Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments  (Read 28958 times)

Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #48 on: January 20, 2023, 03:15:37 AM »
Advertisement

It is controversial because no one has ever been able to produce a similar bullet fired at 2000 fps that has done the kind of damage done to JFK and JBC looking anything like CE399.
  • “It doesn’t make a difference how beautiful your guess is. It doesn't make a difference how smart you are, who made the guess or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong.” — Richard Feynman (1964)

I am not aware of any ballistics expert other than Sturdivan who has examined, let alone opined on, the CE399/SBT hypothesis.

The Nova JFK COld Case video can be seen below:

https://aguilarforensics.weebly.com/firearms--tool-marks/nova-jfk-cold-case-full-video

At 34:39, Luke Haag shows how a bullet can be squeezed to resemble CE-399.
At 35:20, Luke Haag states that there is no reason not to conclude that the SBT as proposed by Specter was incorrect.

So Luke Haag agrees with Larry Sturdivan.

So, I make it at 2 to 0.

Can anyone come up with a real ballistic expert who disagrees? After almost 60 years, not one?

 * * * * *

And I recall a Discovery Channel, from about 15 years ago, that had ballistic gel models of JFK and Connally, with embedded ribs and an array of wrist bones, that produced a bullet that was not greatly dissimilar to CE-399. Bent in two places (not one like CE-399) because it went through two "ribs", not one. But reasonably close.

I don't recall if this experiment was conducted by ballistic experts but it looked pretty reasonable to me. So I don't think one can say that no one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet at 2,000 fps and ended up with anything resembling CE-399.
« Last Edit: January 20, 2023, 03:22:20 AM by Joe Elliott »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #48 on: January 20, 2023, 03:15:37 AM »


Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1424
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #49 on: January 20, 2023, 03:05:02 PM »
The Nova JFK COld Case video can be seen below:

https://aguilarforensics.weebly.com/firearms--tool-marks/nova-jfk-cold-case-full-video

At 34:39, Luke Haag shows how a bullet can be squeezed to resemble CE-399.
At 35:20, Luke Haag states that there is no reason not to conclude that the SBT as proposed by Specter was incorrect.

So Luke Haag agrees with Larry Sturdivan.

So, I make it at 2 to 0.

Can anyone come up with a real ballistic expert who disagrees? After almost 60 years, not one?

 * * * * *

And I recall a Discovery Channel, from about 15 years ago, that had ballistic gel models of JFK and Connally, with embedded ribs and an array of wrist bones, that produced a bullet that was not greatly dissimilar to CE-399. Bent in two places (not one like CE-399) because it went through two "ribs", not one. But reasonably close.

I don't recall if this experiment was conducted by ballistic experts but it looked pretty reasonable to me. So I don't think one can say that no one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet at 2,000 fps and ended up with anything resembling CE-399.
I believe the Discovery Channel special was "Inside the Target Car"? But they only simulated the/a head shot not the back shot. Unless you're thinking of another one? I too vaguely recall another special in addition to the NOVA show duplicating something you mentioned with #399. Either both of us are losing it or neither one of us is. Let's agree to go with the latter explanation.

That "Target Car" can be viewed here: https://archive.org/details/JFKInsideTheTargetCar
« Last Edit: January 20, 2023, 03:05:57 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

Offline Jerry Organ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2261
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #50 on: January 20, 2023, 05:11:48 PM »
I believe the Discovery Channel special was "Inside the Target Car"? But they only simulated the/a head shot not the back shot. Unless you're thinking of another one? I too vaguely recall another special in addition to the NOVA show duplicating something you mentioned with #399. Either both of us are losing it or neither one of us is. Let's agree to go with the latter explanation.

That "Target Car" can be viewed here: https://archive.org/details/JFKInsideTheTargetCar

You may be thinking of the November 2004 Discovery Channel episode of "Unsolved History" called "JFK: Beyond the Magic Bullet". The same program gave us "JFK: Death in Dealey Plaza" (2003; timeline of the photographers), "Robert F. Kennedy Assassination" (2004), "JFK: The Conspiracy Myths" (2004) and "JFK: The Ruby Connection" (2005). One site lists "JFK: Inside the Target Car" as part of the "Unsolved History" series but that show came out in 2008, after the series ended.



See David Von Pein's review of "JFK: Beyond the Magic Bullet" ( Link ). "The closest we're likely to ever get to a perfect duplication of the Single-Bullet Theory".

The rifleman didn't have the luxury of a large target. He was on a lift exposed to wind and at a comparable distance. It's remarkable he came so close to where the "back wound" was.

 

The minor spread meant the bullet emerged from the simulated "body's" chest. Not a great concern as the "Kennedy" surrogate (unlike the "Connally" surrogate) had no hard tissue embedded in it. Unfortunately, critics expect some mirco-level precision with living models.

There was a test done by Failure Analysis Associates for the ABA Convention's August 1992 "mock trial" of Oswald, in which a short-loaded Carcano bullet was used. They fired a Carcano bullet with a lowered velocity of 1100 feet-per-second into a cadaver's wrist. Why weaken the velocity?

Dr. Michael Baden said: "That bullet [CE399] slowed in velocity each time it traversed another body part. there was a debate on our panel as to whether the bullet even hit Connally's rib or just passed close enough to do the damage. But most of of us thought it hit the rib while tumbling, and a sideways hit explains why such a hard bullet is flattened. When it struck the wrist bone, which is small, it was not deformed, since its velocity was so low. By time it left the wrist, its speed was greatly reduced, and the nature of his thigh wound shows it was a spent bullet by then."

This context is important but usually ignored by CTs. Dr. Martin Fackler, then president of the International Wound Ballistics Association, participated in the FAA weak-round tests. He said: "The bullet actually made a slightly greater hole than the one in Governor's Connally's wrist. That's because the experiment bullet was actually going a little faster than the 900 feet that CE 399 was traveling. the test bullet was non-deformed. It was not flattened in the least and had nowhere near the damage of CE 399". Sorry, I don't have any more information of this test than this.



BTW, not much of a hole in Connally's radius bone. The bullet slapped off the bone and left behind a series of fractures that were reset in surgery. There were no bone grafts.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #50 on: January 20, 2023, 05:11:48 PM »


Offline Andrew Mason

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1211
    • SPMLaw
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #51 on: January 20, 2023, 06:27:41 PM »
The Nova JFK COld Case video can be seen below:

https://aguilarforensics.weebly.com/firearms--tool-marks/nova-jfk-cold-case-full-video

At 34:39, Luke Haag shows how a bullet can be squeezed to resemble CE-399.
At 35:20, Luke Haag states that there is no reason not to conclude that the SBT as proposed by Specter was incorrect.

So Luke Haag agrees with Larry Sturdivan.
What is required is a ballistics expert who understands the forces applied to a bullet in contacting different target materials at different speeds and different orientations and who has a thorough understanding of physics and strength of materials and can relate that to the actual physical damage that occurred. Sturdivan appears to qualify as such an expert but not the Haags. The only expert who has provided any of that kind of analysis is Sturdivan and I see a number of inconsistencies with his analysis.

It is not difficult to accept that CE399 is consistent with having passed through JFK's neck. The question is whether:
  • it entered JBC to the right of his right scapula and struck the fifth rib creating a tunneling wound
  • then pulverized the last 10 cm of that rib,
  • then exited just under his right nipple,
  • then passed through his jacket sleeve and french cuff causing a longish jagged tear in the cuff in only one location about 1 inch above the end of the cuff,
  • then struck the distal fourth of the radius causing an oblique wound wound approximately two cm in length with considerable contusions at the margins,
  • created a comminuted fracture of the radius with at least 3 bone pieces being broken off the radius (2 x 1 cm + 1 x 3mm)
  • then passed through the forearm leaving several small lead flakes in the wound
  • then exited on the volar or palm side of the wrist leaving a 1 cm slit 2 cm above the crease of the wrist
  • entered the left thigh on an oblique angle along the direction of the femur appearance being consistent with having struck by the butt end of an intact missile.
  • having exited the thigh leaving a bullet whose only deformation is a lateral compression on on the butt end

Sturdivan does not explain each step in terms of the force that the bullet would experience in each of those impacts in order to create the damage observed.  For example, he does not identify the pressure required to fracture the radius as it did and relate that to the speed of the bullet and whether at that speed, the bullet would deform if hit nose-on or sideways etc.   He avoids it entirely.  Not only did this bullet fracture the radius, which is the hardest bone in the body, causing a large irregular entry hole in the cuff and leaving flecks of lead in the wound, it did this after obliterating 10 cm of rib.

Quote
And I recall a Discovery Channel, from about 15 years ago, that had ballistic gel models of JFK and Connally, with embedded ribs and an array of wrist bones, that produced a bullet that was not greatly dissimilar to CE-399. Bent in two places (not one like CE-399) because it went through two "ribs", not one. But reasonably close.
But did not fracture a radius bone, if I recall correctly.

Quote
I don't recall if this experiment was conducted by ballistic experts but it looked pretty reasonable to me. So I don't think one can say that no one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet at 2,000 fps and ended up with anything resembling CE-399.
I can.  No one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet from a Carcano, doing the damage done to the rib and radius of JBC, and having the characteristics remotely similar to those on JBC's wounds and clothing and looking anything like CE399.

And that is entirely apart from the fact that the evidence from the people who were there who said that JFK and JBC were hit by separate bullets.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #52 on: January 20, 2023, 09:44:51 PM »
Is it really sufficient to argue that CE399 could possibly have gone through both men and caused all those wounds if there is no evidence that it did?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #52 on: January 20, 2023, 09:44:51 PM »


Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #53 on: January 21, 2023, 02:51:49 AM »

I believe the Discovery Channel special was "Inside the Target Car"? But they only simulated the/a head shot not the back shot. Unless you're thinking of another one? I too vaguely recall another special in addition to the NOVA show duplicating something you mentioned with #399. Either both of us are losing it or neither one of us is. Let's agree to go with the latter explanation.

That "Target Car" can be viewed here: https://archive.org/details/JFKInsideTheTargetCar

It was another show. I don't remember the name of it. The Discovery Channel had three different one to two hour shows on the assassination, something like ones made in 2003, 2007 and 2008, as I recall.

The show I am think of, they used two "torsos", of ballistic gel, one modeled after JFK's torso and another after Connally's. These "torsos" had to be kept refrigerated to simulate a human body (for some reason I do not know). So they only had a few minutes to fire the shot once the models were carefully positioned. In addition, they had a third target, an array of bones meant to simulate Connally's wrist. And a fourth target, of just ballistic gel, meant to simulate Connally's thigh, and to capture the bullet itself.

They were firing from a tower they constructed themselves, that was moving some because the wind picked up.

The result was the bullet when through the first three targets but did not embed itself in the forth target, the "Connally thigh". Instead it bounced off. But the bullet resembled CE-399. It was a bit more bent. And had two indentations in it's side, instead of just one like CE 399. This was because as the bullet travelled sideways through the Connally "torso", it went through two ribs instead of one.

I do not recall the tests being supervised by real ballistic experts, like the equivalent of a Luke Haag or a Michael Haag. But it did appear to be a good experiment.

I hope this triggers your memory of that TV show.

Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #54 on: January 21, 2023, 03:01:22 AM »

What is required is a ballistics expert who understands the forces applied to a bullet in contacting different target materials at different speeds and different orientations and who has a thorough understanding of physics and strength of materials and can relate that to the actual physical damage that occurred. Sturdivan appears to qualify as such an expert but not the Haags. The only expert who has provided any of that kind of analysis is Sturdivan and I see a number of inconsistencies with his analysis.

Ok. Sturdivan appears to qualify as such an expert, but not the Haags. I don't see why the Haags don't appear to be, but ok.

Then who is the ballistic expert who disagrees with Larry Sturdivan as far as CE-399 is concerned?

You disagree with Larry Sturdivan, but you are not a ballistic expert. Many others disagree with Larry Sturdivan, but they aren't ballistic experts either. So who is? Who "appears" to be an ballistic expert, like Larry Sturdivan, but who also thinks the CE-399 could not have wounded JFK and Connally?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #54 on: January 21, 2023, 03:01:22 AM »


Offline Joe Elliott

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1656
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #55 on: January 21, 2023, 03:14:41 AM »


It is not difficult to accept that CE399 is consistent with having passed through JFK's neck. The question is whether:
  • it entered JBC to the right of his right scapula and struck the fifth rib creating a tunneling wound
  • then pulverized the last 10 cm of that rib,
  • then exited just under his right nipple,
  • then passed through his jacket sleeve and french cuff causing a longish jagged tear in the cuff in only one location about 1 inch above the end of the cuff,
  • then struck the distal fourth of the radius causing an oblique wound wound approximately two cm in length with considerable contusions at the margins,
  • created a comminuted fracture of the radius with at least 3 bone pieces being broken off the radius (2 x 1 cm + 1 x 3mm)
  • then passed through the forearm leaving several small lead flakes in the wound
  • then exited on the volar or palm side of the wrist leaving a 1 cm slit 2 cm above the crease of the wrist
  • entered the left thigh on an oblique angle along the direction of the femur appearance being consistent with having struck by the butt end of an intact missile.
  • having exited the thigh leaving a bullet whose only deformation is a lateral compression on on the butt end

Sturdivan does not explain each step in terms of the force that the bullet would experience in each of those impacts in order to create the damage observed.  For example, he does not identify the pressure required to fracture the radius as it did and relate that to the speed of the bullet and whether at that speed, the bullet would deform if hit nose-on or sideways etc.   He avoids it entirely.  Not only did this bullet fracture the radius, which is the hardest bone in the body, causing a large irregular entry hole in the cuff and leaving flecks of lead in the wound, it did this after obliterating 10 cm of rib.
But did not fracture a radius bone, if I recall correctly.
I can.  No one has ever fired a WCC/MC bullet from a Carcano, doing the damage done to the rib and radius of JBC, and having the characteristics remotely similar to those on JBC's wounds and clothing and looking anything like CE399.

This is simply not true. In his book "The JFK Myths", Larry Sturdivan discusses the speed the bullet had when it:

First struck JFK's neck.
Exited JFK's neck.
First struck Connally's back.
First struck Connally's rib, the first direct strike on bone.
First struck Connally's wrist bone.
First struck Connally's thigh.


He estimates the speed of the bullet, when it struck Connally's rib, was 1,400 fps. And it was travelling sideways, at that point.

He states that when travelling point first, the bullet won't start to deform once it drops below 1,700 fps. But when travelling sideways, if won't start to deform once it drops below 1,400 fps. So, when the bullet first struck Connally's rib, it was just going fast enough to start to deform. Hence the side of the bullet being squeezed and lead being pushed out of it's base. The speed of the bullet quickly dropped below 1,400 fps and did not deform any further, even after striking the much stronger wrist bone.

Larry Sturdivan does not discuss the pressures involved, only the speed of the bullet needed to deform. He discusses this pretty thorughly.

And that is entirely apart from the fact that the evidence from the people who were there who said that JFK and JBC were hit by separate bullets.

But what witness could possibly view two different people at the same time? One's concentration would, at best, be only one either Kennedy or Connally. They can't watch one with the left eye and the other with the right. And the only witness who had an opinion on which one they saw get wounded first, Mrs. Connally, was not looking at either man at z-222. Who are the other witnesses who you are referring to?