Lack Of Damage To CE-399

[Andrew Mason]

If you had been following, you would know it's not a "Magic Bullet" trajectory but a 3D recreation of Z193, to demonstrate where a bullet through Kennedy would end up if fired in the Z190s (which Mason proposed would sail pass Connally on his left side and gently lodge in his left thigh). The model is valid in demonstrating right-to-left issues and thus invalidates Mason's claim.

You still haven't established that it is a correct 3D recreation.  Where is the overhead shot with the men in the same position and showing the horizontal angle of the shot trajectory to the car direction?  Where is the side view showing the vertical angle to the car of the shot trajectory? Where is the view showing the SN so that we can see that the line from the SN through JFK's neck ends up striking JBC's right armpit and then his left thigh? I'd really like to see you work out those details.  Until you do, you cannot claim to have invalidated anything.

[Walt Cakebread]

If that was a rendering of Z193 then JFK was NOT in the correct position to receive the MB from the SN. This is all about demonstrating that the MB trajectory was possible before trying to figure out how and where it zig-zagged in and out of Connally.

Either you simulate JFK's correct body position for the MB trajectory or you don't. If you don't then your whole model is crap and you can't make any assertions.

All your graphics are invalid because they aren't based on real-world data. You must use surrogates with comparable body dimensions to create accurate models and avoid future embarrassment.

Slouch? Go ahead, re-enact JFK's slouch and show the MB trajectory with revised graphics and try to advance your position. Otherwise, you are wasting our time.

Why aren't the two lines parallel ?   They should match precisely ...... 

[Jerry Freeman]

 What does all of the preceding gibberish have to do with the Lack of Damage done to the bullet?

[Andrew Mason]

That's a pretty polite response from Canning considering you accused him of "using faulty reasoning" and having Connallly sitting over the centre console.

I never accused him of "faulty reasoning" when he was alive.  Unfortunately, he died in 2009.  The "faulty reasoning" that I alleged here could be seen as sound reasoning based on a "faulty premise" (that JBC's right shoulder would have been visible in Betzner's photo if the man in front of Betzner had not been there).  Mr. Canning seemed to acknowledge that the premise was not correct ie. it was "faulty". 

As a result, one would have to conclude that JBC's head was possibly 8 inches closer to the middle of his seat than where Mr. Canning had placed him.  That would put him in the middle of his seat. Canning was, nevertheless, not persuaded that the path would have missed his back on the left side.  He did not appear to consider how JBC being turned toward the right as seen in the zfilm at z193-200 could affect that.   The bottom line is that if Canning's placement persuaded the HSCA that the trajectory could have intersected Connally's right armpit, moving him even 3 inches farther right let alone 6-8 inches, would have called into question such a conclusion. 

Canning agrees with me that Connally's head (if it were not as inboard relative to Kennedy as he determined) would be visible in Bretzner.

It is rather obvious to all of us that his head would be visible if the man in front of Betzner was not there.  He never said that would mean Connally was as inboard he had placed him on his assumption that his entire right shoulder was blocked.  That should be obvious to all of us as well.  Canning said " The resulting shift would not destroy the conclusion I drew."  Of course, it doesn't.  The failure of the presumption alone just means that we cannot place a rightward limit on the position of the right shoulder - just the rightward position of JBC's head.

I have done a Bretzner sightline in SketchUp and Connally's head is just barely blocked by the foreground figure. If Connally were a little bit less inboard relative to Kennedy, a portion of his head would be visible.

I would like to see your analysis and drawing.  You have to take into account that by being turned to the right as JBC's torso is in z186, his head has to move forward away from the seat back, to accommodate the turned torso.

Seems he's cautioning you on your "simultaneous eye-witness evidence" with a personal antidote.

I think you meant "anecdote".  He candidly admitted "Your explanation of the power of simultaneous eye-witness evidence impressed me particularly in view of my recently recognized poor performance in a stressful situation involving "freeway rage".  His anecdote was simply that he was not a very good witness in the incident he described - not that 40+ people observing the same shot pattern were bad witnesses. If that were the case, they would only have a random chance of agreeing with each other.  I think Canning understood probability and statistics.

That only shows the front half of the 5th rib, genius. The 5th rib slants down from the back area. A bullet entering the HSCA inshoot and going downward and to the left would contact it pretty quickly. And without the Dali-esque deflection required by your theory.

So Dr. Shaw misplaced and misidentified the location of the entry wound?  The axilla or armpit is the region immediately below the joint between the torso and the arm.  The fifth rib is below that joint even in the back:

Gee, Andrew, you have a couple of years experience in SketchUp and 3D on me. Don't expect me to obtain overnight your mastery of fine precision and vivid reality.

So you must be agreeing that you have not invalidated anything. Still waiting for your less than precise, not vividly real views.

[Jack Trojan]

All of this is off topic, but if you guys are intent on pursuing this avenue then here is some advice:

You need to work backwards here. Determine the entry/exit wounds, as best you can on JFK and Connally. Then use 2 lasers pointed at one another and surrogates to simulate the trajectory of the MB thru JFK and Connally to establish their body positions that makes the MB trajectory work. Only then can you try to match it up with a frame from the Z-film. I never get tired of posting the 2 laser challenge, which remains unchallenged...



This is your only option to advance your position, otherwise, your graphics are spinning their wheels.

[Mike Orr]

There is but one reason for the lack of damage to CE 399 and that reason would be that CE 399 was not shot at JFK or JC . CE 399 was to have traveled in and out of JFK and then in and out of JC and in and out of JC and finally into JC's thigh for it's final stop and along the way has left a broken radius bone and a broken rib but since the bullet was slowing down after all these in and outs through two bodies , it has only left a very small misshapen base of the bullet and we are lead to believe Bill , that the reasoning for the bullet to not be looking somewhat misshapen was due to the fact that CE 399 had slowed down so much that after entering and leaving the JFK & JC bodies seven times ( in and out , in and out , in and out and " finally In " with the original shot in the back that was raised up to the base of the back of the neck by Gerald R. Ford . Bill , your analogy for the damage caused by CE 399 is very leaky !

[Jerry Freeman]

To address the "lack of damage" to CE-399...
The bullet, now traveling at around half of it's original speed, strikes Connally's fifth rib, completely shattering it.  Damage to the bullet was minimal due to the fact that it was not traveling anywhere near full speed when it struck the rib. etc etc.

Conjecture that addresses nothing.   Reply #5 ...Where is the proof that CE-399 was even fired at the motorcade that day?
So far, I've seen nothing that does that.
 

[Andrew Mason]

Conjecture that addresses nothing.   Reply #5 ...Where is the proof that CE-399 was even fired at the motorcade that day?
So far, I've seen nothing that does that.
 

The evidence that it was fired at the motorcade consists of the following:

1. three shots were fired at the motorcade
2. a bullet was found on a stretcher at Parkland by Tomlinson on the afternoon of 22/11/63 and passed along to Todd who put his initials on it.
3. the fragments of bullets found in the limo amounted to less than one bullet. None of the fragments could be conclusively tied to Oswald's gun.
4. point 3. was not known by anyone at the time that CE399 was found on the stretcher by Tomlinson and at the time Todd scratched his initials in CE399
5. CE399 was fired at some time by Oswald's MC
6. the above leaves two possibilities: a) CE399 was planted by a conspirator b) CE399 was one of three bullets fired at the time of the assassination.
7. Any theory that someone planted CE399 on Connally's stretcher requires: i). that conspirators anticipated a need to make it appear that Oswald's gun had been used to fire the shots that struck the limo when it hadn't ii). that conspirators knew what the bullets in the car showed or did not show and iii) that the wounds of the men in the car would be consistent with a whole bullet being found on Connally's stretcher iv) that the conspirators knew that CE399 would be discovered at Parkland by planting it on a stretcher  v) that the purpose of planting CE399 was so important that it far outweighed the risk of the conspiracy being discovered.
8. 7. makes no sense.