What are your top 5 JFK assassination books?

[Jerry Freeman]

"Wubbish, wubbish, wubbish, wubbish, wubbish ..." Regarding "The Impossible To Believe Single Bullet Theory," perhaps you should watch this (and the PBS Nova special from which it was excerpted).

Well thanks Tommy-- that cartoon made even more impossible to believe the SBT. I mean just draw a perfectly straight line through everyone and Vwa-Lah! We know there was no wound directly in the back of the neck but let's just believe it anyway  

[Jerry Organ]

Well thanks Tommy-- that cartoon made even more impossible to believe the SBT. I mean just draw a perfectly straight line through everyone and Vwa-Lah! We know there was no wound directly in the back of the neck but let's just believe it anyway

I suspect they used a program like Poser to articulate the human models and a different program for the Plaza model. I think it's done like that also at JFK Boards/JFK Numbers.

Maybe the NOVA modelers were trying to emulate the President's position using the Zapruder film and were unaware of the Croft photo. Unfortunately, the model's position was fixed when imported into the Plaza model. The final product shows the President's torso leaning backwards and doesn't reflect the forward lean noted by the HSCA. That may be why the entry on the back is so high. Also the back of the shirt collar is low relative to Kennedy's right ear height. They couldn't have hired some long-term JFK assassination researchers to review it before broadcast?

I was developing some SketchUp models where the human figures and their skeletons can be articulated within the Plaza model. So no going back and forth between programs.

Work done to show bullet track at Z193 (Mason Theory) The Kennedy model doesn't have the forward lean from the Croft photo

Unarticulated high-poly human model to which I added a skeleton; Scaled at 6' 1"; Missile track is in the early-Z220s Model has some forward lean but not like Croft; I believe Kennedy's jacket at the nape exhibited a larger bunch

We're probably five years away from a super-precise model that duplicates the posture, clothing and skeleton. And then it'll be rejected by the CTs. So what's the use?

[Thomas Graves]

Well thanks Tommy-- that cartoon made even more impossible to believe the SBT. I mean just draw a perfectly straight line through everyone and Vwa-Lah! We know there was no wound directly in the back of the neck but let's just believe it anyway

Jer-wee, Jer-wee, Jer-wee

Tsk, tsk, tsk.

Put your comic books down and watch the PBS Nova special: "Cold Case: JFK"

--  MWT

[John Iacoletti]

We're probably five years away from a super-precise model that duplicates the posture, clothing and skeleton. And then it'll be rejected by the CTs. So what's the use?

That’s because the exact locations of the wounds and the precise bullet paths will always be in question.

[Pat Speer]

If there isn't... [and I haven't run across one] --It's too late now.That is what a guy that was shot that day said [sort of].  Which lone gunman book does not endorse the SBT?

I didn't mean to derail this thread into a thread on the SBT. But, to answer your question, I have two single-assassin theorist books in my possession which devote a considerable amount of space to de-bunking the SBT. One is A Simple Act of Murder, by Mark Fuhrman, and the other is The Assassination of JFK by Robert Wagner. These writers found the SBT unbelievable, but concluded there was enough evidence to support Oswald's sole guilt without the SBT.

[Thomas Graves]

I didn't mean to derail this thread into a thread on the SBT. But, to answer your question, I have two single-assassin theorist books in my possession which devote a considerable amount of space to de-bunking the SBT. One is A Simple Act of Murder, by Mark Fuhrman, and the other is The Assassination of JFK by Robert Wagner. These writers found the SBT unbelievable, but concluded there was enough evidence to support Oswald's sole guilt without the SBT.

Pat,

Did they say anything about the penetrating ability (e.g., three feet of pine wood) of that kind of bullet when fired from that kind of rifle?

Did they say anything about that bullet's tendency to yaw downwards when exiting a body?

--  MWT 

[Pat Speer]

The single bullet theory really is fact though. When you examine all of the available evidence, there really is no other plausible scenario. For you to say that the SBT is absolute rubbish makes me doubt that you are the real Pat Speer. Pat Speer is not a stupid guy and he has examined all of the available evidence. He doesn't embrace the SBT but he doesn't dismiss it outright either. Unless he's had some sort of head injury recently.

To be clear on my position... It is not impossible for a bullet to go through one individual and wound another. It is unlikely, however, that a high-velocity bullet piercing Kennedy's neck on the proposed trajectory would create such little damage. It is unlikely as well that a bullet creating the damage in Connally would end up so undamaged. I have chapter after chapter on this stuff on my website, and performed a presentation on this stuff at the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report Conference in Bethesda.

My problem, then, is not with those who think the SBT has gotta be true, and probably happened in one way or another. It is with those who have fibbed and fibbed and fibbed to support its probability. Specter, Lattimer, Sturdivan, Canning, Myers, Haag, etc... It's just awful.

The wounds don't align...move the wounds.
Connally's back wound is not suggestive of a tumbling bullet...use the wrong measurement.
The amount of bullet velocity lost during the tests performed for the WC don't add up...misrepresent them in the Warren Report, and then, if you're Sturdivan, change them for your book.
And that's not even to get into Canning, who was so desperate to claim the wounds aligned he claimed Kennedy was leaning forward when struck in the back and then sat up in his seat before getting hit in the back of the head--precisely the opposite of what is shown in the Z-film.

It's been a con job since the beginning.

As far as the NOVA program and the cartoon posted by Graves...I saw that on the day it was first broadcast on a morning news show and immediately posted it on the internet to warn people another con job was in the works. You see, that animation shows the bullet enter the back of the collar, when the bullet indisputably entered 5 inches below that location. As I recall, Haag then defended this deception by saying that the controversy about the SBT was all about what happened after the bullet exited the neck--which was as big a whopper as one can tell.

[Thomas Graves]

To be clear on my position... It is not impossible for a bullet to go through one individual and wound another. It is unlikely, however, that a high-velocity bullet piercing Kennedy's neck on the proposed trajectory would create such little damage. It is unlikely as well that a bullet creating the damage in Connally would end up so undamaged. I have chapter after chapter on this stuff on my website, and performed a presentation on this stuff at the 50th anniversary of the Warren Report Conference in Bethesda.

My problem, then, is not with those who think the SBT has gotta be true, and probably happened in one way or another. It is with those who have fibbed and fibbed and fibbed to support its probability. Specter, Lattimer, Sturdivan, Canning, Myers, Haag, etc... It's just awful.

The wounds don't align...move the wounds.
Connally's back wound is not suggestive of a tumbling bullet...use the wrong measurement.
The amount of bullet velocity lost during the tests performed for the WC don't add up...misrepresent them in the Warren Report, and then, if you're Sturdivan, change them for your book.
And that's not even to get into Canning, who was so desperate to claim the wounds aligned he claimed Kennedy was leaning forward when struck in the back and then sat up in his seat before getting hit in the back of the head--precisely the opposite of what is shown in the Z-film.

It's been a con job since the beginning.

As far as the NOVA program and the cartoon posted by Graves...I saw that on the day it was first broadcast on a morning news show and immediately posted it on the internet to warn people another con job was in the works. You see, that animation shows the bullet enter the back of the collar, when the bullet indisputably entered 5 inches below that location. As I recall, Haag then defended this deception by saying that the controversy about the SBT was all about what happened after the bullet exited the neck--which was as big a whopper as one can tell.

How did Haag lie, Pat?

--  MWT