The Facts about Connally's Wounds

First topic message reminder :

FB post made by Linda Giovanna Zambanini. Linda has a background in nursing. I'll take this from Linda over a thousand pages of "research" by certain others on this topic every single time. Yes, we all knew the SBT was crap - but now we have an actual logical explanation for the wounds and prima facie evidence that a change in stories was coerced.

Frankie Vegas, I don't think you or Greg Parker are in a the JFK groups I'm in, so I wanted to share with you and the whole Downunder Crew a BOMBSHELL I found yesterday! :
I came upon a fascinating WBAP TV (NBC) film that is composed of clips from JFK's Texas stops. It has many clips I have never seen before, including an absolute BOMBSHELL from an interview of Dr. Shaw and the other surgeon, Dr. Shires, discussing their surgery on Connolly.
Dr. Shires opens, saying there were 3 wounds - and lists the back wound separately from the wrist and leg wounds, calling it a "tangential wound" - not a through and through wound. Shaw then says CLEARLY, the bullet that entered Connolly's back DID NOT PENETRATE into the body cavity! It was STOPPED by the rib which it shattered and fragments of the rib penetrated the pleura (lining) and lung. The bullet did not penetrate the lung - let alone transit the thorax and exit the anterior chest wall! Of course, this is absolute proof the "magic bullet" was a complete fabrication - the bullet never passed THRU THE BODY to hit the wrist and then the thigh! It completely and utterly destroys the SBT! The clip goes from 40:00 to 43:03. At 41:00 Shaw starts talking about the back wound .... at 41:45 - 42:07 Shaw says:
"In other words, the bullet never actually entered the body cavity, but it caused an opening into the body cavity, by the shock like impact against the rib, which it fractured. THE BULLET, ITSELF, DID NOT ENTER THE BODY CAVITY - IT ONLY WENT THROUGH THE CHEST WALL."
In concluding, Dr. Shires says he agrees with Mrs. Connolly that it's a good thing he turned because "...otherwise the bullet would have been straight through and through and would have involved the heart."

http://www.nbcuniversalarchives.com/nbcuni/clip/51A02395_s01.do

I second that thanks.

Part 3
 
Finally, we get to that 2 inch forward movement, that troublesome 2 inch forward movement that we first saw in Washington. For some time I had come to suspect that measurement. Art Snyder (SP?) a very distinguished physicist with the Stanford Linear Accelerator told me in the 1990s that the acceleration figures concerning JFK's head made no sense at all. He said that 90% of the momentum of the bullet entering at the rear would have had to have been transferred to the head and this is obviously impossible. And that meant of course something screwy but I didn't know what was screwy.
 
The Itek corporation in May of 1976 using the original film, using copies from the original film in 16 mm and 35 mm with 6-8 photogrammetrists working on it using the most cutting edge equipment one could find, finally confirmed my figures.
 

     
There is the Itek study and note at 312-313 his head goes forward approx 2.3 inches. So that's where we are. I knew something was wrong, but I didn't know what was wrong.
 
In the first years of this century a very bright systems engineer, David Wimp from Eugene OR, showed me with remarkable simplicity how both the Itek corp and I had made the same, simple dumb mistake. |24:31| Let's look at 312 and 313:



Looking at 312, the yellow arrow points to points of light reflected off the chrome strut. The red arrow points to a highly exposed part of John Connally's forehead. Now 1/18 second later, the points of light have now become horizontal streaks and highly lit part of Connally's forehead has been elongated, horizontally.
 
So Wimp in his articles pointed out and his analysis is based upon a fundamental and simple photographic principle: since highly exposed areas, bright areas of the film, have a whole lot of energy to them. If the shutter is open and the camera moved, then those highly energized areas will intrude into low energized areas. It's a basic photographic principle. Bright areas intrude into dark areas. |26:14|
 
[At this point, JT shows cropped areas of Z-405, 412, 414, and 402, all showing a light pole with different degrees of camera movement all affecting the width of the light pole, from wide to almost invisible.]   
 
Here's the crucial figure.
 

 
The measurements were made from the back of Kennedy's head to the beginning of the rear strut and also to the top of the seat. Notice what happens in 313 is that the brightly lit strip elongates horizontally just as the points of light became streaks and just as Connally's forehead elongated horizontally. That's what happened. Only I measured that as an increase in length that is a movement of Kennedy forward, when actually it's just the effect of Zapruder moving his camera. |28:04|
 
[At this point, JT shows a graph comparing his measurements of JFK's head moving forward to Wimp's "corrected" (post blur removal) measurements. The head movement is greatly toned down (not as pronounced), or about 3/4 inch. JT also shows several charts in rapid succession that show Wimp's math behind this. How reliable this math is, I don't know, but JT seems to buy it. Also, Wimp's measurements show that JFK's head moves a little forward even earlier than Z-312. JT then shows a looping gif of 306-317 where all of the occupants heads move forward, signifying deceleration of the limo. JT does acknowledge that Alvarez did some good work by calculating the limo decelerated beginning about at Z-300. There are a number of factors at play here: the blur effect, and at the same time the limo slows from about 12 to 8 mph. None of these things have anything to do with a bullet.]
 
The consequences of all this is that there is no longer any solid evidence whatsoever that John Kennedy was hit in the head from the rear between Z-312 & 313.
 
It changes everything. |32:11|
 
Next, Part 4
 
PS: I did some checking on David Wimp and I noted that he was attacked by John Costella, whatever this means I don't know. Just an observation at this point.

Jet Effect Theory supporters.

Alvarez created a lot of melon heads!
 

 
He was brilliant physicist, but his jet effect melon bullshit was deceitful. Criminally so, I'd say.

the "Jet effect" theory is without any shadow of a doubt a crock of shit. Anybody with an ounce of common sense knows that if the theory were true, the President's head would not only have spun violently to his left, but his head would have been knocked into his wife.

Alvarez's theory appeals to ignorant fucks. The same guys who watch Penn and Teller pull the same stunt on their show.
You have to be a total dumb fuck to suspend disbelief to such a degree that you accept a melon is no different to a human skull.

Captain Alvarez sez: "Put them melons to work for you!"

Part 4
 
With the jettison of the 2 inch forward movement there is no longer any reason to even consider the various theories that seek to explain why a body hit by a bullet would move towards the gun firing to bullet. This is a critical, logical consequence of everything above. This is a logical argument. There's no way that Alvarez's jet effect theory attaches because there's no place here. No longer does the event show a body (or body part) struck by a bullet moving towards the shooter. Both the jet effect and neuro-muscular response theories are irrelevant since neither has anything to do with the shooting. Since they are irrelevant, it no longer matters whether you deem them valid or not. You can believe that the jet effect is a fine theory, but it doesn't apply here. That's what's so important. |33:04|
 
This is not the only consequence. I have to admit how I was transfixed by that 2 inch movement because when I saw it, it immediately registered what I'm seeing here has to be the exit of that bullet, that's the only explanation for it, right? So I never looked closely at what we see right here...could what we see right here not be the exit of a bullet...but maybe the impact of a bullet?



I think we could. The two long arrows point to pieces of bone but the trajectories of those two pieces of bone are much more to the left than they are forward. And then if you take the epicenter of the explosion above the right temple you'll notice there's a "fan" of material that seems to be blown backwards over Jacqueline Kennedy's right shoulder. That material, of course, we know where it went. It went onto the motorcyclists Hargis and Martin riding off the left rear of the limo. And notice also that other impact debris goes down and forward and rear and forward. The rear vectors I think are more important and suggest to me that what I'm seeing now is not the exit of a bullet but the impact of a bullet. If one works on this photo and raises the contrast and shadow enhances the version I think you can see this "fan" of material going up and over her right should and also going down [high contrast image not included here].
 

 
The acoustic evidence produced by the HSCA, there's the knoll shot, shock wave, Elm Street echoes, Houston Street echoes, etc., the acoustic evidence made it crystal clear to me that I was wrong, there was no double impact, there's one shot, only one shot was fired at frame 313, not two.
 
Now both Bob Groden who is here and has talked to me about this and the two scientists Weiss and Aschkenasy were given the job of synchronizing the Zapruder film with the acoustic evidence. They concluded the next to last shot from the knoll was fired at frame 313. So what we're seeing there is the impact of that shot. Next the committee asked its photo panel of experts to pursue the same question. They too pointed out that a match between the acoustics evidence and Zapruder film was only possible if you matched frame 313 with next to last shot. Given what we see happening at 313, it would appear this shot from the knoll struck JFK high above the right temple and drove tangentially upward and rearward. |36:48|
 
With the elimination of the 2 inch forward movement as a piece of evidence the remaining pieces have come together with remarkable ease into a single picture. That picture was described to me over 40 years ago by one of the most colorful and reliable witnesses to the shooting: S. M. "Skinny" Holland. It was cold that November night when Ed and I drove out to Irving TX to Holland's home. Holland had a leathery face, the product of too many cigarettes and too many days in the West Texas sun as a supervisor for the railroad.
 

 
And on that November noon he was standing on the triple overpass |37:37| watching the shooting take place as if it were a staged play before his eyes—he's in the oval.

Next, Part 5

Stan, sorry for butting in......did he get shot in the back ..or what.

steely dan wrote:Stan, sorry for butting in......did he get shot in the back ..or what.

As a Musketeer, you may butt in anytime my brother!

Just as a reminder, I am going through the presentation "Passing the Torch - Last Seconds in Dallas" by Josiah Thompson. After I post it all up, we'll be in a position to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the material. It will probably take another 3-4 posts to get it all up. I would have done more today, but I was too busy feasting at the return of The Prodigal Son!

Sorry Stan. My info is from Mady, called  "missing the wound" otherwise i'm 1 bullet short.

Part 5
 
There was a flurry of shots, said Holland, then a pause, then a couple more. The next to last shot he said had a different sound to it. It would be like you are firing a .38 pistol right beside a shotgun. The final shots were not simultaneous, but close together. They weren't simultaneous, he said, but "boom, boom." In looking at the transcripts of this interview that I did almost 50 years ago, I remembered the time when I asked Holland the question. He said they were simultaneous but that's at the time I thought there was a double hit that was simultaneous, so I said to Holland "Oh, you mean 'booo-ooom,' right?" And he said no, they were "Boom. Boom." And I could remember being disappointed that night, but he was right. He saw it correctly; I didn't.
 
Like the first flurry of two or three shots, the final shot came from up Elm street, where the TSBD lay. The next to last shot—the one with the different sound—came from near the corner of the stockade fence. And there in the shadows of the fence he's seen smoke. And I believe you've all heard of this. |39:15|
 

 
Now what's impressive to me about Holland is, this evidence is stale, we've all known about it for 50 years, but as an investigator for 35 years what I find compelling about this is, this isn't just a report that Holland gave, he acted on it. Right? He hears a shot from near the corner of the fence, he sees smoke and he and his two buddies act on it. They jumped down off the Triple Overpass, climb over a steam pipe and make their way through a jumble of cars and so finally they get over to the corner of the fence.
 
 
 
And there, that's what they found, that was taken in 1966. And that's where they found fresh footprints in the mud, and cigarette butts.
 
Now the next Saturday—this was a Wednesday when we interviewed Holland—we asked him to come into Dealey Plaza and he came and I didn't tell him why. I just asked him to go stand behind the fence where you found those cigarettes and footprints. So he did. And I went and took his picture from Mary Moorman's position which was very easy to find.
                 

 
And there's Holland, see him standing behind the fence? Now let's go to the Moorman film.


 
Folks they're standing in the same place. The anomalous shape along the fence line is right where Holland was standing and of course, since this was reported in Six Seconds 46 years ago this is not news. But, this is news. At the end of the HSCA's investigation, Weiss and Aschkenasy were asked to compute the position of the motorcycle, on the knoll shot, and also the firing point. This is something you could do, you had 26 different echo patterns, mathematically you could do this, and they did. What they found was the following:
 


This is an official diagram from the House Select Committee, untouched, I haven't fiddled with it. And note what you see; the position of the unknown gunman.
 


So there we have Holland standing behind the fence, the anomalous shape along the top of the fence, and Unknown Gunman established by completely independent scientific evidence 10 years later.
 
So what have we shown? I think we've shown that John Kennedy was not hit in the back of the head between 312 and 313. Frame 313 now reveals exactly what we always thought was there. JFK was hit, not with a baseball bat, but with a bullet, from the right front. |42:45|

Next, Part 6

Thanks, Stan.

He's done some impressive work here. Whoever was the guy standing behind the fence to take the shot certainly had some balls, didn't he?(/she)

It is amazing how much of this stuff has been known for so very long but the community gets wrapped up in other things, minor details, doppelgangers, and film/body alteration theories.

I can hardly wait for the next installment!!

Terry W. Martin wrote:Thanks, Stan.

He's done some impressive work here. Whoever was the guy standing behind the fence to take the shot certainly had some balls, didn't he?(/she)

It is amazing how much of this stuff has been known for so very long but the community gets wrapped up in other things, minor details, doppelgangers, and film/body alteration theories.

I can hardly wait for the next installment!!

Thanks Terry. I've been led down many blind alleys over the years trying to "see" things others claim are in pictures, but as with Prayer Man, context is crucial. I think Thompson has done a convincing job so far establishing the proper context for these interpretations. I think we'll be getting into the Connally wounds next, which is the subject of this thread. Good stuff.

Part 6
 
There is, however, one fly in the ointment, an additional part of the evidence package has to be explained, or else the remarkable coming together of everything I've been talking about, everything, comes under deep suspicion. This additional piece of evidence simply has to be explained.
 
 
 
The green arrow points to damage to the windshield on the interior side, the orange arrows point to blood [spurts/marks?], the notes, [couldn't make out the person's name] notes are in the upper right—he testified in New Orleans that he found impact debris as far forward as the hood ornament on the car. Here are two fragments of a bullet that were found in the front seat. Now you can distrust the medical evidence all you want but the medical evidence does say, however you place it, that there was a little bullet hole in the back of Kennedy's head. Clearly, this impact debris in these bullet fragments didn't come from any body shot. They had to come from the head shot. And that's also what the medical evidence fairly unambiguously tells us.
 
So, if Kennedy got hit in the back of the head, when did this happen? Because he got hit in the back of the head. I just tried to demonstrate that I was wrong when I thought that happened between 312 and 313, but you have to explain this, or this whole mélange of fact and theory that I've been giving you comes apart. Well, to pull the rabbit from the hat, I give you my good friend Keith Fitzgerald, who first came up with a solution to this puzzle about 10 years ago. |44:56|
 
Next, Part 7

[PS: The final part(s) with be a challenge. There's a great deal of video clips/gifs that Fitzgerald uses to that I won't be able to show. I'll do my best to describe what I'm seeing and I'll use screen shots at key points as appropriate. It's something I'll have to work through first in order to see how effective it is.]

Part 7
 
Keith Fitzgerald
 
Six Seconds in Dallas. Now Tink [Josiah Thompson] told you that he measured the movement of the president's head which he did with Itek back in 1975, but Tink did something really important: he measured more frames, 301 to 330—these are all the frames he measured. The focus has always been here, between 312 & 313, but I'd like to redirect your attention to these last frames.
 
 
 
We all know what the forward movement was, 2.3 inches. But in actuality, the presidents head moves faster in these last frames than at any other point in the film.  
 
 
 
Why is that the case?
 
[At this point, a short clip from the 11/22/1963 interview with Abraham Zapruder is shown. I found a copy; watch till 1:25.]
 

 
I think he was asking the essential question, which is, at the time the presidents head exploded, he didn't hear one shot or two. The evidence tells us the spacing of the shots weren't evenly spaced (according to a majority of the witnesses) and most of the witnesses agreed that the shots were bunched together. So in this case, Zapruder has lots of company. |47:06|
 
 
 
If you look at this from the statistical standpoint, this is 65 earwitness recollections of the spacings of the shots. There are four categories: two shots bunched at the beginning and two bunched at the end (5 of 56), the first two bunched (7 of 65), evenly spaced (13 of 65), but the remaining 40 tell you that the last two shots were bunched together.
 
There's another piece of evidence that indicates those final two shots were bunched together that has a history of controversy—which is the acoustic evidence. I'm not going to debate that, I'm going to place it inside the other evidence and see where we go.
 
[The HSCA] tell us four shots were fired, with the third shot coming from the knoll. The actual spacing of those shots to the nearest one-tenth of a second would be 1.6, 6.0 and 0.7 seconds (HSCA Photographic Evidence Panel Report, HSCA Appendix – Volume VI, 30). That is our focus.
 
The main focus has always been on frame 312, the knoll shot. But I'd like to divert your attention to the fourth shot. When did that impact in the limo? There. When have you seen that before? Here
       

 
One other point is the extent of agreement between the acoustics evidence and blur evidence in the shots (Zapruder film). In these final two shots, the committee tells us that Zapruder heard both of them (312-313 and 328-329) and acted at the time he should have (blur).
 
That brings us to a possibility, not raised be me, but by the Committee itself in 1979: both shots hit the president in the head—the third and the fourth, but the [third] shot from the right-front and the fourth shot from the rear.
 
 
 
This is the diagram of the President's head the Committee uses to show you the rear head shot: entrance, exit and the missile path. It was designed for frame 312, but the possibility today raises the same question about a different frame, seven 10ths of a second later. What was the position of his head at that time?
 

 
Right there. So indeed he could be struck again in the rear of the head, or for the first time in the rear of the head. What's occurred here is that he's moved back after being shot, strikes the back of the limo and then begins to move forward, bringing him back here 0.7 seconds later. And we can see that right here:
 
[Video gif of frames 314-327 shown here.]
 
When he gets to this point [Z-327] the Committee gives us a road map, and that is this: Dr. Michael Baden, Chairman of the Committee's Forensic Pathology Panel, noted that the head wound in 312 could have been caused by a shot from the knoll but only if the medical evidence of it had been destroyed by a shot from the rear a fraction of a second later. 0.7 seconds would be a fraction of a second later. The Committee then tells us this: The significance of this is that it could mean that the President's fatal head would was caused by the shooter from the grassy knoll, not Oswald.
 
And then they tell us where to look: For a bullet to have destroyed the medical evidence from a shot from the right-front (grassy knoll shot), it would have to have struck the President, when? Here (rear of his head) at frames 328-329 (by a shot fired from TSBD). Now to cut to the chase, the Committee never looked at this sequence of frames, they simply made the conclusion without looking. 

But we will look to see what happened. |50:55|

Next, Part 8

Great series, Stan.
I think it might be important to also note at this point how differently the LN shot sequence scenario compares to the majority of ear witness accounts.
The accepted shot sequence for the LN scenario is for three shots only. First, Z160 (missed shot), 2nd Z223 (SBT), and 3rd and final Z313 ( JFK head shot). The only other variant I have come across is Z154 for the first shot that also misses.
There is another significant discrepancy with this theory of theirs. An even larger majority of witnesses claim that JFK reacted by bringing his hands up to his neck/and or slumping after hearing the first shot and before hearing the others. That of course happens at Z223.

Paul McGurkenfarklein wrote:Great series, Stan.
I think it might be important to also note at this point how differently the LN shot sequence scenario compares to the majority of ear witness accounts.
The accepted shot sequence for the LN scenario is for three shots only. First, Z160 (missed shot), 2nd Z223 (SBT), and 3rd and final Z313 ( JFK head shot). The only other variant I have come across is Z154 for the first shot that also misses.
There is another significant discrepancy with this theory of theirs. An even larger majority of witnesses claim that JFK reacted by bringing his hands up to his neck/and or slumping after hearing the first shot and before hearing the others. That of course happens at Z223.

Thanks, Paul. I'm going to try to wrap this up tonight. There's a lot of video from this point on that shows JFK and Connally being hit/moving, and it's merged with the the acoustics evidence (they added sound effects). It's quite powerful; for me it was like seeing JFK the movie in certain spots. I'll do the best I can here, but I'd recommend anyone purchasing this MP4 video presentation if they want to experience it themselves. It was just $2.95 US. But hopefully, this series of posts will suffice for most. Deep down inside, it feels right to me.

Part 8
 
This would be our frame 312, for the rear head shot—frame 327:
 
 
 
What has to occur now is that the wound should change and it should change dramatically.
 

 
Here we have 326, 327, and 328. Three frames that basically look identical. Something important happens in frame 328, but you won't recognize that, not yet. But as we look at this wound they're identical looking—the back of the head in shadow, the right ear is not visible in any photo, but his face is in profile in sunshine. The head wound is in that right-front area. Now, for the sake of argument, if the rear head shot has not occurred yet, when that bullet enters the head, penetrates through and exits, this wound should change and change dramatically and the President should be driven forward and downward. What happened? That's what happened:
 

 
That is about 1/3 of a second time interval. And what we're looking at now is a completely different head wound. For no apparent reason. The medical evidence tells us only one shot struck the President in the rear of the head, but it can't tell us when, it can only tell us it did happen. |52:06| Now I'm going to put this in motion and what we're looking for is a change in 1/18 second in that front portion of his head wound
  

 

 
328 now begins our process; the next two frames are going to be what we see after the point of impact. What we see is a head wound changing for no apparent reason, but this is the moment when the Presidents head moves the fastest forward at any time in the film. It also is the time the head wound for no reason begins to change dramatically.
 
Now I'll put this in motion and we'll see this happen between 327 and 328. You'll watch that head move. [Gif video shown here]
 
If that is our point of entrance, initially from 313, it must now become our point of exit at 328, and it does—that wound changes in 1/9 second. Leading to this—frame 333.
 
This then is our last wound between 327-335. These are prior to (326-327) and these are after (335-337).
 
The medical evidence tells us that only two shots struck the President from behind; no shots hit from the front (Robert Blakey). But one doctor (Cyril Wecht) did insist that it was possible for a shot to have come from the right front. That is this shot [frame sequence 313 to 327 shown]; now the second shot, this time from the rear to drive him forward and downward and destroy the head wound [frame sequence 327-335 shown]. That all occurred again in less than 1/3 of a second.
 
This possibility was acknowledged by the House Committee, and it was supposed to have been a subject for discussion on that last public hearing that was held—but no one ever raised the issue.
 
The Warren Commission told us three shots were fired and that one missed, they though it was less likely the last shot missed because of witnesses who told them such was the case. Illustrative of that is James Altgens who had an excellent vantage point near the Presidents car. He recalled that the shot which hit the Presidents head "was the last shot, that much I will say with a great degree of certainty." He was certain of it for a very particular reason. This is the picture he took [Altgens 6 shown here]. He was preparing to take his next picture, and something unusual happened that no one knows that's in the film but that he saw [watch 0:30-1:11].
 

 
The question is where was James Altgens standing between frames 327 and 337? The answer to that question is right there.
 

 
He was literally looking at the President at the time the bullet struck him in the head. He didn't take this picture because of what he witnessed. ("Altgens stated he was staring in utter disbelief at what he had just witnessed and was so aghast that he froze and did not snap the picture.") He witnessed the rear head shot to JFK. He indicated he was 15 feet away, with the limo almost directly in front of him. That occurred here, not at frame 313, and what he saw occurred between frames 327-337. 

He tells us what the acoustic evidence, the blur evidence, the witness evidence, and the film tell us. |56:26|

Next, Part 9 Finale

Part 9, Finale
 
I have one quick point to make and not much time to make it. The rear head shot at this time opens up the possibility of one additional wound which is the right wrist wound of Governor Connally.
 

 

 
The fragments from that head shot give the characteristics of a rear head shot fragment struck in his wrist. The doctor who operated on Connally's wrist raised the possibility at that time that it's the fragment from the rear head shot that hits the Governor's wrist.
 

 

 
Entrance wound was on the back of the wrist, exit wound was on the front of the wrist, palm side, entrance wound was bigger than the exit wound, meaning an irregular missile probably caused the wound.
 
This is Connally in frame 312, we're going to put these in motion. |57:09| And what I want you to concentrate on is the Governors hand and his wrist and were going to watch this...as he moves forward...

[Fitzgerald is using a copy of the Z-Film frames that is much higher quality than anything I've been able to download off the Internet. I made a gif from screen shots to replicate the video sequence he shows in the presentation. However, I wasn't able to post it directly here; but this link should work.]

http://postimg.org/image/rgharjzd7/
 
This is Connally now in 327. The back of his hand is now facing something very important, which is...here is JFK's head in frame 327.  You will now watch Connally move that arm and hand into a position necessary to be struck by a fragment at that time—right there [gif video sequence shown in presentation].
 

 
The House Committee in its report agreed that this was possible, like Dr. Gregory did.
 

 
But they weren't looking for this. This is where the photographic evidence and the medical evidence come together, at this point, when the evidence tells us the last shot fired from the rear should strike the President's head.
 
And with that, we're going to go to the film. Now what I've done here, there are three versions with the shots superimposed (warning, extremely graphic). |58:10|

[What is shown is video of shot sounds superimposed, three views, the last one showing the entire Z-film. It's very powerful, something that would show well in a movie or documentary.]
 
Josiah Thompson final comments
 
Think of going up into your attic. You find an old jigsaw puzzle and you start putting the pieces together. You slave and slave and the pieces just won't fit together. And finally you figure it out—there are some pieces that don't belong in this puzzle. That's the problem. Well, over time, what's happened in these 50 years is that the evidence package got contaminated. Various pieces that didn't belong in the puzzle got there.
 
For example Vincent Guinn's neutron activation analysis, but I'm here to tell you the big irony of this is I introduced this stupid piece that doesn't belong here. I introduced this 2 inch movement which had such enormous kind of logical significance that if you pull it out, all the other pieces begin to shift and bend and then come together.

So what I'm trying to say is what Keith and I are trying to present to you here is as it where a new pattern. The pattern has been there all along, there hasn't been new evidence in the case; it's been there all along. But this is a new paradigm to try to understand what happened. 

|01:03:05|

New paradigm?

We've been looking at it all along... just looking at it wrong.

Fucking brilliant!

Is there active research going on here? The back of the head always showed an exit wound in frame 313.

jack ferguson wrote:Is there active research going on here? The back of the head always showed an exit wound in frame 313.

Jack, welcome. Yes, there is active research happening here. But this was a rare incursion into these particular areas. 

The reason we largely stay out of this area is shown within this thread. The debates go round and round and have done so for over 50 years and got us no closer to closure. 

Most of us here believe the correct path is in exonerating Oswald. There is a justice system that is supposed to deal with the questions raised, but until that system can be convinced that the wrong guy has been pinned, then conspiracy theories and bullet trajectories will continue to be discussed for another 50 years. 

There is little substantive difference between Oswald and Steven Avery or the many now freed by the Innocence Project. The one difference is that Oswald never got his day in court. Ironically, his own murder disallows him from the same considerations and assistance  to clear their names that innocent men on death row can access.

When I made the Part 9 Finale post two years ago (above) the hosting service I was using at the time didn't allow for direct viewing of GIF files. The one I use now does so I post the GIF here:



As I said back then, the quality of the Zapruder frames Thompson used in his presentation was the best I've ever seen. If we could only get our hands on a copy of Darnell or Wiegman this sharp!