The part of my reply that you edited out in such an heroic fashion referred to the jacket bulging and it was this part of my response I should have emphasised, it is this that demonstrates when the bullet has passed through both men:
Question: Should you critique the complete response or edit it to suit your own needs?
The only thing I edited out was a line that said “Hi Joe” and the following picture.
II edited this out because too many times, the same lines and the same pictures get presented over and over again, making harder to sift through for new information. I was not hiding evidence. You said this frame shows no reaction Connally’s face at z223. And I totally agreed, but pointed out that z222 is way to soon to rule out an impact at z222. I saw no reason to reproduce the same picture again when we both agree shows no reaction on Connally’s face.
I do edit responses, particularly pictures out, to keep the screen from being too cluttered. If I had disagreed with your assessment of z223, and claimed it did show a reaction on Connally’s face, I should have and would have shown the picture again so others and judge if you were right or I. But since we agree on the picture, I saw no need to show it once again.
I also like to break up others response, to make it clear exactly what paragraph, or even what sentence, I am responding to. This can be hard to tell in original posts that are more than a screen wide. To get the total context of what the original post was saying, viewers can easily go back to the original post which can be found easily, because I preserve the date and time of that post.
The jacket bulging is an instantaneous mechanical response to an impact. You talk about tests where the bullet passes straight through the jacket which then moves 100 milliseconds later. It is all based on the assumption that the bullet passed cleanly through the jacket. In your earlier post you claim the jacket is moved by the 'debris' that exits Connally's chest. So you are claiming the bullet passes through Connally and the jacket after which the 'debris' waits for 100 milliseconds before exiting:
The ‘debris did not wait for 100 milliseconds. It came flying out of the chest. Let’s speculate say the debris was going at 100 feet per second and travelled three inches before it struck the coat. That would take 2 to 3 milliseconds. For all practical purposes, striking the coat at 0/30 seconds after impact. Unlike the much faster moving bullet, the debris bounces off the coat, transferring its momentum to the coat, which over the next 100 milliseconds swings forward to its near maximum movement.
My claim that the bullet passed cleanly through the coat without pushing it much, is based on the real-world test conducted by Dr. Lattimer. If it was the slowed down bullet which pushed the coat, then the coat would have been observed to bulge at 0/30 of a second after impact, because the bullet struck the coat at 0/30 of a second after impact and did not bounce off. The velocity of the bullet at the time it impacted the wrist is estimated by ballistic expert Larry Sturdivan as 500 feet per second and was at least that fast when it passed through the coat. This sounds fast enough to slice through without transferring too much momentum.
I agree that it is speculation by Dr. Lattimer that it was the bone fragments and debris that moved the jacket, but it is reasonable speculation. The jacket did not move when the “Connally” model was shot without the “Kennedy” model, when the bullet travelled straight and little debris was ejected from the rib cage. But it did when the “Kennedy” model was also used, and large bone fragments were sent flying out of the rib cage. These caused large irregular holes in the model shirt, just as it did in Connally’s. It seems this debris is needed to move the coat several inches.
In any case, the bottom line is, the coat reached its maximum bulge after 3/30 of a second, not 0/30. It doesn’t matter why the coat moves, the key fact is that the coat is at, or very near, its maximum forward movement 100 milliseconds after impact.
Your armchair assumption that the coat would bulge 0 milliseconds after impact, so the bullet hit at z224, is no more valid that someone else’s armchair assumption that the bulge would occur 225 milliseconds after impact so the bullet hit 4 frames earlier at z220.
So, until some new real-world tests are run, like Dr. Lattimer’s, that comes up with a different result, frame 222 has to be considered the best estimate of when the bullet struck both men, at least for those who are guided by real-world tests.
Question: Do you see the corner you've painted yourself into?
I'm not saying you do, but if anyone believes CE 399 shattered Connally's wrist bone, the thick end of the radius, and came out looking like it did is suffering from 'Magical Thinking'. I accept that some kind of miraculous event may have possibly occurred but I wouldn't put my eggs in that basket. At the moment my intuition is telling me the bullet that passed through JFK and then shattered Connally's rib had lost enough momentum to have difficulty getting through Connally's jacket, causing it to bulge on contact - z224. I need to go to dodgytesting.com to find something that corroborates my hunch.
No, I have not painted myself into a corner. Millions of laymen who don’t conduct ballistic experiments have trouble believing CE-399 could have caused those wounds and ended up in fairly good shape. But ballistic experts like Larry Sturdivan, Luke Haag and Michael Haag, who conduct and are guided by real-world ballistic experiments have no problem believing this.
When I start using the opinions of the majority, who do not conduct scientific tests and ignore the opinion of experts who do run such tests and form their opinions based on them, then I’ll start questioning if CE-399 could have caused those wounds. And maybe start believing in Scientific Creationism.
