Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1


That’s an interesting graph. It’s over 10-years old now. The last part of if showed the two lines converging. I wonder if they continued to converge over the most recent 10-year period.
I like how they included notable events surrounding the assassination along with the poll numbers. The latest numbers show a uptick - from ~60% to ~65% - with most of the increase driven by self-identified Republican voters. It appears to be the "the Deep State got JFK like they tried to get Trump" view. Silly.
2
The next issue I'd like to discuss on using logic and critical thinking in the JFK case is the wound ballistics aspects of the case.

Before doing so, let's recap the issue of Oswald's marksmanship and his alleged shooting feat.

One, nearly everyone who saw Oswald shoot in the Marine Corps (MC) or in Russia said he was a poor shot, and Oswald's MC rifle scores show he was only a mediocre shot even when using a superb semi-automatic rifle against stationary targets that he had practiced against for hours and while having no less than 5 seconds per shot in the fastest of the firing phases.

Two, Oswald's alleged shooting feat has never been duplicated. In the only rifle test that used the alleged murder weapon itself, three NRA-Master-rated riflemen failed to hit the head and neck area of the target silhouettes 20 out of 21 times, even though the rifle had been zeroed with the scope, even though they were firing from only 30 feet up, even though they were firing at stationary target boards, even though they took practice shots before the test, and even though they took all the time they wanted for their first shot.

In the 1967 CBS rifle test, only one of the 12 experienced riflemen, many of whom were expert marksmen, scored two hits in three shots in under 6 seconds on his first attempt, and that was only because the test counted as "hits" any shots that landed anywhere on the target silhouettes, even if they landed far from the 14 x 4-inch area that Oswald allegedly hit two out of two times in 5.6 seconds. I should add that the rifle in the CBS test was zeroed and that the riflemen were allowed to fire nine practice shots before the test.

Wound Ballistics Problems: Really Big Problems

One of the most glaring contradictions and illogical aspects of the lone-gunman theory involve its claims about the behavior of the two alleged Oswald bullets that supposedly hit Kennedy. Oswald supposedly used 6.5 mm full-metal-jacketed (FMJ) bullets, which are built to have tremendous penetrating power without markedly fragmenting. The lone-gunman theory says that his first alleged hit struck Kennedy in the back of the neck and that his second alleged hit struck the back of the head (we will not delve into the two severely inconsistent proposed entry points for this bullet). These two bullets behaved in dramatically different ways.

According to the lone-gunman theory's single-bullet theory (SBT), the first supposed Oswald bullet that hit JFK tore through JFK's neck, exited his throat, hit Governor Connally in the back, tore through Connally's chest while shattering 4 inches of rib bone, exited Connally's chest, hit his wrist and fractured the distal radius bone (one of the hardest bones in the body), exited the wrist, and buried itself in the governor's left thigh. And this bullet, CE 399, after supposedly doing all this destruction, emerged with minimal damage, with its lands and grooves intact, with no deformation to its nose, and with the loss of only 3-4 grains of its substance.

Yet, the alleged Oswald bullet that supposedly hit JFK in the head shattered into several large fragments and into dozens of tiny fragments, allegedly leaving at least two fragments on the rear outer table of the skull, leaving dozens of tiny fragments in a veritable "lead snowstorm" near the top of the skull around the right coronal suture, and leaving two sizable fragments just behind the right orbit.

What in the world?! So one FMJ bullet tears through seven layers of human skin, shatters 4 inches of rib bone, and fractures the distal radius bone--but somehow emerges with its lands and grooves intact, suffers no deformation to its nose, and loses only 3-4 grains of its substance. Yet, the other FMJ bullet penetrates the rear of a skull and then shatters into dozens of tiny fragments and also several sizable fragments while impossibly leaving at least two fragments at its entry point on the outer table of the skull.

Leaving aside the fact that no FMJ bullet in the known history of forensic science has ever behaved the way the SBT bullet behaved or the way the head-shot bullet behaved, how could two FMJ bullets behave so drastically differently as these two bullets supposedly did?

It is hard to say which bullet's alleged behavior is more problematic. No genuine, realistic SBT wound ballistics test has ever produced a bullet that emerged looking like CE 399. Even some severely rigged SBT tests failed to duplicate the SBT. In the WC's SBT wound ballistics test, bullets that were merely fired into cotton wadding emerged with more deformity than CE 399, which is one reason the Army's top wound ballistics expert, Dr. Joseph Dolce, told the WC the SBT was impossible.

On the other hand, forensic science tells us that FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever shatter into dozens of tiny fragments after penetrating bone, skull bone or otherwise. Dr. Vincent DiMaio, considered one of the greatest forensic pathologists of the 20th and 21st centuries, made this clear in his famous forensic handbook Gunshot Wounds:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Notice the two key points: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. (2) If an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," i.e., a cluster of numerous tiny fragments, this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

Thus, it is not surprising that the skull x-rays from the WC's head-shot wound ballistics test show a fragmentation pattern that looks nothing like the pattern seen in the JFK autopsy skull x-rays.

This article was posted by Natalie on a ladies beauty products site, She seems to know a lot more about it than you do.

Understanding The Fragmentation Of Full Metal Jacket Bullets

Last updated

Feb 21, 2024 Posted by

Natalia

To summarize, the velocity at which a full metal jacket bullet is traveling, the construction and shape of the bullet, the type of target, the angle of impact, and the distance at which the bullet is fired are all factors that can determine whether the bullet will fragment upon impact. These factors interact with each other and can vary depending on the specific circumstances, so it is difficult to make generalizations about whether a full metal jacket bullet will fragment in any given situation.

However, it is important to note that FMJ bullets can still fragment to a certain extent, depending on various factors. When a FMJ bullet strikes a hard or dense material, such as bone or metal, it can chip or break, leading to fragmentation. Similarly, when the bullet strikes a soft or fluid-filled target, such as gel or water, it can cause cavitation and disrupt the surrounding tissues, resulting in fragmentation.


Maybe we can contact Natalie if you have any further questions on fragmenting FMJ bullets.
4
In the early days/weeks after the assassination the majority of Americans polled believed there was a conspiracy. This is before any investigation other than the DPD was done.

People simply want to believe - or have to - that it was more. Great events need a great cause and one man with a rifle can't be it.





That’s an interesting graph. It’s over 10-years old now. The last part of if showed the two lines converging. I wonder if they continued to converge over the most recent 10-year period.
5
I don't speak for other LNs but my guess is they don't care about your perceived problems any more than I do.

"Perceived problems"?! Your comment is further proof that you are an uninformed, unserious troll.

Umm, the HSCA FPP certainly saw this as a huge problem. Remember? They hammered the autopsy doctors on the fact that the existing autopsy materials, especially the alleged brain photos, show no wound path, not even a theoretically possible wound path, from the EOP site to the right orbit. I've pointed this out to you several times, but you just keep ignoring it--because you can't explain it.

Just try to fathom the absurdity of your position: You're saying it's no big deal, no problem at all, that three autopsy pathologists, after viewing the skull x-rays at length during the autopsy, and after consulting with the autopsy radiologist during the autopsy, failed to mention a glaringly obvious fragment trail near the top of the skull and claimed to see a much lower EOP-to-right-orbit fragment trail that does not appear on the autopsy skull x-rays.

"Happens all the time," right? Was the radiologist blind too?

What makes these stunning problems even more severe and revealing is that the autopsy doctors reviewed the autopsy x-rays and photos for five hours in 1966 and declared that those materials supported their original findings.

To make these problems even more extreme, we have the fact that the alleged autopsy brain photos, if authentic, absolutely rule out a bullet striking anywhere in the righthand side of the occipital bone, much less 1 cm above and 2.5 cm to right of the EOP, because they show no damage whatsoever to the rear area of the right occipital lobe. In fact, they show no damage to the left occipital lobe either. 

Yet, Dr. Gerald McDonnel told the HSCA FPP that the skull x-rays show the bullet penetrated in the "right occipital bone." One would assume that a diagnostic radiologist such as Dr. McDonnel could easily tell the difference between the occipital bone and the parietal bone, especially since they are separated by the lambdoid suture. The autopsy doctors doggedly insisted they saw and handled the entry wound near the EOP. The autopsy photographer, who took the photo showing the rear head entry wound, said the wound was near the EOP and not in the cowlick. Several witnesses at the autopsy said the entry wound was where the autopsy doctors placed it. Your side's most-qualified wound ballistics expert, Dr. Larry Sturdivan, says the entry wound was near the EOP and not in the cowlick.

Okay, then surely you have enough basic intelligence and reasoning ability to understand that you need to explain how a bullet could have entered the EOP site, or entered anywhere in the occiput, without tearing through the right or left occipital lobes after it entered the skull. This was the crucial issue that the FPP hammered the autopsy doctors on, and they had no answer for it because they were unwilling to question the authenticity of the brain photos.
 
6
In the early days/weeks after the assassination the majority of Americans polled believed there was a conspiracy. This is before any investigation other than the DPD was done.

People simply want to believe - or have to - that it was more. Great events need a great cause and one man with a rifle can't be it.

7
The next issue I'd like to discuss on using logic and critical thinking in the JFK case is the wound ballistics aspects of the case.

Before doing so, let's recap the issue of Oswald's marksmanship and his alleged shooting feat.

One, nearly everyone who saw Oswald shoot in the Marine Corps (MC) or in Russia said he was a poor shot, and Oswald's MC rifle scores show he was only a mediocre shot even when using a superb semi-automatic rifle against stationary targets that he had practiced against for hours and while having no less than 5 seconds per shot in the fastest of the firing phases.

Two, Oswald's alleged shooting feat has never been duplicated. In the only rifle test that used the alleged murder weapon itself, three NRA-Master-rated riflemen failed to hit the head and neck area of the target silhouettes 20 out of 21 times, even though the rifle had been zeroed with the scope, even though they were firing from only 30 feet up, even though they were firing at stationary target boards, even though they took practice shots before the test, and even though they took all the time they wanted for their first shot.

In the 1967 CBS rifle test, only one of the 12 experienced riflemen, many of whom were expert marksmen, scored two hits in three shots in under 6 seconds on his first attempt, and that was only because the test counted as "hits" any shots that landed anywhere on the target silhouettes, even if they landed far from the 14 x 4-inch area that Oswald allegedly hit two out of two times in 5.6 seconds. I should add that the rifle in the CBS test was zeroed and that the riflemen were allowed to fire nine practice shots before the test.

Wound Ballistics Problems: Really Big Problems

One of the most glaring contradictions and illogical aspects of the lone-gunman theory involve its claims about the behavior of the two alleged Oswald bullets that supposedly hit Kennedy. Oswald supposedly used 6.5 mm full-metal-jacketed (FMJ) bullets, which are built to have tremendous penetrating power without markedly fragmenting. The lone-gunman theory says that his first alleged hit struck Kennedy in the back of the neck and that his second alleged hit struck the back of the head (we will not delve into the two severely inconsistent proposed entry points for this bullet). These two bullets behaved in dramatically different ways.

According to the lone-gunman theory's single-bullet theory (SBT), the first supposed Oswald bullet that hit JFK tore through JFK's neck, exited his throat, hit Governor Connally in the back, tore through Connally's chest while shattering 4 inches of rib bone, exited Connally's chest, hit his wrist and fractured the distal radius bone (one of the hardest bones in the body), exited the wrist, and buried itself in the governor's left thigh. And this bullet, CE 399, after supposedly doing all this destruction, emerged with minimal damage, with its lands and grooves intact, with no deformation to its nose, and with the loss of only 3-4 grains of its substance.

Yet, the alleged Oswald bullet that supposedly hit JFK in the head shattered into several large fragments and into dozens of tiny fragments, allegedly leaving at least two fragments on the rear outer table of the skull, leaving dozens of tiny fragments in a veritable "lead snowstorm" near the top of the skull around the right coronal suture, and leaving two sizable fragments just behind the right orbit.

What in the world?! So one FMJ bullet tears through seven layers of human skin, shatters 4 inches of rib bone, and fractures the distal radius bone--but somehow emerges with its lands and grooves intact, suffers no deformation to its nose, and loses only 3-4 grains of its substance. Yet, the other FMJ bullet penetrates the rear of a skull and then shatters into dozens of tiny fragments and also several sizable fragments while impossibly leaving at least two fragments at its entry point on the outer table of the skull.

Leaving aside the fact that no FMJ bullet in the known history of forensic science has ever behaved the way the SBT bullet behaved or the way the head-shot bullet behaved, how could two FMJ bullets behave so drastically differently as these two bullets supposedly did?

It is hard to say which bullet's alleged behavior is more problematic. No genuine, realistic SBT wound ballistics test has ever produced a bullet that emerged looking like CE 399. Even some severely rigged SBT tests failed to duplicate the SBT. In the WC's SBT wound ballistics test, bullets that were merely fired into cotton wadding emerged with more deformity than CE 399, which is one reason the Army's top wound ballistics expert, Dr. Joseph Dolce, told the WC the SBT was impossible.

On the other hand, forensic science tells us that FMJ bullets will never, ever, ever shatter into dozens of tiny fragments after penetrating bone, skull bone or otherwise. Dr. Vincent DiMaio, considered one of the greatest forensic pathologists of the 20th and 21st centuries, made this clear in his famous forensic handbook Gunshot Wounds:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Notice the two key points: (1) In the "rare" cases when FMJ bullets do fragment if they penetrate bone, they will only leave "a few" fragments. (2) If an x-ray shows a "lead snowstorm," i.e., a cluster of numerous tiny fragments, this "rules out" FMJ ammo.

Thus, it is not surprising that the skull x-rays from the WC's head-shot wound ballistics test show a fragmentation pattern that looks nothing like the pattern seen in the JFK autopsy skull x-rays.
8
So where did the back shot come from smart ass?

It came from behind JFK.
9
Andrew has painted himself in to a corner by fully committing to z312/313 as being the final shot of the three, clearly audible shots reported by over 160 witnesses.
JFK's reaction to being shot through the throat (and Brachial Plexus) is for his hands to fly upwards, towards his chin, at an incredible speed. It is clearly a neuromuscular/reflex reaction.
This indicates he was shot milliseconds before this movement.
The first reliable visible signs of this movement are seen in z225, so the shot passed through JFK only 2 or 3 Z-frames before this (z222/223).
The problem for Andrew is that there is a shade less than 5 seconds between z222/223 and z312/313.
He believes there was a significant gap between the first and second shots (and that the second and third shots were close together) - shot, pause, shot, shot.
This is impossible if you accept that the head shot was the last shot. There would be no time for a pause between the first two shots.

How does he overcome this problem?
By using the worst methodology possible.
He fixes the last shot at z312/313 then uses the time it takes to get off a shot with the MC (around 2.5 seconds ish) and calculates his way backwards from z312/313.
He then has his Z-frames (first shot z190, second shot z272, third shot z312/313)
After he has got his Z-frames he then, and only then, looks for evidence to support his calculations!!

He doesn't use the evidence to reach a conclusion.
He already has his conclusion and then cherry-picks evidence to support this conclusion.

It is a doomed method that led to a doomed theory.
However, this has not stopped him from constantly promoting this dead theory. It is his creation, after all.

Yes it is. He was peddling it on John McAdams' forum as far back as 2008 when I joined it and probably before that. It doesn't matter how many times or how many ways people have pointed out the impossibility of his pet theory, he will dream up some cockamamie excuse to cling to it. He seems to have an undying pride of authorship of it although I have no idea why.
10
I guess we are all entitled to be our own little photographic panels and medical panels, but it certainly looks to me like "something is going on" with JFKA after Z195. The right arm seems locked in a distinctly odd position.

It's called waving. After Z195 he stopped waving and began lowering his right arm, a movement he continued until Z226 when both arms suddenly raised dramatically. I don't see anything odd about it.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10