Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» The Facts about Connally's Wounds
Today at 11:23 am by Paul Francisco Paso

» ROKC Lampoon
Today at 10:12 am by Stan Dane

» What strange affidavits these are!
Yesterday at 11:43 pm by Ed. Ledoux

»  How Jack Ruby's Entry Could Have Been Coordinated
Sun 04 Dec 2016, 9:59 pm by Vinny

» JFK Conference
Sun 04 Dec 2016, 9:55 pm by Vinny

» Kennedys and King website
Sat 03 Dec 2016, 6:05 pm by Paul Francisco Paso

» Kent Courtney
Fri 02 Dec 2016, 11:47 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» a ramble in and around Pine St, NO
Fri 02 Dec 2016, 11:45 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» Anatomy Of A Second Floor Encounter
Fri 02 Dec 2016, 11:01 pm by barto

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Furl  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



The head wounds revisited

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Sun 23 Jun 2013, 6:26 am

Martin,

Just so we don't derail the "Education forum" thread, I thought I'd start a separate thread for your article, which I've linked below:

http://themysteriesofdealeyplaza.blogspot.com.au/2013/06/the-head-wounds-revisited.html

I've quickly read through it, and I think that it was very well written, but I want to read through it again tomorrow before commenting on it. But for now, let me say that I'm glad that you decided there was an EOP entrance wound. Too many witnesses who recall it, with none recalling a cowlink entrance, plus the fact that there was no back-spatter from the top of the President's head.

Anyway, I'll read through it again tomorrow and get back to you.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Sun 23 Jun 2013, 7:19 am

On an unrelated note, could someone please tell me what the name of the book which Allen Dulles the "great American" was talking about and giving out at the first executive session of the Warren Commission?

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 24 Jun 2013, 5:59 am


Martin,
 
 
A few comments:
 
 
 
I think that your article is very good, with lots of really good information. I had totally neglected Frank O’Neill’s diagram and testimony before the HSCA, so I’m grateful that you included that in your article. Also, that picture of the lateral skull X-ray showing what I also believe to be the EOP entrance wound is really something.
 
 
 
My own belief about the EOP bullet is that it had gone down his neck and out his throat, just as Pat Speer has concluded. Both Richard Lipsey and Tom Robinson claimed that they saw they one of the autopsy doctors insert a surgical probe into the back of the President’s head near his hairline, and that it came out of his throat. Pat Speer has also shown what appear to be air bubbles in his neck from the throat towards the base of his skull. One other is that Marrion Jenkins’ daughter, Christine, provided a video presentation of her father in 2008, in which Jenkins’ apparently explained what went on in trauma room 1. According to Jack White who watched the presentation:
 

 
"Each time he [Jenkins] squeezed on his air bag, bubbles of blood came out the [President’s] brain wound."
 
 

I’m not so sure how reliable that information is, but Pat now seems to think that White was mistaken. However, based on what Lipsey and Robinson claimed, I don’t think he was. I think this shot was fired from a rifle equipped with a silencer/suppressor from either the 6th or 7th floor of the Dal-Tex building. This brings me to the acoustics evidence.
 
 
 
I think that most people either believe the acoustics evidence is totally bunk or that the way in which Don Thomas presented it is totally accurate. As for me, I think there is some validity to it. I discuss the reasons why in part 3 of my Don Thomas review linked below:
 
 
 
http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/2013/05/hear-no-evil-by-don-thomas-part-3.html
 
 
 
Ultimately, what made me believe that there were not 5 audible shots was Pat Speer’s analysis of the ear witnesses, where he demonstrated that the overwhelming majority of them claimed there were 3 shots or less, with only 18 who claimed there were 4 or more.
 
 
 
But I think the best evidence that there were only two shots from the 6th floor of the TSBD is Bonnie Ray Williams’ statement to the Dallas Sheriff’s Office and FBI in which he claimed that there were only TWO shots fired from above his head. It’s pretty hard to imagine how he missed hearing one shot altogether. Besides, I think the statements of Harold Norman and James Earl Jarman demonstrate quite conclusively that the shot(s) to Governor Connally didn’t originate from above their heads.
 
 
 
http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/the-shots-at-zapruder-frame-224-why.html
 
 
 
As for the massive head wound, I agree with Pat Speer that a MC bullet struck the top right of his head tangentially. FWIW I agree with you that the occupants of the limousine lurch forward simultaneously just as he is struck in the head. But I think that Pat Speer has shown quite conclusively that his head is also driven down from a shot to the top of the head. The harper fragment, which originated from the top of the head, shows both internal and external bevelling associated with tangential wounds, and there is a gray lead smudge on its exterior where the bevelling; is providing strong evidence of a tangential hit from a lead core bullet, IMO. I provided a detailed discussion of the head wound in part 2 of my Don Thomas review.
 
 
 
http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/hear-no-evil-by-don-thomas-part-2.html
 
 
 
 
One other thing I’d like to point out here. If there was a shot from behind the picket fence which hit the President in the right temple/right top of his head, then his head would logically have been violently knocked and spun to the left, due to the massive force required to deflect and prevent the bullet/bullet fragments from exiting the left side of his head.
 
 
Unfortunately I’ve run out of time to continue. In any event, Martin, I hope we can agree to disagree on some (or all) of these issues, and still continue to discuss them. If you want me to address any specific issues, then by all means, go ahead and ask me.
 
 
 
P.S I should add that I DO believe there was a shot from the front, but that it missed.


Last edited by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 24 Jun 2013, 4:58 pm; edited 3 times in total

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 24 Jun 2013, 6:03 am

My apologies for the small font, Martin. It's something I was unable to prevent.


Last edited by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 24 Jun 2013, 4:59 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : I've fixed it up a bit now.)

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by greg parker on Mon 24 Jun 2013, 6:36 am

Hasan,

the new editor is a bit hard to get used to, but the font size can be edited with the "A" button alongside the arrow.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3443
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 24 Jun 2013, 7:15 am

Thanks for that, Greg.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Martin Hay on Tue 25 Jun 2013, 3:54 am

Hasan,

Thanks for the compliments and for sharing your thoughts. Please allow me to respond.

It is my opinion that we cannot use the subjective impressions and opinions of witnesses to invalidate the objective scientific evidence. This is a rule I try to stick to in all areas of the case as far as possible. For example, there were dozens of witnesses including doctors, nurses, Secret Service & FBI Agents, who saw the gaping wound in JFK's skull and almost to a person they recalled that it was well into the rear. In some cases, solely in the rear. But the autopsy X-rays show the wound to be chiefly in the parietal region. Many researchers use this fact to claim that the X-rays must be fake or altered. I think they are wrong and I'm pretty sure that yourself and Pat Speer agree with me that the hard evidence trumps the witnesses. As I'm sure you know, Pat actually goes to great lengths to argue that under certain circumstances witnesses can all be mistaken in the same way.

To use another example, Vincent Palamara wrote an article detailing some 59 witnesses who believed the presidential limo came to, or almost to, a complete stop on Elm Street. The Zapruder film of course shows no such stop. This fact has again been used as proof of alteration. And again I say that the hard objective evidence of the film is of greater value than the witness recollections. And again I'm sure that yourself and Pat agree with me.

IMHO this same set of principles should be applied to the dictabelt and the five shots it reveals were fired at the limo.

Some time ago, I posted a survey of the "ear-witnesses" to the Tippit shooting on the Education forum. I was going to copy and paste that here but thanks to John Simkin deleting all my posts that is no longer possible. I was afraid I was going to have to dig all their statements out again, but luckily Barry Krusch quoted me and used my analysis in Vol. 2 of his book Impossible: The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald so I was able to look it up on the Kindle preview to refresh my memory. In any case, what I found was that their were 12 people who heard the shots that killed Tippit but only one of them was sure that he heard 5; the actual number believed to have been fired. The average number heard was only 3. Some heard only 2. What this shows to me is that witnesses who are surprised by a series of gunshots or loud noises cannot be relied upon to accurately recall the number that they heard. Which is not surprising really since they would be unlikely in the extreme to be standing there counting.

The question remains, why did such a large number of witnesses in Dealey Plaza report hearing only 3 shots? I believe that the Warren Commission actually supplied the most reasonable answer to this question: "Soon after the three empty cartridges were found, officials at the scene decided that three shots were fired, and that conclusion was widely circulated by the press. The eyewitness testimony may be subconsciously colored by the extensive publicity given the conclusion that three shots were fired." (WR110-111) Like I said, this appears eminently reasonable to me and I believe provides a probable explanation for why there appears to be a consensus of only 3 shots.

Onto the head wounds.

There are numerous problems that I can see with the theory that the bullet which entered the EOP exited the throat. Firstly, I don't find the recollections of Robinson and Lipsey given some 15+ years after the event to be overly credible. The fact is that there were a ton of witnesses to the autopsy and it strains credibility to suggest that only two of them noticed something as significant as a probe being put into the EOP and emerging from the throat. The two most important witnesses IMHO were Sibert and O'Neil because one or other of them was with the body at all times and they wrote down their observations contemporaneously. Obviously, they did not report this alleged probing.

I also cannot imagine why, if such a pathway was found, Humes and Boswell would have kept it out of their report or why it would have been covered up. After all, a shot to the EOP, a tangential shot to the right side, and a shot to the back that did not penetrate are all compatible with the official scenario of three shots from above and behind.

Another big problem with this scenario is the actual trajectory from the EOP to the throat. It is extremely steep!



It is very hard to imagine where such a shot could have originated from. Now, one could argue that the bullet was deflected but that would be a fairly large deflection. Plus a small, neat exit wound, as well as a lack of fragmentation, is indicative of a Full Metal Jacket round which, as Dr. Wecht told me, should not be significantly deflected upon striking a skull.

But I think the fatal flaw to this theory is the subcortical brain damage. As I wrote in my blog post, the Supplemental Autopsy Report describes a "a longitudal laceration of the right hemisphere which is para-saggital in position 2.5 cm to the right of the midline which extends from the tip of the occipital lobe posteriorly to the tip of the frontal lobe anteriorly." According to neuroscientist Dr. Joseph N. Riley, this "cylinder of disruption...predicts the entrance and exit wounds (direction cannot be predicted, but a back-to-front trajectory is assumed). The alignment of the wound predicts an entrance wound in the occipital bone, lateral and above the external occipital protuberance. The exit wound, if it exists, should be in the region of the right orbit." As Dr. Riley explains, this "linear" wound could not have been caused by the same missile which created the trail of metallic debris and caused the "dorsolateral cortical damage". IOW the damage to the brain shows that a bullet entered near the EOP and exited the right front.

Finally, the tangential strike theory is also not without problems IMHO. Firstly, as Dr. Wecht told me, and as Dr. Vincent DiMaio explains in his textbook Gunshot wounds, FMJ ammunition does not disintegrate and create the "lead snowstorm" seen on the autopsy X-rays. So the evidence strongly indicates the use of something other than a Mannlicher Carcano round. Secondly, the pattern of fragmentation, with the smaller, dust-like fragments near the front and the larger particles located at the rear, is indicative of a shot striking at the right temple and exiting the top right rear. And finally, it's difficult to see how such a shot could account for all of the wound matter that was thrown forcefully to the left rear. Remember, the two Police motorcycle officers who were riding to the left rear of the limo were splattered with blood and brain. B.J. Martin said that there was blood and "pieces of flesh" all over his windshield, helmet, and all the way over to the left shoulder of his uniform. Bobby Hargis told reporters that he was struck so hard by the blood and matter that "I though at first I might have been hit." Hargis testified to the Warren Commission that because of the way he got splattered, his immediate impression was that the shot had come from the railroad overpass.

So IMHO the evidence is much more indicative of a shot from the right front.


ADDENDUM: I Noticed that during discussion of the head wound in your review of Don Thomas that you quote from one particular book that claims High -velocity lead core and jacketed bullets generally break up into hundreds of fragments, called a lead snowstorm, upon entering tissues, creating significant damage.” This is contrary to everything I've ever read, not to mention the opinions of world renowned experts like Drs. Wecht and DiMaio. Just doing a basic google search I found an article on the website for RadioGraphics, "The journal of continuing medical education for radiology." The article, titled "Gunshot Injuries: What Does a Radiologist Need to Know?" features the following passage:

"The degree of bullet fragmentation is also affected by bullet construction. The presence of a full or partial metal jacket has a major effect on deformity. Bullets with full metal jackets often remain in one piece and usually do not deform much. These projectiles typically do not leave a trail of lead fragments along their path. On the other hand, semijacketed, hollow-point, nonjacketed, and soft-point bullets tend to deform on impact or break apart, leaving a telltale trail of metal fragments through the soft tissues. Hollow-point handgun bullets usually deform by simply mushrooming with minimal fragmentation, whereas high-velocity soft-point rifle bullets usually undergo marked fragmentation. This fragmentation of high-velocity bullets creates a “lead snowstorm” appearance on radiographs. The area over which the lead snowstorm fragments are deposited in the soft tissues widens as the distance from the entry site increases. Thus, a conical distribution of lead fragments is seen on radiographs, with the apex of the cone pointing toward the entry site."

From everything I've personally read, the literature is quite clear on this point. But we don't have to take these experts at their word. The tests performed for the Warren Commission at Edgewood Arsenal clearly demonstrated the exact same thing. They used Oswald's rifle and ammunition and fired at numerous test skulls. Although the bullets did break apart, they did not disintegrate into dust-like particles and create a lead snowstorm effect. At most, they left 2 or 3 small fragments at the point of exit.

Martin Hay

Posts : 217
Join date : 2013-06-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Tue 25 Jun 2013, 7:28 am

Thanks for your detailed reply, Martin. I've recommended your article on my blog. I'll try to give you a thorough response tomorrow if time permits.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Wed 26 Jun 2013, 6:32 am

Martin,


A few comments from me:


I totally agree that eye/ear witnesses can be utterly unreliable, and that there latter recollections should always be taken with a grain of salt. I recall reading your analysis of the Tippit murder witnesses, and I thought it was quite good. However, the difference IMO is that the Tippit killer supposedly fired the revolver at Tippit three times hitting him in the chest and abdomen, followed by a single shot to the head. So the rapid fire of the revolver could conceivable account for the difference in the number of shots heard, including the distance of each witness from the murder scene.


I think the reason the Davis sister-in-laws heard two shots is because they had interpreted the three rapidly fired shots as one shot, followed by a pause, then the single shot to the head accounting for another shot heard. Don’t get me wrong, I am thoroughly convinced that they were (along with the other witnesses) coerced by the DPD into identifying Oswald as the killer:


http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/2013/01/the-tippit-murder-witnesses-part-2.html


You said that five shots were allegedly fired. If I may ask, do you base that on the fact that the bullets were 3 Winchesters, 1 Remington, with the shells as two of each, with one bullet supposedly gone astray and one spent shell casing missing?


Also, the fact that only 18 of the 264 witnesses analysed by Pat recalled hearing more than three shots, is far too little for my liking. There are some things about the assassination which I am more than willing to change my mind about, but not the fact that Bonnie Ray Williams initially reported hearing TWO shots. It seems almost impossible to me how he could miss hearing a third shot. I would like to elaborate on that, but in about a week, I hope to post my opinion on where Ce399 had originated. I expect to receive a SHIT LOAD of resistance from many people, and I am not going to pretend that I can make a rock solid case.


Regarding the acoustics evidence, the third alleged shot with the 0.6 correlation coefficient should have been dismissed because of its low value, the fact that there was no other matching microphone position identified, and that the majority of the ear witnesses do not support it. I think that the second alleged shot should have been dismissed as well. That being said, I do think the first, fourth and fifth shots are valid, since they are supported by the majority of the ear witnesses, and therefore, there is some validity to the acoustics evidence.


Although there are many researchers who will say that HB McClain was lying about the bike with the stuck Mic. being a three wheeler, I don’t think he was. He told Seamus Coogan that he did believe there was a conspiracy, so it doesn’t make sense that he was lying. Then again, he could have been playing games. Secondly, the fact that the Police sirens were captured about three to four minutes following the assassination is compelling evidence, IMO, that there was a three wheeler at the Trade Mart with a stuck open mic. Now please don’t laugh at me, but I think the distinct possibility exists that there were TWO mics. stuck open. One at the Trade Mart, and another, IMO, on the Stemmons freeway, which would account for the absence of crowd noise, the lack of loudness of the gunshot sounds, and the fact that the sound of the Carillon bell being heard above the crown noise.


Per the EOP shot, if it was just one witness, I might dismiss the possibility that it went down his neck and out his throat. I think the large downward deflection is possible, as the bullet was travelling downwards as it entered, and would not have required a great deal of force to deflect further downwards as it hit bone, IMO, plus all the other evidence I have listed.


Concerning the tests with the MC and skulls, how many of those included firing at the skull tangentially as Pat Speer and I believe the bullet hit the President’s skull? I thought they were only fired near the EOP location. When I look at the base fragment of the copper jacket (Ce569) recovered from the limo, it shows shearing and flattening as we would expect from a tangential hit. I also think Roy Kellerman’s testimony, plus the damage to the limousine, supports the notion that the recovered fragments were not planted. Also, the presence of human skin on the nose portion (Ce567) recovered is evidence that it is not planted evidence.


If you don’t mind me asking, Martin, did Dr Wecht and others ever address the issue of whether the bullet would fragment if it hit the top of the head tangentially? Let me say that you make a good point about the dispersion of the lead fragments. However, I think the larger fragments could have traversed a shorter distance due to their larger surface area and greater resistance than the smaller ones.


I hate to sound smug here, and I’m having a go at anyone, but I would like Wecht and others to explain how it is that a high velocity bullet could strike from the GK area, and not twist and knock the head violently to the left after transferring its momentum. It seems impossible to me that it wouldn’t. As for the blood and brain matter, I think it went back and to the left due to the wind. This would also explain how the puff of smoke had drifted from behind the picket fence.


All of the above is just my opinion of course. I certainly don’t consider myself an expert on the medical/ballistics evidence, let alone the assassination. And I must admit that most of my knowledge concerning the medical evidence does come from Pat Speer’s website.


I apologise if I didn’t make much sense in my reply, Martin. I’m too tired to think anymore right now.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Wed 26 Jun 2013, 6:35 am

Let me quickly add, that I haven't dismissed the notion that there was some type of neuro-muscular reaction which caused the President to stiffen up. But do I think that Sturdivan some how proved it? Hell no. Do I believe in the jet effect. Again, hell no. But I think his corset back brace may have helped stiffen his back up.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Martin Hay on Wed 26 Jun 2013, 10:46 pm

Hasan,

Thank you for another detailed and thought-provoking post.

I will respond in detail in a few days time. At the moment my spare time is taken up working on something for the MLK section and I need to re-read the transcripts to James Earl Ray's guilty plea hearing (among other things) to refresh my memory.


Martin Hay

Posts : 217
Join date : 2013-06-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Thu 27 Jun 2013, 2:25 am

Martin Hay wrote:Hasan,

Thank you for another detailed and thought-provoking post.

I will respond in detail in a few days time. At the moment my spare time is taken up working on something for the MLK section and I need to re-read the transcripts to James Earl Ray's guilty plea hearing (among other things) to refresh my memory.


No problem, Martin. Take your time. Look forward to reading your reply.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Guest on Thu 27 Jun 2013, 7:54 am

That's an excellent article on your blog, Martin, and the same goes regarding your most recent detailed post. It's nice to have your input on this forum. You've finally found the words, for me, that express the "fatal flaw" in the EOP/throat wound theory (which I think Pat Speer borrowed form Milicent Cranor). It doesn't explain the subcortical damage. Nor have I been a fan of the tangential strike theory, for the reasons you outline.

I've long-concluded that there were 2 shots to the head- but the opposite of your conclusion, that is, my opinion is that Z-313 indicates a shot from the rear, entering the EOP (fired along a near-level trajectory, from the 2nd floor of the Dal-Tex) and that Z-326 indicates a shot from the grassy knoll.

I must admit that your argument, along with the gifs provided on your blog, is very convincing: that JFK was hit from the grassy knoll at Z-313, whence Greer hit the brakes and jostled the Connallys and Kellerman forward.

Jackie doesn't move much, however. And if we look at Z-326

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z326.jpg

we can see that her right hand, which had been supporting JFK's head, is suddenly propelled backwards about one foot.

The subsequent frames Z-327 to Z-331 show a white object sliding off of the trunk.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z327.jpg
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z328.jpg
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z329.jpg
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z330.jpg
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z331.jpg

I believe this is a portion of JFK's occitpital bone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0JojdpJol

So I'm hard-pressed to visualize that Z-326 was NOT a shot from the grassy knoll- it knocked Jackie's hand back and blew out a part of JFK's occipital bone.

Thoughts?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Thu 27 Jun 2013, 8:08 am

Richard, how do you explain why JFK's head did not violently twist and get knocked to the left from the transfer of momentum from the bullet fired from the GK area?

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Thu 27 Jun 2013, 8:14 am

There were people hanging out the 2nd floor windows of the dal-Tex building, and I can't imagine why the sniper would use a lower floor instead of the upper floors, Richard. The key is the 6th floor, IMO, because of the Dallas uranium and oil "company".

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Guest on Thu 27 Jun 2013, 8:22 pm

Apologies on the youtube link; you should google "Zapruder film enhanced slow motion" to reach "JFK assassination 100fps stable super slow motion"; this particular video shows the white bone sliding along the limousine trunk after the 2nd head shot.

The axis of debris from the grassy knoll shot was 23.5 degrees. That is the angle from the entrance of the debris, in the right temple, out through the skull cap at the top of the head. Unless the shooter was located in the storm drain (which has been shown to be next-to-impossible), JFK's head had to have been tilted backwards when he received this shot. His head in Z-326 is tilted backwards, with Jackie supporting it. His head in this frame is like a limp rag doll, neurologically without sensation, and thus reacts hardly at all to this 2nd head shot.

You'll note that the people hanging out of the 2nd floor window in the Dal-Tex in Altgens' famous photo are next to a chimneylike partition. My opinion is that this partition separates them from the rest of the 2nd floor. I have the Sanborn fire map of the Dal-Tex, drawn up in the 50's, but it doesn't include this architectural detail, so it's no help. But the rest of the 2nd floor in November 1963 was empty office space. The window partially hidden by the fire escape was a broom closet. Ideal, in my and many others' opinion, for an assassin. The view onto Elm Street is a "turkey shot".

The 4th & 5th floors of the Dal-Tex were taken up by Zapruder's dressmaking company, Jennifer Juniors. The 3rd floor was shared by garment manufacturers Edward-Barry and Miller-Cupaioli. The 6th floor was shared by lawyer/clothier Morty Freedman, Marilyn Belt Manufacturing and Dallas Uranium and Oil; they all used the same telephone. From 1952- 1962 the 1st floor held the main offices of the Texas School Book Depository company.


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Thu 27 Jun 2013, 8:29 pm

Thanks for your reply, Richard. I will respond with something later on today. I believe that what Jackie recovered from the limo truck was actually a piece of the President's brain, which she then turned over to Dr Marrion Jenkins at Parkland hospital.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Martin Hay on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 2:38 am

Richard Gilbride wrote:That's an excellent article on your blog, Martin, and the same goes regarding your most recent detailed post. It's nice to have your input on this forum.

Thanks for the kind words, Richard.

Just a brief response as I'm pushed for time. I would hazard a guess that Jackie's hand moved quickly backwards away from the skull as she reacted in shock to the explosion of her husband's head.

With regard to the order of the shots, I remain convinced that the DPD dictabelt is most likely a genuine recording of the assassination. And on the dictabelt the Knoll shot comes first at Z-313, with the final TSBD shot 0.7 seconds later at Z-327. Like I said in my blog post, this evidence is more persuasive to me personally than subjective interpretations of the Zapruder film.

If a new analysis should conclusively disprove the acoustics evidence then I would be more open to the possibility that the shots were the other way round. I'm very curious about that white artefact you pointed out though. It does seem quite probable it was a piece of bone.

Very interesting...

Martin Hay

Posts : 217
Join date : 2013-06-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 5:15 am

Richard,

Thanks for the info concerning the 2nd floor of the Dal-Tex building. The problem I have is that I think the sniper would logically choose a higher floor; to be further away from the crowd. I don’t think he would be on the roof, since undoubtedly, the witnesses in the plaza would have seen him. I think the key is the 6th floor. Besides, I think the upper floors would best align with the shot to Connally, where I am convinced Connally was shot at.

http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/2012/12/the-shots-at-zapruder-frame-224-why.html

Concerning the GK shot, I don’t see Jackie supporting the President’s head with her right hand. I see her holding onto his left arm with both of hers. The bullet hitting his skull from the right front would have knocked his head violently to the left into his wife, and not back and slightly to the left, IMHO. Such a shot would have to deflect upwards significantly, which I don’t think is possible.

I would like an explanation as to the damage to the interior of the limousine if Roy Kellerman was lying about the flurry of shells entering the limousine after Zapruder frame 224, as his testimony clearly indicates. I would like an explanation as to the presence of skin on the badly mangled nose portion of the MC bullet found inside the limo. I would like proof that a MC bullet striking the top of the head tangentially wouldn’t break up due to shear stress. This is what I found in a book entitled Forensic Neuropathology, describing a tangential type gunshot wound to the head:

“A gunshot wound that penetrates the scalp and subcutaneous tissue may be angled sufficiently to graze or groove the skull but not enter it. Such a wound has also been termed a tangential wound or gutter wound. It may involve the skull external table only; may produce in addition, a linear non-displaced inner table fracture; or may perforate the skull and cause fragments of bone to be displaced inwards. A slightly deeper penetration may be accompanied by the deeper portion of the bullet being sheared off by the skull and entering the intracranial cavity, often with skull bone fragments, while the remainder of the bullet continues on an extracranial path. The latter situation may result in a keyhole skull fracture, with its characteristic combination of external and internal bevelling of the wound edges. Rarely has a keyhole would pattern been described in skull exit gunshot wound. When even a portion of the bullet perforates the skull, it is no longer classified as a tangential wound.”

Now, what supposedly happened to the rest of the bullet’s Copper jacket, I honestly don’t know. Consider the following from Pierre Finck’s report on the autopsy:

“There is a parasagittal laceration of the right cerebral hemisphere, extending from the frontal to the occipital lobes and exposing the Thalamus. The Corpus Callosum is lacerated. No metallic fragments are identified but there are numerous small bone fragments, between one and ten millimetres in greatest dimension, in the container where the brain was fixed.”

The harper fragment (which originated from the top of the head) has a greyish lead smudge with both internal and external bevelling indicating a tangential strike. The so-called delta fragment, which Lawrence angle determined came from the front top of the head, shows external bevelling for an exit. Therefore, I firmly believe the bullet struck the top of the President’s head from the rear.

BTW, if you orientate the lateral skull X-ray diagram on Martin’s blog showing the path of the bullet fragments to the position of President Kennedy’s head seen in the Moorman photo, and the Zapruder and Muchmore films, it either points to the floor of the limousine or back towards the TSBD/Dal-Tex building; from what I can tell.

I’ve run out of time. Please don’t think I’m trying to be antagonistic towards you, Richard. I’m just trying to discuss the evidence. And FWIW, I have not totally dismissed a frontal shot.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Guest on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 8:18 am

Believe it or not, I'm of the opinion that the white bone sliding off of the trunk is the Harper fragment. Billy Harper found it far forward of where the limousine was determined to have been at Z-313, simply because the fragment rode along for numerous extra yards. He found it in the grass so it seems someone unknown picked it up off of Elm Street and tossed it onto the grass.

I'm more of a traditionalist, following David Mantik's classic analysis in Murder in Dealey Plaza, in his article "The Medical Evidence Decoded". And I accept his analysis of the vascular markings in the bone, indicating it's mainly occipital bone. Which is what the original doctors at Methodist Hospital also determined, when Billy Harper brought it there. I don't believe for a minute that it's from the top of the head, nor that it's that helicoptering piece seen ejected skywards in Z-313.

This is the 1st time I've heard it's got beveling on both sides.

Martin's argument is very powerful, as to the sequence of the head shots: right temple at Z-313, EOP at Z-326. I can't dispute it for the time being.  I'm going to have to review the acoustics evidence someday; I'd been pretty cursory with it a few years back, and haven't touched it since. Can you direct me to a handy synopsis? 

When I first saw the sliding white bone, about 5-6 years ago, there were some videos on the web that really highlighted it well. A blood-free, bright white ovoid chunk of bone. I'll see if I can find another.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by greg parker on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 8:25 am

The subject matter here isn't my cup of meat, so I am not as well read on it as others, but I did just want to say it's one of the better discussions on it I've come across.

Keep at it, guys. And Richard, fwiw, I like your take on the Harper fragment being the piece of bone that came off the trunk.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3443
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 8:48 am

I strongly disagree that the Harper fragment came from the occiput. Someone please explain the presence of both internal and external bevelling, plus the fact the lead smudge is on the outside of the fragment.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Guest on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 9:20 am

This is a pretty good quality clip, "Zapruder film FRAME BY FRAME (HIGH QUALITY)"; the head shots come in at about the 5 minute mark:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1Lyv4wrJQU

The lead smudge is the result of the impact of the bullet near the External Occipital Protuberance. That is, from a bullet from the rear, which struck just to the right and essentially at the same anatomical height as the EOP. The Harper fragment snapped off just above the EOP- I'm staring right now at the diagram on p. 227 in Murder in Dealey Plaza. 

So if the EOP area was struck at Z-313, this area of bone was structurally weakened, and broke apart  and was sent backwards by the right temple impact at Z-326. But if the EOP area was struck at Z-326, the force of impact sent the Harper fragment directly backwards. Which is what the acoustics evidence suggests is what happened. So it's as if the occipital bone area was hanging on a hinge, and ready to fall off, shattered from the force of the right temple shot.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 9:39 am

That would mean the bullet also broke up at that point to expose it's lead core. I am not going to take Mantik's word over Lawrence Angel's. Randy Robertson and Joseph Riley support Angel. Pat Speer showed that Mantik is not to be trusted, because he lied about the location of the lead smudge. The Harper fragment shows a tangential hit.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1779
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Martin Hay on Fri 28 Jun 2013, 3:18 pm

Richard Gilbride wrote:
 I'm going to have to review the acoustics evidence someday; I'd been pretty cursory with it a few years back, and haven't touched it since. Can you direct me to a handy synopsis? 


Richard,

I'm still unable to post links but if you go to my blog, I posted a synopsis of the acoustics on January 9, 2011.

It's the fifth post down on the main page.

Martin Hay

Posts : 217
Join date : 2013-06-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The head wounds revisited

Post by Sponsored content Today at 9:11 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum