Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Autopsy proves SBT impossible  (Read 10703 times)

Offline Paul Ernst

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 564
  • Semper peratus semper idem
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #80 on: April 14, 2018, 09:53:46 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But we can say the actual wound in the back which seems to only be a couple of inches in depth and angled downward at around 45 is consistent with a shot from behind I am just saying this to justify the 3 score from me

Matt,

This forum is not meant to keep scores.

The 17 degrees downwards direction angle does not fit with a shot from the SN.

Did you ever calculate the armpit length for this shot measured in the SN?

A more credible angle is between 7 and 10 degrees towards the target.

45 degrees impact angle of projectile is not possible with that speed and kenetic energy and wound measurement.

A yawing bullet is possible.

See also this tread.


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


« Last Edit: April 15, 2018, 12:31:16 AM by Paul Ernst »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #80 on: April 14, 2018, 09:53:46 PM »


Offline Rob Caprio

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
  • You only receive flak when you are over the target
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #81 on: April 14, 2018, 11:01:32 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That is not evidence that the bullet did not go through. The evidence that it did go through JFK's neck is the following:
1. There was an entry wound on the back.
2. There was an exit wound in the neck (this is confirmed by the holes in the shirt and the abrasion on the tie knot.
3. There was no bullet in JFK.

This is consistent with a shot from the SN:
4. There was evidence of a sniper in the 6th floor SE corner of the TSBD.
5. The angle through JFK of the bullet path is consistent with a shot from the SN going undeflected through JFK if JFK was turned slightly right as he appears in the zfilm.

Cite your supporting evidence for each of your points. You won't be able to of course because it doesn't exist.

Many of the medical witnesses said that the throat wound was one of entry. One doctor said that IF it was one of exit then the bullet that caused the small wound only had the energy to "drop out" of JFK's throat. Obviously it wouldn't have the energy to go on and do all the damage to JBC as claimed.

Even the WCR said that it was PROBABLY a wound of exit. Probably leaves conjecture. Autopsies are NOT conducted to leave conjecture.

All this has been, and will be, covered in my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series.

Online Andrew Mason

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #82 on: April 15, 2018, 08:15:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
On a different tact, I am a bit curious about the claim that when we see Connally's shirt puff up at one of the first couple of frames as the motorcade emerges from behind the sign is proof he is shot at the same time as the President Clearly JFK is already reacting before this frame How is that possible?
You are quite right. From z195 to z226 JFK changes both his body position/hand position and facial expression. The change in appearance of JBC's jacket could not be from a bullet that struck JFK at z224 because the changes in JFK occurred before the change in jacket appearance..

The zfilm is not clear enough to conclude that the front of JBC's jacket moves outward. The change between z223 and z224 appears to be the reverse of the change from 222 to 223. What is seen is a change in the amount of white shirt, which could be due to a change in light or jacket movement. It could have the same cause as JFK's change in appearance if JFK was shot in the neck enough time before z224 to allow him to react to it and the change in appearance of JBC's jacket is caused by JBC beginning to react to hearing the shot. In any event, there is abundant evidence that there was only one shot at this point. There is consistent evidence that JFK was hit by the first shot and JBC was hit in the torso by the second. That tells you that JBC is reacting to something other than his chest wound. He said he reacted to hearing the first shot.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2018, 02:16:00 AM by Andrew Mason »

Online Andrew Mason

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #83 on: April 15, 2018, 09:30:23 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Cite your supporting evidence for each of your points. You won't be able to of course because it doesn't exist.
1. and 2. Robert Frazier 5 H 59-62. 3. JFK autopsy xrays show no bullet in the body. 4. Howard Brennan, Robert Jackson, Mrs. Cabell, Amos Euins all saw the rifle in the 6th floor window. Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Norman and James Jarman also heard a bolt action rifle being fired 3 times in the same location. 5. The HSCA report beginning at 41 outlines the trajectory evidence of the path from the SN through JFK's neck.

Quote
Many of the medical witnesses said that the throat wound was one of entry. One doctor said that IF it was one of exit then the bullet that caused the small wound only had the energy to "drop out" of JFK's throat. Obviously it wouldn't have the energy to go on and do all the damage to JBC as claimed.

Even the WCR said that it was PROBABLY a wound of exit. Probably leaves conjecture. Autopsies are NOT conducted to leave conjecture.

All this has been, and will be, covered in my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series.
In order to determine whether the back wound is an entry or exit wound one has to consider all the evidence. None of the doctors had examined the clothing. Frazier did that examination. He was never contradicted.
« Last Edit: April 15, 2018, 09:58:15 PM by Andrew Mason »

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #84 on: April 16, 2018, 03:02:38 AM »
The HSCA report beginning at 41 outlines the trajectory evidence of the path from the SN through JFK's neck.to consider all the evidence. None of the doctors had examined the clothing. Frazier did that examination. He was never contradicted.
[/quote]
 
 Maybe this not what you are suggesting but forensic pathology is science It does not take into account outside circumstances We have seen the pictures, examiners etc and we have heard from the witnesses Those are the facts in terms of the forensics I like forensics I think they are the bedrock  of cases They are certainly not superseded by mere opinions of a commission

 I am a litle confused Are you LN and still saying a separate bullet Connally ? One could say that I suppose if we considered the IFT (Incredible Frgament Theory)where a fragment of the third shot broke off and hit Tague


« Last Edit: April 16, 2018, 03:23:29 AM by Matt Grantham »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #84 on: April 16, 2018, 03:02:38 AM »


Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #85 on: April 16, 2018, 03:15:01 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Matt,

This forum is not meant to keep scores.

The 17 degrees downwards direction angle does not fit with a shot from the SN.

Did you ever calculate the armpit length for this shot measured in the SN?

A more credible angle is between 7 and 10 degrees towards the target.

45 degrees impact angle of projectile is not possible with that speed and kenetic energy and wound measurement.

A yawing bullet is possible.

See also this tread.


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login




 In regard to the three score that was simply that said I agreed with Andre on of his 5 points Is that a problem?

 In regard to quoting  Humes I just answered Tim asking me about what Humes said


 I am happy you gave me what the expected angle would be however so thanks for that I assume there is disagreement since I remember the SBT claims he was hunched forward to change the angle

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 802
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #86 on: April 16, 2018, 03:48:59 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is NOT,.. consistent with a shot from the SN:

  So I answered this earlier, and believe I may have done a poor job explaining it and perhaps that is what started the trouble/confusion When I said 3 out 5 they were 1,3, and 4 , so I was not disputing whether the angles were consistent with the SN

Online Andrew Mason

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 172
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #87 on: April 16, 2018, 04:54:23 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

 Maybe this not what you are suggesting but forensic pathology is science.  It does not take into account outside circumstances.  We have seen the pictures, examiners etc and we have heard from the witnesses.  Those are the facts in terms of the forensics. I like forensics I think they are the bedrock  of cases They are certainly not superseded by mere opinions of a commission.
Forensics may or may not be useful. Some "forensic" analyses are not reliable without other evidence.  A good example is hair and fibre analysis. Other kinds of forensic "science" are simply unproven.  A good example is bullet lead analysis.  Remarkably, comparative bullet lead analysis was introduced without any testing of the theory.  When it was subjected to scrutiny, it was found to be completely unreliable (see: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login ).  Another example is jiggle analysis.  Until it can be tested and shown to consistently and accurately identify shots from just the camera jiggles (which has never been done) it remains junk science.

Quote
I am a litle confused Are you LN and still saying a separate bullet Connally ? One could say that I suppose if we considered the IFT (Incredible Frgament Theory)where a fragment of the third shot broke off and hit Tague
I accept that Oswald was the lone assassin because there is overwhelming, consistent evidence and no evidence that anyone else was involved.  I do not accept the SBT because there is overwhelming evidence that:
1. the first shot was after z186.
2. the first shot struck JFK
3. the second shot struck JBC.
4. the only evidence we have is that a fragment from the second shot struck James Tague. This is corroborated somewhat by Wm. Greer who heard a concussion on the second shot - which is likely when fragments caused the windshield damage in the president's limo.
5. the shot pattern was 1......2...3, the last two being closer together - see You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

So there was only one shot before the midpoint between 1 and 3.  That puts the second shot after z256.  This fits with Hickey (who said he was looking at JFK at the time of the second shot and saw JFK's hair lift on the side of his head and thought it missed - he was turned backward until sometime after z255 - Altgens) , Greer (said he turned around immediately after the second shot - he turns at z280 or so), and Altgens (who said his z255 photo was after the first and before any other shot).  Nothing conflicts with JBC being hit after z270 except subjective interpretations of some people (including, ironically, the Connallys themselves) as to when the Governor looked like he was hit.

6. there is evidence from Hickey and the zfilm that a second shot at z272 barely missed JFK.
7. a separate shot at about z272 striking JBC's fifth rib, deflecting slightly to go along the rib for a few inches on the outside of the rib and then penetrating the rib and exiting, striking JBC on the top of the right radius that was pressed against chest  is consistent with the position of the body and wrist.  However, the bullet should have deflected away from the point of contact, which was on the top, distal side of the radius.  That is consistent with the bullet fragmenting and fragments striking the top of the windshield and at least one going over the windshield. That is consistent with the evidence that Tague was struck on the second shot and Greer sensed a "concussion" on the second shot.
8. the trajectory of a shot through JBC striking his wrist and then his thigh never works at any position.  However, there is a distinct possibility that the first shot through JFK proceeded downward and to JBC's left and struck his left thigh, butt first. That is consistent with the condition of CE399 and the wound characteristics of the thigh.

Three shots, three hits.  A second shot at z272 leaves just enough time for Oswald to fire a third by z313. There is abundant evidence that the last shot was fired quickly after the second. All wounds are explained. It is really just a matter of seeing what the evidence says and putting aside "expert" opinions of what people thing JBC is doing in the zfilm.
« Last Edit: April 17, 2018, 02:31:39 AM by Andrew Mason »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #87 on: April 16, 2018, 04:54:23 AM »


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2114
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #88 on: April 17, 2018, 12:09:15 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
1. and 2. Robert Frazier 5 H 59-62. 3. JFK autopsy xrays show no bullet in the body.

That doesn't tell you anything about whether there was a bullet in the body at Parkland...or in the limo.

Quote
4. Howard Brennan, Robert Jackson, Mrs. Cabell, Amos Euins all saw the rifle in the 6th floor window.

Not quite.  Cabell saw a "projection".  Euins saw a "pipe thing".

Quote
Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Norman and James Jarman also heard a bolt action rifle being fired 3 times in the same location.

None of them mentioned anything about hearing a bolt action rifle in their first day affidavits.  And BRW said TWO shots.

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2114
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #89 on: April 17, 2018, 12:15:10 AM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I accept that Oswald was the lone assassin because there is overwhelming, consistent evidence and no evidence that anyone else was involved.

There is not overwhelming, consistent evidence that Oswald killed JFK.  There's speculation and conjecture, and a little bit of weak, indirect, inconsistent, tainted, circumstantial evidence.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #89 on: April 17, 2018, 12:15:10 AM »