55 years later...

[Bill Brown]

As for the autopsy photos and X-rays, in 1967 the autopsy pathologists (Humes, Boswell, and Finck), the acting chief of radiology (Ebersole) and one of the autopsy photographers (Stringer) viewed the autopsy photographs and/or X-rays and confirmed the photos and X-rays were accurate in the portrayal of the wounds of the President.

[Jon Banks]

Shouldn?t be ignored? Medical and ballistic evidence trumps witnesses every time.  What do you suggest be done with them?

The Medical evidence in the Kennedy assassination is a mess.

What Ballistics evidence are you referring to?

[Paul May]

Take your pick. The ordering of the weapon. Possession of the weapon as determined by b/y photos. That M/C to the exclusion of any other weapon fired the bullets. Oswald?s finger print on the trigger housing.  No evidence of other weapons bullets hit Kennedy. LHO shirt fibers found in the butt plate. If this weapon didn?t kill JFK, then JFK is still alive.

[Bill Brown]

The HSCA's Photographic Panel studied the autopsy photos and X-rays.

From the Kennedy Library in Massachusetts, the panel gathered X-rays of the President which were made when he was alive.
 In examining these X-rays, they studied unique anatomic characteristics (of the turcica, cranial sutures, vascular grooves, air cells of the mastoid bone).  A difference in any of these anatomic characteristics among the autopsy X-rays would show that the two sets of X-rays were NOT of the same person.  Similarities of these anatomical features among the autopsy X-rays led the panel to conclude that the autopsy X-rays were of same individual as the X-rays that came from the Kennedy Library (again, made when Kennedy was alive).

Dr. Lowell Levine, a forensic odontologist and an expert in dental comparison, testified before the HSCA in 1978.  He was experienced in the dental identification of people who died of some sort of unnatural death (such as airplane crashes, etc.). Levine compared the X-rays from the Kennedy Library with the autopsy X-rays. He concluded that the three autopsy skull X-rays are identifiable as being of the same person as the dental X-rays of President Kennedy.

[Bill Brown]

Stereophotographic views.

Like the backyard photos, the autopsy photos were examined using stereoscopic viewing (3-D).  The autopsy photographer had taken two or more photos of the same scene many times throughout the autopsy process.  The panel found several "stereo pairs" of autopsy photos which they used for stereoscopic viewing.  Stereo pairs added depth to the autopsy photos.  Unless both of the photos of a stereo pair are altered in the exact same manner (virtually impossible to do), any alterations in either of the photos would be easily detected.

There were enough stereo pairs of the back of the head, the top of the head, the large skull defect, the head viewed from the front right, the back wound and the neck wound.  Using stereoscopic viewing (3-D), the panel concluded that the photos (at least the photos used for the stereoscopic viewing process) were authentic.  They found no indication (or evidence) that any of the photos were altered.

[Mitch Todd]

He?s not alone though. There?s a whole movement among scientists to expose the flaws in Forensic ?Science?.

She. Read the blurb again. At any rate, there isn't "a whole movement among scientists." There was a 20-year period starting about 1990 when the forensic science crowd began to systematically look carefully at the validity of existing methods, but that seems to have collected all the scalps its going to. Right now, it's the science side that's having issues, most notably in what is known as the  "reproducability crisis."

Law Enforcement and Prosecutors over-sell the reliability of most methods in Forensics.

There definitely have been people who oversold or misused the value of certain forensic methods. The DNA in the Kercher murder case is a good example of it. But that doesn't invalidate the methods themselves.

I agree but there are a few things we can throw out with regards to the Kennedy assassination investigations like the NAA Lead Analysis and the Hair and Fiber Analysis.

We can safely disregard any claims of matching-to-uniqueness based on fiber analysis or NAA. But both still prevent claims that the paper and cloth (for instance) fibers taken from CE139 cannot be from the 6th floor bag or the blanket from the Paines' garage. Similarly, the NAA doesn't rule out that the Connally wrist fragments were from CE399 or that the fragments plucked from the underside of JFK's frontal lobes were from the same bullet that produced the limo fragments.

There are two other forensic methods seen in the assassination that are essentially novel to the case. The first is the so-called "jiggle analysis." The second is the acoustic analysis performed for the HSCA. The latter (or at least the Weiss and Aschkenazi version) is fatally flawed. It assumes that the only alternative explanation for the putative shots is some burst of noise; however, the Decker crosstalk overlies the "shots" and needs to be accounted for as a/the possible source.  As for the jiggly bit, I would suggest looking at what Hartman at EG&G did with CBS's help in the '60s, and forgoing Alvarez as anything more than an introduction to the problem. EG&G was able to get control footage taken by someone trying to hold cameras while someone else was shooting a rifle nearby. That enabled Hartman to figure out exactly what to look for in the Z film. His solution looks different than what's normally presented on the subject.

[Jon Banks]

That M/C to the exclusion of any other weapon fired the bullets.

Debunked

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/16/AR2007051601967.html

No evidence of other weapons bullets hit Kennedy.

Inconclusive

LHO shirt fibers found in the butt plate.

Debunked

http://jfkfacts.org/new-fbi-study-hair-analysis-warren-commission/

[Jack Nessan]

Debunked

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/16/AR2007051601967.html

Inconclusive

Debunked

http://jfkfacts.org/new-fbi-study-hair-analysis-warren-commission/

Here is the opening paragraph of Tobin's paper. In it near the bottom is the quote about the 2nd assassin.  Hard to say what was the ultimate goal of this research. Maybe just to show the rest of us how smart they really are. A second shooter armed with a carcano.....very smart. The premise and conclusion are basically not worth repeating.

CHEMICAL AND FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF JFK ASSASSINATION
BULLET LOTS: IS A SECOND SHOOTER POSSIBLE?
BY CLIFF SPIEGELMAN, WILLIAM A. TOBIN, WILLIAM D. JAMES,
SIMON J. SHEATHER, STUART WEXLER AND D. MAX ROUNDHILL
Texas A&M University, Forensic Engineering International,
Texas A&M University, Texas A&M University,
Hightstown High School and Chem Consulting
The assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy (JFK) traumatized
the nation. In this paper we show that evidence used to rule out a second
assassin is fundamentally flawed. This paper discusses new compositional
analyses of bullets reportedly to have been derived from the same batch
as those used in the assassination. The new analyses show that the bullet
fragments involved in the assassination are not nearly as rare as previously
reported. In particular, the new test results are compared to key bullet composition
testimony presented before the House Select Committee on Assassinations
(HSCA). Matches of bullets within the same box of bullets are shown
to be much more likely than indicated in the House Select Committee on Assassinations?
testimony. Additionally, we show that one of the ten test bullets
is considered a match to one or more assassination fragments. This finding
means that the bullet fragments from the assassination that match could have
come from three or more separate bullets. Finally, this paper presents a case
for reanalyzing the assassination bullet fragments and conducting the necessary
supporting scientific studies. These analyses will shed light on whether
the five bullet fragments constitute three or more separate bullets. If the assassination
fragments are derived from three or more separate bullets, then
a second assassin is likely, as the additional bullet would not easily be attributable
to the main suspect, Mr. Oswald, under widely accepted shooting
scenarios [see Posner (1993), Case Closed, Bantam, New York].


Obviously, Tobin and the rest of the forensic dream team never understood its ramifications. In their zest and zeal to prove Guinn wrong and the existence of a conspiracy, these scientists fail to understand what their analysis of the results of their tests indicated.  Essentially, all the tests were performed on 6.5mm Carcano bullets from the same batches as LHO's and from these tests determined that there was a possibility the bullet  fragments recovered in the JFK assassination came from more than two bullets. Thus somehow proving to themselves that there was more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza. Apparently they don't realize what they are really saying is that there wasn't just one shooter in Dealey Plaza armed with a 6.5mm Carcano but two shooters both armed with 6.5mm Carcanos. Most people don't even want to believe there was one person there with a Carcano let alone two.

One additional brilliant finding from the paper: Way to go out on limb.

"Dr. Guinn may have been correct or incorrect about the number of bullets originating
from the JFK fragments; the state of knowledge even today, but definitely about 30 years ago, remains too uncertain".