Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.  (Read 17063 times)

Online Andrew Mason

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
    • SPMLaw
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2018, 03:47:13 AM »
Not sure why you say that. The autopsy report summary, p. 6, refers to the throat wound as the exit wound from the bullet that entered in the upper back:

"The other missile entered the right superior posterior thorax above the scapula and traversed the soft tissues of the supra-scapular and the supra-clavicular portions of the base of the right, side of the neck. This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura and of the apical portion of the right Yupper lobe of the lung. The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2018, 03:47:13 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4738
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2018, 04:58:11 PM »
"The second wound presumably of entry is that described above in the upper right posterior thorax. Beneath the skin there is ecchymosis of subcutaneous tissue and musculature. The missile path through the fascia and musculature cannot be easily proved. The wound presumably of exit was that described by Dr. Malcolm Perry of Dallas in the low anterior cervical region."

Online Andrew Mason

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
    • SPMLaw
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #22 on: July 12, 2018, 06:25:56 AM »
"The second wound presumably of entry is that described above in the upper right posterior thorax. Beneath the skin there is ecchymosis of subcutaneous tissue and musculature. The missile path through the fascia and musculature cannot be easily proved. The wound presumably of exit was that described by Dr. Malcolm Perry of Dallas in the low anterior cervical region."
That does not mean that they were unable to prove the missile path through the fascia and muscles.  It was proven to their satisfaction. Just not easily . They explained how the wounds were connected:

"The third point of reference in connecting these two wounds is in the apex (supra-clavicular portion) of the right pleural cavity. In this region there is contusion of the parietal pleura and of the extreme apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. In both instances the diameter of contusion and ecchymosis at the point of maximal involvement measures 5 cm. Both the visceral and parietal pleura are intact overlying these areas of trauma."

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #22 on: July 12, 2018, 06:25:56 AM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4738
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #23 on: July 13, 2018, 08:39:16 PM »
That does not mean that they were unable to prove the missile path through the fascia and muscles.  It was proven to their satisfaction. Just not easily . They explained how the wounds were connected:

"The third point of reference in connecting these two wounds is in the apex (supra-clavicular portion) of the right pleural cavity. In this region there is contusion of the parietal pleura and of the extreme apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. In both instances the diameter of contusion and ecchymosis at the point of maximal involvement measures 5 cm. Both the visceral and parietal pleura are intact overlying these areas of trauma."

I think by "proven" you mean speculation.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
    • SPMLaw
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2018, 07:44:42 PM »
I think by "proven" you mean speculation.
No. I meant "proven" in the sense of: a rational conclusion based on evidence.   

The three autopsy doctors reached these conclusions based on the evidence they had. 

First of all, there was abundant evidence that the head shot had entered from the back. This was evident from the examination of the hole in the back of the skull: "Situated in the posterior scalp approximately 2.5 cm. laterally to the right and slightly above the external occipital protuberance is a lacerated wound measuring 15 x 6 mm. In the underlying bone is a corresponding wound through the skull which exhibits beveling of the margins of the bone when viewed from the inner aspect of the skull." (Autopsy report: CE387 at p. 4). They also observed in the xrays metal particles behind the President's right eye (Humes: 2 H 353).

They observed a similar size hole in the upper back.  They were informed that there had been the tracheostomy done in the same location where there was already a wound in the throat.

There was evidence that the internal damage ("contusion of the parietal pleura and of the extreme apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung.) aligned with the two external wounds in the upper back and throat (Humes: 2 H 369) :

    "Senator COOPER. Assuming that we draw a straight line from Point C which you have described as a possible point of entry of the missile, to Point D where you saw an incision of the tracheotomy-
    Commander HUMES. Yes, sir.
    Senator COOPER. What would be the relation of the bruise at the apex of the pleural sac to such a line?
    Commander HUMES. It would be exactly in line with such a line. sir. exactly.

Xrays of this area showed no bullet remained in the President.

The angle to the neck wound was downward. There was no evidence presented to them that there was a shot fired in an upward direction from somewhere in front of the President. There was evidence before them that a similar sized bullet had been fired from the rear and struck him in the head.

That is part of the body of evidence that persuaded all three doctors that the bullet had entered the upper back and exited the throat.

Although you may disagree with their conclusions, they reached their conclusions based on the evidence before them.  So it was not speculation.  If there is other evidence that was not before them that would call into question their conclusions, I have not seen it. 

To suggest that such evidence might exist and, if available, would call into question their conclusions would be speculation.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2018, 07:46:47 PM by Andrew Mason »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2018, 07:44:42 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4738
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #25 on: July 18, 2018, 09:44:36 PM »
No, "proven" would be if they had actually tracked the missile path through the body.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
    • SPMLaw
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #26 on: July 18, 2018, 10:21:03 PM »
No, "proven" would be if they had actually tracked the missile path through the body.
That might be what you would require in order to be convinced.  But most people would conclude that the path has been established from the evidence that there were two bullet holes in the body and internal damage on a line between the two but no bullet in the body.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #26 on: July 18, 2018, 10:21:03 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4738
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #27 on: July 19, 2018, 10:58:25 PM »
"Convinced" isn't the same as "proven".  But you'll forgive me if I don't recognize you as a spokesperson for "most people".

Online Andrew Mason

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 427
    • SPMLaw
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #28 on: July 20, 2018, 01:54:55 PM »
"Convinced" isn't the same as "proven".  But you'll forgive me if I don't recognize you as a spokesperson for "most people".
One cannot divorce the concept of "proven" from the process of convincing human beings. 

In science, theories are never "proven".  In law, proving cases is all about convincing people.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #28 on: July 20, 2018, 01:54:55 PM »


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4738
Re: A scientific look at the Single Bullet Theory.
« Reply #29 on: July 20, 2018, 04:28:59 PM »
One cannot divorce the concept of "proven" from the process of convincing human beings. 

In science, theories are never "proven".  In law, proving cases is all about convincing people.

Then why did you claim that "the missile path through the fascia and muscles" was "proven"?

Fair enough, though.  I'm not at all convinced that there was one path through the body from the alleged "neck wound" to the alleged throat wound.
« Last Edit: July 20, 2018, 04:30:49 PM by John Iacoletti »