Surely you're joking. "Please read it again"? What don't you understand here? You can read it a thousand times, and it's still going to read that Ford replaced "at a point slightly below the shoulder" with "the back of his neck."

Sheesh, even Google AI says that Ford changed the wound's description so that it would "better align" with the single-bullet theory:

Gerald Ford successfully pushed the Warren Commission to change the written description of President John F. Kennedy's back wound from the upper back to the base of the neck to better align with the single-bullet theory. (Google "gerald ford's alteration of the description of jfk's back wound")

I was surprised by this acknowledgment because Google AI usually gives answers that are pro-WC.

And surely you can't look at the autopsy photo of the back wound and claim with a straight face that it shows the wound in "the back of his neck" where Humes put it in his drawing for the WC, can you? The HSCA FPP concluded the photo puts the wound at T1, which is a good 2 inches lower than where Humes placed it in his WC drawing. Indeed, the FPP said they placed the wound "in the back area" and "a few inches lower" than where Humes put it in his drawing:

The panel also places the entrance perforation on the lower, in the back area, a few inches lower than illustrated in this drawing. (1 HSCA 256)

But Humes's wound diagram for the WC put the wound at C3 or C4, not C7. He put the wound noticeably above the throat wound, as we see in CE 385. Humes had to put the back wound above the throat because he and the WC claimed the bullet traveled a "downward path" from the back wound to the throat wound, a piece of pure fiction that even the HSCA FPP rejected.

A bullet entering at C7 would have struck barely level with or slightly below the throat wound. A bullet entering at T1 would have struck at least 1/3 of an inch below the throat wound,

which is one reason the HSCA FPP said the bullet hit the back at an upward angle and that it tunneled upward, a fact that Dr. Werner Spitz had confirmed for the Rockefeller Commission three years earlier:

There is no doubt that the bullet which struck the President’s back penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction, as is evident from the width of the abrasion at the lower half of the bullet wound of entrance. The term "sharply upward direction" is used because it is evident from this injury that the missile traveled upwards within the body. (Report of Werner Spitz, 4/24/75, p. 1, Rockefeller Commission papers, see https://websites.umich.edu/~ahaq/correspondence.pdf)

This is why the FPP had to assume that JFK was leaning so far forward as to be nearly doubled over when the bullet struck, as Dr. Baden was nice enough to demonstrate in front of TV cameras.

Also, we know the back wound was actually at T3, as documented in the death certificate (marked "verified") and on the autopsy face sheet (also marked "verified"), and as confirmed by the hard physical evidence of the rear JFK clothing holes.

Sibert and O'Neill insisted the back wound was well below the throat wound and could not have exited the throat.

A careful look at the autopsy photo of the back wound shows the photo is consistent with the T3 location, when you take into account the fact that the head is tilted substantially backward, so much so that two lines of folded skin can be seen on the upper part of the neck just below the hairline. With those two lines of folded skin unfolded, the wound could very well be at T3 or more than halfway between T2 and T3.

"JFK's Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible"

"Where Was President Kennedy's Back Wound?"

The topic of the thread is uninteresting to me. Your use of hyperbole in the OP makes you look ridiculous.

Oh, but it was even better than that. He'd decided that the evidence envelope that contained the bullet was a used one that a "newbie nurse" (his own original invention) fished out of the trash to reuse. He never could get his head around the fact that Nolan and Audrey Bell verified that the writing on the envelope was theirs.

Hi Tim, do you have an opinion about the actual topic of this thread?

You've claimed but never documented that Young's notes contained a reference to a bullet being sent to Bethesda. Even if his notes did contain that, they would only reflect Young's confusion about what was in the envelope containing the recovered bone fragments. It would make no sense for the bullet fragments to have been handed over to the FBI but for some strange reason, they would send a whole bullet to Bethesda. There is no documentation which shows a whole bullet was recovered from the limo, only bullet and bone fragments.