile, which doesn't sound like CE 399.
DR. GREGORY - The only way that this missile could have produced this wound in my view, was to have entered the wrist backward. Now, this is not inconsistent with one of the characteristics known for missiles which is to tumble. All missiles in flight have two motions normally, a linear motion from the muzzle of the gun to the target, a second motion which is a spinning motion having to do with maintaining the integrity of the intial linear direction, but if they strike an object they may be caused to turn in their path and tumble end over, and if they do, they tend to produce a greater amount of destruction within the strike time or the target, and they could possibly, if tumbling in air upon emergence, tumble into another target backward. That is the only possible explanation I could offer to correlate this missile with this particular wound.
Mr. SPECTER - Is them sufficient metallic substance missing from the back or rear end of that bullet to account for the metallic substance which you have described in the Governor's wrist?
Dr. GREGORY - It is possible but I don't know enough about the structure of bullets or this one in particular, to know what is a normal complement of lead or for this particular missile. It is irregular, but how much it may have lost, g have no idea.
Mr. DULLES - Would the nature of the entry wound give you any indication as to whether it entered backward or whether it entered forward?
Dr. GREGORY - My initial impression was that whatever produced the wound of the wrist was an irregular object, certainly not smooth nosed as the business end of this particular bullet is because of two things. The size of the wound of entrance, and the fact that it is irregular surfaced permitted it to pick up organic debris, materials, threads, and carry them into the wound with it.
Now, you will note that Dr. Shaw earlier in his testimony and in all of my conversations with him, never did indicate that there was any such loss of material into the wrist, nor does the back of this coat which I have examined show that it lost significant amounts of cloth but I think the tear in this coat sleeve does imply that there were bits of fabric lost, and I think those were resident in the wrist. I think we recovered them.
Mr. SPECTER - Is the back of that bullet characteristic of an irregular missile so as to cause the wound in the wrist?
Dr. GREGORY - I would say that the back of this being fiat and having sharp edges is irregular, and would possibly tend to tear tissues more than does an inclined plane such as this.
Mr. SPECTER - Would the back of the missile be sufficiently irregular to have caused the wound of the right wrist, in your opinion?
Dr. GREGORY - I think it could have; yes. It is possible.
-
Why do you say that the wrist fragments are not from CE-399?
I don't say that. John Orr does. I simply say it's an interesting idea because JBC's wrist wounds seem to me the most problematical for the condition of CE 399.
I just checked. Tink Thompson says JBC is hit at Z235. Mark Tyler, whose work I respect, says the first shot is at Z185 and JBC reacts at Z224-240. Rorschach test. I decline to dive into the debate. I simply do find CE 399 somewhat implausible, and eliminating the wrist wounds would make it far more plausible to me if that can be plausibly done.
-
I don't say that. John Orr does. I simply say it's an interesting idea because JBC's wrist wounds seem to me the most problematical for the condition of CE 399.
I just checked. Tink Thompson says JBC is hit at Z235. Mark Tyler, whose work I respect, says the first shot is at Z185 and JBC reacts at Z224-240. Rorschach test. I decline to dive into the debate. I simply do find CE 399 somewhat implausible, and eliminating the wrist wounds would make it far more plausible to me if that can be plausibly done.
Dear Lance,
Are there any "Lonenutter" researchers you respect who believe in the Single Bullet Hypothesis?
Or do you not respect them for the simple reason that they do believe in it?
-- Tom
-
I don't say that. John Orr does. I simply say it's an interesting idea because JBC's wrist wounds seem to me the most problematical for the condition of CE 399.
I just checked. Tink Thompson says JBC is hit at Z235. Mark Tyler, whose work I respect, says the first shot is at Z185 and JBC reacts at Z224-240. Rorschach test. I decline to dive into the debate. I simply do find CE 399 somewhat implausible, and eliminating the wrist wounds would make it far more plausible to me if that can be plausibly done.
Surely, you're aware of the Failure Analysis Test of 1992, are you not? What do you think CE-399 should have looked like after hitting the wrist? Granted, in the FAA test, the bullets struck the wrists nose-forward. However, Fackler didn't seem to think that mattered much.
-
….they could easily see that any theory that needs to be substituted for the Single-Bullet Conclusion lacks all credibility and can easily be shot full of holes via common sense alone.
The evidence is overwhelming that all three shots were fired by a single shooter from the SN and that the shooter was Oswald. That conclusion is not driven by common sense. It is compelled by the evidence.
Prior to Arlen Specter foisting his “common sense” on the WC the FBI was of the view that none of the three shots missed: the first struck JFK in the neck when JFK was opposite the lamp post near the Thornton sign (z190); the second struck JBC in the back around z275 causing all his wounds, and the third struck JFK in the head at z312-313. This sequence is apparent in the FBI working model:
(https://i.postimg.cc/NMTxbm6Y/kennedy-john-f-3-shots-jan-1964-0124.jpg)
Then the US Army ballistics experts showed that the bullet exiting JFK’s neck was still moving at significant speed. However, Dr. Light who was Chief of the Wound Assessment Branch at Edgewood Arsenal and a medical doctor who had practiced as a pathologist and whose area of study and work was the pathology of wounds, stated that JBC’s back wound is consistent with having been hit by a pristine bullet. The main reason he thought that it hadn’t had nothing to do with the wound characteristics but with the fact that JBC was in front of JFK: 5H94-96. He stated that he could not tell if the bullet that struck JBC in the back had been yawing: “I don’t feel too certain that it was yawing”.
So according to the most qualified expert on wound assessment, Dr. Light, the wounds in JBC were consistent with a pristine bullet hitting JBC. If all the witnesses who said that the third shot occurred rapidly after the second and the Connallys, Dave Powers, Gayle Newman were right that JBC was hit on the second shot, I don’t see any need for the SBT.
The rest of the evidence tells you that Oswald did it.
-
The evidence is overwhelming that all three shots were fired by a single shooter from the SN and that the shooter was Oswald. That conclusion is not driven by common sense. It is compelled by the evidence.
Prior to Arlen Specter foisting his “common sense” on the WC the FBI was of the view that none of the three shots missed: the first struck JFK in the neck when JFK was opposite the lamp post near the Thornton sign (z190); the second struck JBC in the back around z275 causing all his wounds, and the third struck JFK in the head at z312-313.
Then the US Army ballistics experts showed that the bullet exiting JFK’s neck was still moving at significant speed. However, Dr. Light who was Chief of the Wound Assessment Branch at Edgewood Arsenal and a medical doctor who had practiced as a pathologist and whose area of study and work was the pathology of wounds, stated that JBC’s back wound is consistent with having been hit by a pristine bullet. The main reason he thought that it hadn’t had nothing [sic] to do with the wound characteristics but with the fact that JBC was in front of JFK: 5H94-96. He stated that he could not tell if the bullet that struck JBC in the back had been yawing: “I don’t feel too certain that it was yawing”.
So according to the most qualified expert on wound assessment, Dr. Light, the wounds in JBC were consistent with a pristine bullet hitting JBC. If all the witnesses who said that the third shot occurred rapidly after the second and the Connallys, Dave Powers, Gayle Newman were right that JBC was hit on the second shot, I don’t see any need for the SBT.
The rest of the evidence tells you that Oswald did it.
The Carcano bullet that was filmed in super slow motion as it passed through and exited a block of ballistic gel in "Cold Case JFK" started yawing within a couple of feet (actually started yawing before it exited the block of ballistics gel), but not all that much.
Point being: the slightly elliptical entry wound in JBC's back could have been caused by a slightly yawning CE-399.
Interestingly, the directionality of the axes of the entry wounds in JFK and JBC were significantly different.
Grok:
JFK’s wound had a vertical major axis (aligned with the body’s longitudinal axis, reflecting the bullet’s downward path from the sniper’s nest). Connally’s wound had a horizontal major axis (lateral, due to the bullet’s tumble after passing through JFK, causing a wider, flatter entry). The single-bullet theory supports this, as the bullet’s yaw after exiting JFK’s neck would reorient its impact angle on Connally.
Contextual Notes:
The vertical axis of JFK’s wound aligns with the shooter’s position (sixth floor, Texas School Book Depository, ~60 feet above ground), creating a downward trajectory.
Connally’s horizontal axis reflects the bullet’s instability (tumbling), as confirmed by forensic analyses (HSCA, 1979) and the rib fracture pattern, which follows a lateral path.
Some discrepancies exist in wound descriptions due to surgical debridement (Connally’s wound was enlarged to ~3 cm post-surgery) and initial mis-probing of JFK’s wound, but the axis orientations are consistently described as above in primary sources.
No X posts or web sources (searched up to September 15, 2025) provide contradictory forensic details on axis orientation; most reinforce the Warren/HSCA findings.
Thus, the major axis of JFK’s back wound (vertical) was oriented differently from Connally’s back wound (horizontal).
-
Thus, the major axis of JFK’s back wound (vertical) was oriented differently from Connally’s back wound (horizontal).
That could also be explained by different shots 4 seconds apart between which the vertical and horizontal angle from the SN to the car changed, and at which the vertical and horizontal orientation of the surfaces struck differed markedly.
JFK was leaning forward so the back entry surface was aligned with the bullet trajectory at z190-200. Whereas at z271 JBC was twisted around and leaning back so the surface of the right armpit relative to the bullet path was not aligned.
-
The evidence is overwhelming that all three shots were fired by a single shooter from the SN and that the shooter was Oswald. That conclusion is not driven by common sense. It is compelled by the evidence.
Not on this planet.
Prior to Arlen Specter foisting his “common sense” on the WC the FBI was of the view that none of the three shots missed: the first struck JFK in the neck when JFK was opposite the lamp post near the Thornton sign (z190); the second struck JBC in the back around z275 causing all his wounds, and the third struck JFK in the head at z312-313. This sequence is apparent in the FBI working model:
I suggest doing some research on the origins of the SBT. Specter only concocted the SBT when he realized the timing problem of the closeness of two of the shots. His determination to push the SBT, even though his own experts said it was bunk, increased after the Tague wounding could no longer be ignored.
Then the US Army ballistics experts showed that the bullet exiting JFK’s neck was still moving at significant speed. However, Dr. Light who was Chief of the Wound Assessment Branch at Edgewood Arsenal and a medical doctor who had practiced as a pathologist and whose area of study and work was the pathology of wounds, stated that JBC’s back wound is consistent with having been hit by a pristine bullet. The main reason he thought that it hadn’t had nothing to do with the wound characteristics but with the fact that JBC was in front of JFK: 5H94-96. He stated that he could not tell if the bullet that struck JBC in the back had been yawing: “I don’t feel too certain that it was yawing”.
I feel sorry for Dr. Light. He was under a lot of pressure. He knew what was expected of him and, sadly, he usually cooperated. He should have known that the bullet that hit Connally was not yawing because the back wound was only 1.5 cm wide, the same width as JFK's rear head entry wound, and because the wound path through Connally was so narrow that when the bullet smashed the fifth rib it did little damage to the surrounding tissue, as Dr. Shaw explained.
The yawing myth came along after it was realized that CE 399 was traveling sideways when it hit whatever it hit.
So according to the most qualified expert on wound assessment, Dr. Light, the wounds in JBC were consistent with a pristine bullet hitting JBC. If all the witnesses who said that the third shot occurred rapidly after the second and the Connallys, Dave Powers, Gayle Newman were right that JBC was hit on the second shot, I don’t see any need for the SBT.
Just FYI, Dr. Light was not the most qualified expert on wound assessment. Dr. Dolce was. Dolce had more experience with gunshot wounds than Light did. Anyway, Light deserves some credit for equivocating about the bullet that hit Connally, but Light did end up endorsing the SBT.
The rest of the evidence tells you that Oswald did it.
No, it does not. Even Chief Curry later admitted they didn't have any evidence that put Oswald in the sniper's window with a rifle in his hand. The NAA testing on Oswald right-cheek paraffin cast found no chemical indications that he had fired a rifle on 11/22, and the NAA test process was confirmed as 100% reliable via control testing. Evidence that surfaced in the 1990s shows that Oswald was not on the sixth floor during the shooting. VSA polygraph analysis of Oswald's filmed denial of guilt to journalists indicates he was telling the truth. Oswald's Marine Corps rifle scores and WC's own rifle test clearly prove that Oswald did not have the marksmanship skills to perform the alleged shooting feat. And on and on we could go.
-
Specter only concocted the SBT when he realized the timing problem of the closeness of two of the shots. His determination to push the SBT, even though his own experts said it was bunk, increased after the Tague wounding could no longer be ignored.
Dear Comrade Griffith,
If Specter's experts thought his Single Bullet Hypothesis was "bunk," then they were almost as full of beans as you are.
The Single Bullet Fact is counterintuitive, so why begrudge Specter for having to "come up" with a hypothesis that would plausibly explain Tague's wounding timing-wise, and account for all of the wounds to JFK and JBC not only over a seemingly impossible period of time, but in a scenario in which one of the three shots (the first one at or near limousine "Point A") missed everything and another one (at Z-313) "only" struck JFK's head, and based largely (luckily for you and all of the tinfoil-hat JFKA CTs out there!) on a film in which JFK and JBC passed behind a large sign right at the critical moment, and on earwitness' statements regarding the number and timing of the shots they heard or thought they heard in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza?
-- Tom
-
I suggest doing some research on the origins of the SBT. Specter only concocted the SBT when he realized the timing problem of the closeness of two of the shots. His determination to push the SBT, even though his own experts said it was bunk, increased after the Tague wounding could no longer be ignored.
Have you read David Belin's book Final Disclosure? Belin credits Specter with coming up with the SBT after he found an expert (apparently FBI's Robert Frazier) who said that JBC could not have been hit after z240 assuming the bullet did not deflect on striking Connally's rib. That suggests that Specter came up with the SBT, as you suggest, to deal with the timing problem that a wounding of JBC before z240 presents. Specter himself, however, maintained that the primary reason for the SBT is the absence of marks in the car from the bullet that passed through JFK's neck. This fits with what Specter said in an interview with Life Magazine in 1966 and published November 25, 1966 (A Matter of Reasonable Doubt) at p. 48B:
- "One of our most impressive pieces of evidence,” says Specter, “is the
FBI report on an examination of the limousine. It concludes that
no part of the car’s interior was struck by a whole bullet.” ...
"Where, if it didn't hit Connally, did that bullet go? This is the single most
compelling reason why I concluded that one bullet hit both men".
I don't disagree with Specter. I just suggest that Connally was hit in two different places that could well have been exposed to a shot from the SN through JFK's midline, the least likely of which is his right armpit. the conclusion that the bullet struck JBC on the right side after passing through JFK is not the most reasonable one.
Just FYI, Dr. Light was not the most qualified expert on wound assessment. Dr. Dolce was. Dolce had more experience with gunshot wounds than Light did.
Dr. Dolce did not testify before the WC. He was a junior technician to the technician who assisted in JFK's autopsy. I am not aware he had anything to do with Connally.
-
I asked AI to settle this, and it came up with the following, which I thought was pretty insightful.
Is no one else finding this all kind of humorous? I do like Andrew's explanation, since a non-SBT LN narrative always appeals to me. Toss in a fragment from the head wound and I have my New Favorite Theory, thereby supplanting the Phantom Shot, which is hereby demoted to my Alternative Favorite Theory.
(https://media.gettyimages.com/id/149215025/vector/rorschach-inkblot-test.jpg?s=1024x1024&w=gi&k=20&c=LJA6bscrJu5xtQuK2kh99VE30VTXEnIwAU1O_RvRmNY=)
-
I asked AI to settle this, and it came up with the following, which I thought was pretty insightful. Is no one else finding this all kind of humorous? I do like Andrew's explanation, since a non-SBT LN narrative always appeals to me. Toss in a fragment from the head wound and I have my New Favorite Theory, thereby supplanting the Phantom Shot, which is hereby demoted to my Alternative Favorite Theory.
Dear Fancy Pants Lance,
You're quite the hoot!
-- Tom
-
Dear Fancy Pants Lance,
You're quite the hoot!
-- Tom
Thank you, I try. It's nice to be appreciated. Had you never heard the word "hoot" before - you seem to have become obsessed with it? I believe I originally said I found The Donald to be a hoot, which I do, so perhaps this explains why it has resonated so strongly with you.
(https://www.economist.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=1424,quality=80,format=auto/sites/default/files/images/print-edition/20160227_LDD002_0.jpg)
-
Thank you, I try. It's nice to be appreciated. Had you never heard the word "hoot" before - you seem to have become obsessed with it? I believe I originally said I found The Donald to be a hoot, which I do, so perhaps this explains why it has resonated so strongly with you.
No, because it rhymes with "coot," as in zombified by sixty-six years of KGB* disinformation, "active measures," and mole-based strategic deception counterintelligence operations waged against us and our NATO allies "old coot."
*Today's SVR and FSB
-
....I do like Andrew's explanation, since a non-SBT LN narrative always appeals to me. Toss in a fragment from the head wound and I have my New Favorite Theory, thereby supplanting the Phantom Shot, which is hereby demoted to my Alternative Favorite Theory.
I can't take credit for the three shot, three hit, one shooter explanation. That was determined by and maintained by the FBI until Arlen Specter came up with the SBT.
So the question is: on what basis was the original 3 shot, 3 hit, one shooter explanation rejected? It appears to me that it was rejected because everyone assumed JBC was struck by only one bullet and the bullet exiting JFK's neck was likely travelling too fast to have missed anyone and struck the car without leaving noticeable damage. All I have done is just question the first assumption by showing that the path through JFK's midline was to the left side of JBC.