A Guilty Man

[Bill Chapman]

When a bullet exits the body, will some blood or tissue stick to it, or does the bullet exit cleanly?
https://www.quora.com/When-a-bullet-exits-the-body-will-some-blood-or-tissue-stick-to-it-or-does-the-bullet-exit-cleanly

'Jacketed bullets don’t normally change shape (deform) when traveling through soft tissue. When intact, the smooth jacket does not provide areas which can retain tissue readily. Hollow points will have many “nooks and crannies” which can easily retain tissue'.

[Bill Chapman]

Hung up on credentials? How about the Haags?

I didn't say that.

According to experts, the lack of blood and tissue on a bullet wouldn't by itself exclude it from having passed through a human body.

'I didn't say that'
> Good one

[Jack Trojan]

Iacoletti,

What kind of evidence would suffice for you?

A dated-and-signed sales receipt in triplicate with Oswald's saliva and 30-point fingerprints on all three copies?

Exact dates and times other photos were taken with that camera by anyone?

A photo or film showing that camera (with serial number visible, of course) in the possession of Oswald (verified by mastoid scar, etc, etc, etc)?

Not nearly good enough for you, John "The Contrarian CTer" Iacoletti?

LOL

--  MWT   

Are you absolving the evil, evil, evil DPD's role in creating the BYPs? If Marina was telling the truth about taking 1 BYP and burning another, then someone else must have taken them. Either the DPD took them (like their inexplicable re-enactments and cutouts) or one of Oswald's handlers did (Paine or de Mohrenschildt?).

The DPD are up to their eyeballs re the BYPs. They were sheep-dipping Oswald but all the photos they took with the Imperial Reflex could not resolve the commie lit headline or capture Oswald's face in focus. If one more of you amateurs tries to talk about optics and focal planes, etc. then I'm going to call you on it. Know what you are talking about before you offer up lame excuses why CE 133A looks different than the rest. So why is it so important to you LNers that ALL the photos were snapped with the IR? Why would that make Oswald a lone nut? Why couldn't Marina have taken the money shot with another camera? Is it because you want her "revised" testimony to be true that she alone took all the photos? As soon as you establish that she was lying, then all bets are off. BAAAA!

My analysis doesn't prove CE 133A was taken with another camera since I can't experiment with the IR to know for sure. The HSCA tested the IR and found the imagery distorted significantly outside of the sweet spot of the lens and concluded this may have accounted for the differences between 133 A & C. But they never did a formal study comparing the over all lens distortion between A & C. If you knew anything about photogrammetry you would know that distortion is like a photo's watermark.  Any differences cast doubt that the photos were shot with the same lens. Photogrammetry uses camera/lens parameters to calculate, identify and correct for optical distortion created by an imperfect lens. Spherical aberration is the #1 culprit for distorting images at the periphery of the lens. Cheap and wide angle lenses tend to have a smaller "sweet spot" where the distortion is minimal.

We know that Roscoe White didn't use an enlarger lens to correct for distortion because the negative for CE 133A exists, and it appears to match the print's distortion. And what about the unregistered photo of CE 133C found in the possession of White's widow? And where are all the damn negatives?  Only a diehard LNer thinks that the DPD weren't sheep-dipping Oswald to be the patsy with the BYPs.  CE 133A was the money shot, by design and Marina likely had nothing to do with it. And if that was the case then the BYPs were all part of sheep-dipping the patsy.

ps. I'm not sure what point Mytton was trying to make up thread but I'm sure it was more obfuscation.

[Jack Trojan]

In a second-floor OR, about 1 pm, the Governor was shifted from his stretcher onto an operating table. The used stretcher was then left next to the elevator.

If you say so.

The more intact a jacketed bullet, the less likelihood it'll retain material. There is also the cavitation cavity that pushes soft tissue away from the missile as it passes through.

Is there a report that said there was never any material on CE 399?

Funny how striking bones in Connally (and JFK) caused no loss of material in CE 399, let alone minimal deformation, yet the head shot FMJ bullet EXPLODES in JFK's head.

First with a right temple blow out: (not sure how LHO managed that from the 6th floor)



Then it nearly blew the top of his head off as it disintegrated into the ether: (then someone stole JFK's brain and any remnants of the FMJ bullet that killed him)



Same type of FMJ bullet producing 2 wildly different results doesn't make any sense to me. Or was it the "Jet Effect"? 

[Thomas Graves]

Are you absolving the evil, evil, evil DPD's role in creating the BYPs?  If Marina was telling the truth about taking 1 BYP and burning another, then someone else must have taken them. Either the DPD took them (like their inexplicable re-enactments and cutouts) or one of Oswald's handlers did (Paine or DeMohrenschildt?).

The DPD are up to their eyeballs re the BYPs. They were sheep-dipping Oswald but all the photos they took with the Imperial Reflex could not resolve the commie lit headline or capture Oswald's face in focus. If one more of you amateurs tries to talk about optics and focal planes, etc. then I'm going to call you on it. Know what you are talking about before you offer up lame excuses why CE 133A looks different than the rest. So why is it so important to you LNers that ALL the photos were snapped with the IR? Why would that make Oswald a lone nut? Why couldn't Marina have taken the money shot with another camera? Is it because you want her "revised" testimony to be true that she alone took all the photos? As soon as you establish that she was lying, then all bets are off. BAAAA!

My analysis doesn't prove CE 133A was taken with another camera since I can't experiment with the IR to know for sure. The HSCA tested the IR and found the imagery distorted significantly outside of the sweet spot of the lens and concluded this may have accounted for the differences between 133 A & C. But they never did a formal study comparing the over all lens distortion between A & C. If you knew anything about photogrammetry you would know that distortion is like a photo's watermark.  Any differences cast doubt that the photos were shot with the same lens. Photogrammetry uses camera/lens parameters to calculate, identify and correct for optical distortion created by an imperfect lens. Spherical aberration is the #1 culprit for distorting images at the periphery of the lens. Cheap and wide angle lenses tend to have a smaller "sweet spot" where the distortion is minimal.

We know that Roscoe White didn't use an enlarger lens to correct for distortion because the negative for CE 133A exists, and it appears to match the print's distortion. And what about the unregistered photo of CE 133C found in the possession of White's widow? And where are all the damn negatives?  Only a diehard LNer thinks that the DPD weren't sheep-dipping Oswald to be the patsy with the BYPs.  CE 133A was the money shot, by design and Marina likely had nothing to do with it. And if that was the case then the BYPs were all part of sheep-dipping the patsy.

ps. I'm not sure what point Mytton was trying to make up thread but I'm sure it was more obfuscation.

Jack,

Why would any rational person expect probable KGB agent Marina Nikolayevna (What? She knew her father's name, after all??) Prusakova to tell the truth about anything?

George DeMohrenschildt?  You mean the guy whom the FBI had investigated years earlier on suspicion of being a Communist agent, and whom CIA Counterintelligence Staff analyst Clare Edward Petty believed was a long-term KGB "illegal," based on his close reading of some WW II VENONA decrypts?

That George DeMohrenschildt?

LOL

--  MWT 

[John Iacoletti]

What kind of evidence would suffice for you?

Well, since you have provided NONE AT ALL, it doesn’t much matter, does it?

[John Iacoletti]

Hung up on credentials? How about the Haags?

How about them?

I’m hung up? You’re the one who invoked “expertise” (which you apparently define as agreeing with what you want to believe) as a rhetorical device.

I didn't say that.

Not those words, but you actually used “ You can't prove it wasn't found on Connally's stretcher” to try to argue that it was found on Connally’s stretcher.

According to experts, the lack of blood and tissue on a bullet wouldn't by itself exclude it from having passed through a human body.

But what is your evidence (any evidence) that CE 399 went through anybody, much less both Kennedy and Connally?

[John Iacoletti]

We know that Roscoe White didn't use an enlarger lens to correct for distortion because the negative for CE 133A exists, and it appears to match the print's distortion.

It doesn’t exist anymore (if it ever did). The HSCA couldn’t find it.