Author Topic: Unseeing the Headshot  (Read 2374 times)

Online John Tonkovich

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #10 on: November 17, 2020, 05:38:20 PM »
I'm relatively new to all this. While many are up in the hills chasing the Mafia/Russians/Cuban exiles etc. I'm stuck in Dealey Plaza still trying to figure what happened. Apart from the fact JFK was assassinated there is only one other core certainty I've carried through this learning experience - the shot that caused JFK's head to explode and forced him 'back and to the left' was fired from somewhere in front of the limo. While working on "The First Shot" thread I came across something that I've been trying to "unsee" for a few weeks. It appears to be physical evidence that challenges my core belief the headshot came from the front. I'm hoping I've missed something obvious.

The disturbing Gif below appears to show an enormous flap of JFK's scalp hanging from his head. As JFK leans forward this pendulous mass of flesh appears to swing out in front of him. The flap is still attached to his head and the "hinge" for this flap appears to be slightly forward of his right ear.



My problem is this - if the shot that blew this large section of scalp out came from the front surely the "hinge" would be towards the back of his head with the flap hanging down his back?

Am I missing something obvious?
Quite possibly.

Since I can't "unsee" this post, I will add that your use of " back and to the left" is quite telling. 
For the record, I have only suffered through snippets of "JFK" .
And, there was no frontal shot. Because, there's no evidence of it.

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #11 on: November 18, 2020, 12:31:30 AM »
Quite possibly.

Since I can't "unsee" this post, I will add that your use of " back and to the left" is quite telling. 
For the record, I have only suffered through snippets of "JFK" .
And, there was no frontal shot. Because, there's no evidence of it.

you had no problem unseeing the Nix Illusion.




Online Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
  • War is too important to be left to politicians.
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #12 on: November 18, 2020, 12:38:26 AM »
And, there was no frontal shot. Because, there's no evidence of it.

Don't you consider the testimony of a dozen medical staff that observed a "fist-sized" hole in the back of JFK's head evidence? This had to be a blow out from a frontal shot and judging by the angle of JFK's head and the direction of the limo, the shot came from the overpass.


Offline Pat Speer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #13 on: November 18, 2020, 06:14:22 PM »
I'm relatively new to all this. While many are up in the hills chasing the Mafia/Russians/Cuban exiles etc. I'm stuck in Dealey Plaza still trying to figure what happened. Apart from the fact JFK was assassinated there is only one other core certainty I've carried through this learning experience - the shot that caused JFK's head to explode and forced him 'back and to the left' was fired from somewhere in front of the limo. While working on "The First Shot" thread I came across something that I've been trying to "unsee" for a few weeks. It appears to be physical evidence that challenges my core belief the headshot came from the front. I'm hoping I've missed something obvious.

The disturbing Gif below appears to show an enormous flap of JFK's scalp hanging from his head. As JFK leans forward this pendulous mass of flesh appears to swing out in front of him. The flap is still attached to his head and the "hinge" for this flap appears to be slightly forward of his right ear.



My problem is this - if the shot that blew this large section of scalp out came from the front surely the "hinge" would be towards the back of his head with the flap hanging down his back?

Am I missing something obvious?

Greetings, Dan

When I first started researching this event, I was much like yourself--uncertain of what to think but wary of most of those pushing this theory or that.

So I spent a few years full-time, and then another dozen years or so part-time, reading texts and articles on subjects such as military medicine, forensic pathology, forensic radiology, neutron activation analysis, and cognitive psychology, and added the highlights into my website on the Kennedy assassination, patspeer.com.

Chapters 16 -16d should be of particular interest. Chapter 16 recounts the Warren Commission's attempts at replicating Kennedy's head wound, and Chapter 16b recounts the history of the study of wound ballistics (as it relates to the Kennedy assassination) and the facts leading to the conclusion Kennedy's large head wound was a tangential wound of both entrance and exit. Chapter 16c discusses the damage to Kennedy's brain, and how this supports the probability Kennedy's large head wound was a tangential wound to the right temple and top of his head. And Chapter 16d discusses the Discovery Channel's failed attempt at re-creating Kennedy's head wound as described by the HSCA, and accidental re-creation of what would appear to have been his actual wound.

You might wish to start with Chapter 16b. (This actually goes for anyone reading this thread. I recently received a phone call from two prominent doctors who have written on this case, and I had to go through Chapter 16b step-by-step as much of what I've uncovered was news to them.)

Regards, Pat
« Last Edit: November 18, 2020, 06:27:52 PM by Pat Speer »

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #14 on: November 18, 2020, 08:10:41 PM »
Greetings, Dan

When I first started researching this event, I was much like yourself--uncertain of what to think but wary of most of those pushing this theory or that.

So I spent a few years full-time, and then another dozen years or so part-time, reading texts and articles on subjects such as military medicine, forensic pathology, forensic radiology, neutron activation analysis, and cognitive psychology, and added the highlights into my website on the Kennedy assassination, patspeer.com.

Chapters 16 -16d should be of particular interest. Chapter 16 recounts the Warren Commission's attempts at replicating Kennedy's head wound, and Chapter 16b recounts the history of the study of wound ballistics (as it relates to the Kennedy assassination) and the facts leading to the conclusion Kennedy's large head wound was a tangential wound of both entrance and exit. Chapter 16c discusses the damage to Kennedy's brain, and how this supports the probability Kennedy's large head wound was a tangential wound to the right temple and top of his head. And Chapter 16d discusses the Discovery Channel's failed attempt at re-creating Kennedy's head wound as described by the HSCA, and accidental re-creation of what would appear to have been his actual wound.

You might wish to start with Chapter 16b. (This actually goes for anyone reading this thread. I recently received a phone call from two prominent doctors who have written on this case, and I had to go through Chapter 16b step-by-step as much of what I've uncovered was news to them.)

Regards, Pat

Hi Pat,

I will most certainly be visiting your site as I find it an invaluable research tool and have credited you on a number of occasions on various threads for information gleaned there. It is a truly impressive enterprise and important to this area of study. Work commitments allow me no time to get stuck in at the moment, when I get a chance I would like to persuade you with my arguments for a first shot at z223, something strongly supported by your own extensive work on witness statements.
I've yet to get stuck in a particular rut regarding all this, this thread demonstrates how things I've taken for granted can be suddenly turned upside down by something hidden in plain sight.
It's a real conundrum for me at the moment and I hope your work can shine a light on it.

Dan

Offline Chris Bristow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #15 on: November 19, 2020, 03:39:53 AM »
There is substantial circumstantial evidence that has to be considered if your trying to examine the direction of the head shot. It points to the possibility of two shots at almost the same time.
1.) Of the 35 witnesses that said the last two shots were close together 22 used terms like "In rapid succession" or "almost simultaneously" "almost at the same time"  Several SS agents used that term "In rapid succession".
2.) Kellerman and Greer were especially qualified because they were sitting inches from where the rounds were landing. They didn't just hear muzzle blast and shock wave they could hear the rounds coming into the limo and landing near them. Kellerman described the last shots as "A flurry of shells" and Greer said the last rounds came in "Almost simultaneously".
  A bolt action rifle that experts tried to rapid fire took 2.3 seconds  between shots.  Who would characterize shots fired every 2.3 seconds as "Almost simultaneous or as "A flurry of shells". Terms like "In rapid succession" don't fit either and I believe a couple of those were SS agents in the follow up car.
 If there were shots from different locations the timing of the shots would have been different depending on their location. Witnesses right in between two shooters would hear two shots at the same time. Witnesses near the limo would hear a knoll shot before a TSB shot. As an example the West knoll is maybe 400 feet from the 6th floor of the TSB. A witness standing very close to either location would hear  about a 4/10 of a second delay for shots fired simultaneously.     

Online John Tonkovich

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 716
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #16 on: November 19, 2020, 04:06:49 AM »
Don't you consider the testimony of a dozen medical staff that observed a "fist-sized" hole in the back of JFK's head evidence? This had to be a blow out from a frontal shot and judging by the angle of JFK's head and the direction of the limo, the shot came from the overpass.


Two bullets hit Kennedy's head.
Tends to cause a lot of damage.

Once we agree on that, it's smooth sailing from there.
« Last Edit: November 19, 2020, 04:14:48 AM by John Tonkovich »

Online Jack Trojan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
  • War is too important to be left to politicians.
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #17 on: November 19, 2020, 06:46:38 AM »
There is substantial circumstantial evidence that has to be considered if your trying to examine the direction of the head shot. It points to the possibility of two shots at almost the same time.
1.) Of the 35 witnesses that said the last two shots were close together 22 used terms like "In rapid succession" or "almost simultaneously" "almost at the same time"  Several SS agents used that term "In rapid succession".
2.) Kellerman and Greer were especially qualified because they were sitting inches from where the rounds were landing. They didn't just hear muzzle blast and shock wave they could hear the rounds coming into the limo and landing near them. Kellerman described the last shots as "A flurry of shells" and Greer said the last rounds came in "Almost simultaneously".
  A bolt action rifle that experts tried to rapid fire took 2.3 seconds  between shots.  Who would characterize shots fired every 2.3 seconds as "Almost simultaneous or as "A flurry of shells". Terms like "In rapid succession" don't fit either and I believe a couple of those were SS agents in the follow up car.
 If there were shots from different locations the timing of the shots would have been different depending on their location. Witnesses right in between two shooters would hear two shots at the same time. Witnesses near the limo would hear a knoll shot before a TSB shot. As an example the West knoll is maybe 400 feet from the 6th floor of the TSB. A witness standing very close to either location would hear  about a 4/10 of a second delay for shots fired simultaneously.     

James Files claims that his shot from the knoll struck JFK's head a fraction of a second after another shot struck JFK's head from the front. This is consistent with back and to the left. This detail is why I pay any attention to him. Whether or not he was one of the shooters, he appeared to have inside info re the Big Event.

Offline Chris Bristow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #18 on: November 19, 2020, 07:55:19 AM »
James Files claims that his shot from the knoll struck JFK's head a fraction of a second after another shot struck JFK's head from the front. This is consistent with back and to the left. This detail is why I pay any attention to him. Whether or not he was one of the shooters, he appeared to have inside info re the Big Event.
Is this possible files was involved but lied about being the shooter. The  hole in his story is he's claimed he fired just before he was about to lose his line of sight behind the Stemmona sign. From his position the headshot happened long after that. And he couldn't confuse it with the Fort Worth sign because that would have happened well after the headshot. The only thing that could have conceivably blocked his View is it the tree that was about ten feet out from the fence.
What I found impressive is his letter from Carlos Marcello's daughter. The warden verified it was a cordial letter. Well if you going to make up stories about a mob family and connect them to JFK you might be concerned about their opinion of that. Apparently the family didn't have any problem with his story. But true or not it's really a great mob story.

Online Dan O'meara

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 824
Re: Unseeing the Headshot
« Reply #19 on: November 23, 2020, 02:43:50 AM »
James Files claims that his shot from the knoll struck JFK's head a fraction of a second after another shot struck JFK's head from the front. This is consistent with back and to the left. This detail is why I pay any attention to him. Whether or not he was one of the shooters, he appeared to have inside info re the Big Event.

You're missing the point Jack.
How could a shot from the front cause the flap of scalp to be hinged from the front of JFK's head. Why isn't the 'hinge' of this flap of scalp towards the back of his head?

 

Mobile View