Obvious Facts that Refute the Lone-Gunman Theory

[Jack Nessan]

Some additional obvious facts that refute the lone-gunman theory:

-- The knot of JFK's tie has no hole through it and no nick on either of its edges, which proves that no bullet exited JFK's throat. Any bullet exiting the throat through the front shirt slits could not have missed the tie knot and would have either made a hole through the knot or would have at least nicked one of the knot's edges, and no photo or footage shows JFK's tie knot even remotely so far off-center that a bullet could have missed it.

The WC claimed that the alleged magic bullet of the single-bullet theory (SBT) nicked the left side of the knot, but the two photos of the tie knot plainly and clearly refute this claim.

There is a small nick on the tie knot, but it is very shallow, and it is clearly not on the left edge of the knot (see CE 395). This nick was made by
a Parkland Hospital nurse as she hurriedly cut JFK's tie to remove his shirt. The fact that the nick is not on either edge of the knot refutes the suggestion that a bullet nicked the knot after supposedly exiting the throat.

The FBI produced a misleading photo of the front of the tie knot. The photo includes a caption that reads "nick exposed white lining of tie." In this photo, which contradicts CE 395, the knot is contorted so that the nick is almost squarely in the middle of the knot. This was done to give the misleading impression that there was a hole through the knot, but years later it was revealed that the knot has no hole through it.

Importantly, although the FBI found metallic traces on the rear holes in JFK's shirt and coat, it found no metallic traces on the tie knot and on the shirt slits. When bullets enter and exit clothing, they leave metallic traces. Yet, the FBI found no such traces on the tie knot and on the shirt slits. Not surprisingly, the WC said nothing about this crucial fact in its comments about the tie knot and the shirt slits (WCR, pp. 91-92).

-- The slits in the front of JFK's shirt could not have made by an exiting bullet. The slits do not correspond to each other. They are not the same shape or thickness or length, and are not level with each other. The slit under the button is half vertical and half diagonal, and does not extend into the neckband. In contrast, the slit under the button hole is narrower and much straighter than the other slit, and about 1/5 of it extends into the neckband.

Anyone can look at the FBI photo of the slits and see these facts for themselves (FBI Exhibit 60). This is undoubtedly why the WC did not publish this photo.

Interestingly, we now know that the FBI lab report on the shirt slits did not claim they were made by a bullet; rather, it said they had the "characteristics of an exit for for a bullet fragment." Yet, when FBI ballistics expert Robert Frazier testified before the WC, he said nothing about this vital finding. An irregular-shaped fragment could, in theory, have made the slits. This is at least plausible. However, the SBT requires that a non-yawing, virtually pristine bullet made the slits.

In addition, there is no fabric missing from the shirt slits, which is additional proof they were not made by an exiting bullet. It is a revealing fact that neither the FBI lab nor Robert Frazier claimed that any fabric was missing from the shirt slits. Frazier surely knew that this fact alone almost certainly proved the slits were not made by a bullet. Dr. David Mantik confirmed that no fabric is missing from the slits when he examined JFK's shirt at the National Archives.

Another key fact about the shirt slits, contrary to another lone-gunman myth, is that the fibers of the slits were not bent outward. The myth that the shirt-slit fibers were bent outward, suggesting a back-to-front path for the object that made them, was first peddled by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. To its great credit, the HSCA debunked this myth. The HSCA noted that the FBI lab report on the slits said nothing about the fibers being bent in any direction.

So what caused the shirt slits? Obviously, just as Dr. Charles Carrico indicated years ago, the slits, like the nick in the tie knot, were made by a Parkland nurse as she hurriedly cut away JFK's clothing to remove it. When Dr. Mantik examined the slits at the National Archives, he found that they looked like "a scalpel incision." This, needless to say, explains why no metallic traces were found on the slits, why the slits are so irregular, and why no fabric is missing from the slits.

This also explains why there is no hole in the tie knot and no nick on either edge of the knot; why the throat wound was small, neat, and punched-in; why three Parkland doctors independently confirmed that the throat wound was above the collar; and why in the Zapruder film JFK starts clutching at his throat before he disappears behind the freeway sign in Z207 and is still clutching at his throat when he is visibly and strongly knocked forward starting in Z226. The Z186 shot hit him in the throat, and the Z224 shot hit him in the back.

You seem to grasp the concept there was only two shots. How do you now explain the wound in JBC's back if the bullet does not first pass through JFK?

[Michael T. Griffith]

You seem to grasp the concept there was only two shots. How do you now explain the wound in JBC's back if the bullet does not first pass through JFK?

Where do you get the idea that I believe there were only two shots?

JBC was hit by a separate bullet, quite possibly by two bullets (one to the back and the other to his wrist).

Two bullets struck JFK's head, one from behind (slightly above the EOP) and one from the front (in the right temple). This is why there is a cloud of tiny fragments in the right frontal region on the lateral autopsy skull x-ray. This is why the autopsy doctors saw two fragment trails in the skull, one that started at the EOP and went upward to the right orbit, and one that started in the right frontal region and went upward toward the back of the head--and why they had to ignore one of those two fragment trails to maintain the fiction of a single shot to the head from behind. They chose to ignore the high fragment trail. However, the plotters decided that the high fragment trail was less problematic than the low one, so the low one--the one described in the autopsy report but not seen on the skull x-rays--was made to disappear.

[Jack Nessan]

Where do you get the idea that I believe there were only two shots?

JBC was hit by a separate bullet, quite possibly by two bullets (one to the back and the other to his wrist).

Two bullets struck JFK's head, one from behind (slightly above the EOP) and one from the front (in the right temple). This is why there is a cloud of tiny fragments in the right frontal region on the lateral autopsy skull x-ray. This is why the autopsy doctors saw two fragment trails in the skull, one that started at the EOP and went upward to the right orbit, and one that started in the right frontal region and went upward toward the back of the head--and why they had to ignore one of those two fragment trails to maintain the fiction of a single shot to the head from behind. They chose to ignore the high fragment trail. However, the plotters decided that the high fragment trail was less problematic than the low one, so the low one--the one described in the autopsy report but not seen on the skull x-rays--was made to disappear.

Due to the positioning of the two men in the car, the wound in JBC's back can only be explained if the bullet first passes through JFK. This four- shot scenario now leaves two shots, instead of just one, that strike no one. The Zapruder film leaves no doubt as to how many bullets struck JFK's head.

Greer and Kellerman are two shot witnesses.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Another interesting fact worth noting about the absence of missing fabric from the slits in the front of JFK's shirt: every undisputed, acknowledged clothing hole made by bullets during the assassination had fabric missing from it. The rear holes in JFK's coat and shirt have fabric missing from them. The holes in the front and back of Connally's coat and shirt all have fabric missing from them. Gee, how about that?! That's because when bullets rip through clothing, they invariably remove some fabric. Yet, no fabric is missing from the shirt slits. Why? Because they were not made by a bullet.

This explains why no metallic traces were found on the slits, why the slits are so irregular in shape, why one of the slits extends partly into the neckband but the other does not, and why the FBI lab initially declined to attribute the slits to a bullet but said they could have been made by a fragment.

[Jack Nessan]

Another interesting fact worth noting about the absence of missing fabric from the slits in the front of JFK's shirt: every undisputed, acknowledged clothing hole made by bullets during the assassination had fabric missing from it. The rear holes in JFK's coat and shirt have fabric missing from them. The holes in the front and back of Connally's coat and shirt all have fabric missing from them. Gee, how about that?! That's because when bullets rip through clothing, they invariably remove some fabric. Yet, no fabric is missing from the shirt slits. Why? Because they were not made by a bullet.

This explains why no metallic traces were found on the slits, why the slits are so irregular in shape, why one of the slits extends partly into the neckband but the other does not, and why the FBI lab initially declined to attribute the slits to a bullet but said they could have been made by a fragment.

Based on your belief that there were only two shots fired from the sniper's nest, it is known that one bullet caused all the damage on its path through the JFK and JBC, so what is your explanation for this phenomenon.

[John Iacoletti]

Due to the positioning of the two men in the car, the wound in JBC's back can only be explained if the bullet first passes through JFK.

 

[Michael T. Griffith]

Due to the positioning of the two men in the car, the wound in JBC's back can only be explained if the bullet first passes through JFK.

That's just silly. You folks are like the fawning subjects in the story of The Emperor's New Clothes. The amount of evidence you are ignoring in making this claim is incredible and embarrassing.

Let's just try to get you to explain two things, okay?

One: The Z186 shot, identified by the HSCA experts, causes JFK's cheeks to puff, causes him to freeze his waving motion in mid-wave, causes Jackie to suddenly turn to look at JFK, and causes JFK to start reaching for his throat--all before he disappears behind the freeway sign at Z207. Anyone with a functioning brain and functioning eyes can see these reactions. (Clearly, this was the throat shot, which is why JFK starts to reach for his throat, but never mind this for now.)

By the way, and I forget to mention this earlier, the first Secret Service analysis of the photographic evidence, mainly the Zapruder film, concluded that JFK was hit before Z200.

Now, how could the Z186 shot have anything to do with Connally's dramatic reactions that start 50 frames later, in Z236, especially the rapid and visible dropping of his right shoulder? Keep in mind that Connally himself--the guy who actually experienced the shot--after studying enlargements of the Zapruder frames for Life magazine, said that he was hit at Z234 and that he was absolutely certain he was not hit before Z230.

Remember, too, that even bullets fired from the low-velocity Carcano rifle would have been traveling at 2,100 fps, which equals 114 feet per Zapruder frame.

Two: How could the Z186 shot have suddenly knocked JFK visibly forward 40 frames later, starting at Z226, when the Z312 head shot causes JFK's head to start moving forward in that frame, i.e., within 1/18-second? Beginning at Z226, JFK's upper body is visibly knocked sharply forward, and his hands and elbows are flung upward and forward. The force and speed of these movements are quite startling when one compares Z226, where they are first discernible, to Z232, just 1/3-second later. Again, how could the Z186 shot have caused these violent movements?

Government-hired experts have studiously avoided dealing with the dramatic Z226-232 movements because they obviously, plainly show that JFK was struck by a bullet in the back at Z226. Part of the problem with acknowledging these movements is that Connally's shoulder does not begin its dramatic collapse until Z236, much too late to have been caused by a Z224 shot, and, as mentioned, Connally himself was certain he was not hit before Z230 and identified Z234 as the moment he was struck.