I have already pointed out to you that Connally could have been hit by a bullet fired from the Dal-Tex Building or the County Records Building without hitting JFK first.
But that's ridiculous, and easily debunked. Dr. Canning, the HSCA's trajectory expert, found that he could not get his vertical trajectory lines from JFK to Connally to match up when he considered the location of JFK's back wound as determined by Baden's panel--even that was too low. In order to make the horizontal trajectory work, Canning had to assume that Connally was positioned so far to the left that his right shoulder was practically in the middle of the jump seat. Frame 224 alone visibly refutes any attempt to move Connally that far to the left.
Dr. Baden made a number of other claims that have now been exposed as erroneous. He claimed that the triangular skull fragment was parietal bone. He claimed that the skull x-rays showed no missing frontal bone. He claimed that the rear head entry wound was in the cowlick. He claimed that the Harper fragment was parietal bone. He claimed that the Harper fragment and the triangular fragment joined to form one large, continuous fragment. All of these claims have long since been thoroughly debunked.
And shall we discuss the fact that we now have powerful evidence that the autopsy doctors determined with absolute certainty on the night of the autopsy that the back wound had no exit point? I notice that no WC apologists want to engage in such a discussion.
As far as I have seen, Organ is the only one who has ventured to offer any kind of explanation for this evidence, but his explanation--that "rigor mortise" [sic] would have prohibited the doctors from probing the wound--not only does not explain the evidence but fails to address the evidence, which includes the fact that autopsy doctors removed the chest organs to enable them to see where the probe was going at the other end of the wound, and that the doctors maneuvered JFK into numerous positions to facilitate the probing. They could see, and others could see, that the back wound's tract did not penetrate the chest cavity because they could see the end of the probe pushing against the chest lining.
One of these days, you guys are going to have to come to grips with the fact that the back wound had no exit point.
This is simply wrong. JFK clearly begins to react to an external stimulus at around Z200. Even the HSCA PEP admitted this. We also see some people in the plaza appear to react to the sound of gunfire during this timeframe. This is also the timeframe when a strong blur episode occurs in the Zapruder film, i.e., when Zapruder jiggled his camera in an involuntary response to the sound of gunfire. There are at least four strong blur episodes in the Zapruder film.
Uh-huh, and the HSCA also said that the witness testimony of shots from the grassy knoll could not be dismissed as simply mistaken because of echoes. The HSCA also said that a gunman fired a shot from the grassy knoll. You might want to read the entire HSCA report and its accompanying volumes, instead of skimming through it to cherry-pick statements you like.
No, the HSCA said that Oswald fired three shots, and that another gunman fired a shot from the grassy knoll. Again, you might want to read the entire HSCA report and the supporting volumes.
"I have already pointed out to you"
"could have been hit by a shot from another building"
"I have already pointed out to you" ,"Could have been"? This is not an answer, just because you said so? A maybe? You have demanded a great deal more of the various experts on the various commissions but you yourself insinuate whatever and disproved absolutely nothing. You make a statement and suddenly that is Gospel?
Actually no it could not have been fired from the buildings you have stated and that is why this is all you can offer for an explanation. No proof , no evidence just a personal refusal to accept the truth. You believe there was only two shots fired from the SN and also offer absolutely no explanation for JBC's wounds other than SBT.
The only explanation for JBC's wound is a bullet passing through JFK.
"I have already pointed out to you that Connally could have been hit by a bullet fired from the Dal-Tex Building or the County Records Building without hitting JFK first."
No matter how many times it is stated this is an unfounded statement with zero proof. Other than state it and repeat not one piece if evidence has been provided to prove it. Basing a whole theory on an obviously flawed belief is an attempt to provided validity to the other parts of the same conspiracy theory. Part of this theory is JBC's statement of being struck at Z230+. A seperate shot coupled with JFK's physical reaction proves it never happened. JFK's reaction only further shadows the back of JBC it does not makes the location of the back wound more accessible for a wound other than the bullet that passed through JFK.
All of these conspiracy theories are a house of cards predicated on a seperate shot hitting JBC than the one hitting JFK, This one is no different. A little more elaborate and definitely more researched but in the end it ends up without a seperate shot to JBC the only assassinin was LHO.
======================
No not Cherry picked. The HSCA conclusion is the answer provided by the HSCA Report reduced to a summary. The exact same conclusion reached by the Sound Analysis.
Cherry picking is relying on the widely debunked dictabelt and ignoring all the other info in the HSCA Report. You should follow your own advice and read both WC and the HSCA reports. There is a lot of useful information in them.
5. CONCLUSIONS
Despite this uncertainty, two general remarks seem worthwhile one based on the test, the other on the statistical analysis. First, it is hard to believe a rifle was fired from the knoll. Such a shot would be extremely loud, even if silenced, and it would be hard to imagine anyone in the vicinity of the knoll missing such an event. An unsilenced pistol firing subsonic bullets also seems unlikely because this shot was the easiest to localize of all the shots fired. It produced the least reverberation. As an acoustic image, it was much sharper and less diffuse than that of the rifle, sounding much like a firecracker. It is, however, conceivable that had a pistol been fired from the knoll at about the same time a rifle was fired from the,TSBD, the pistol shot would have been less easily localized, or even completely masked from some vantage points. As an isolated shot, however, it is extremely easy to localize. Finally, if one accepts the hypothesis that a marksman fired from the knoll and that other shots were fired from some other location, then it seems most unlikely that only 4 of 178 witnesses would report a single location as the origin of the shots. Despite the various causes of confusion in the locus of any single shot, a second shot from a different location should be distinctive and different enough to cause more than four witnesses to report multiple origins for the shots .
"The buildings around the Plaza caused strong reverberations
or echoes that followed the initial sound by from 0.5 to 1.5 sec.
While these reflections caused no confusion to our listeners
who were prepared and expected to hear them they may well
inflated the number of shots reported by the suprised witnesses
during the assassination" HSCA Earwitness Analysis Report, pgs 135-137
-------------------------------------------
A jacketed bullet traveling at a velocity of 2000+ ft/sec does not magically stop in soft tissue.
Dr Ebersol was tasked with locating the bullet. Two different attempts did not locate it. They were then told the throat wound was the exit wound.
Dr Ebersole:...We were asked by the Secret Service agents present to repeat the films and did so Once again there was no evidence of a bullet. I assume you are familiar with portable X ray It is not the kind that gives a fine diagnostic but it is helpful in picking up metallic fragments. It would stand out like a sore thumb either intact or shattered.
The autopsy proceeded and at this point I am simply an observer. Dr. Humes in probing the wound of entrance found it to extend perhaps over the apex of the right lung bruising the pleura and appeared to go toward or near the midline of the lower neck.
Dr. EBERSOLE. The taking of the X rays again were stopped to the best of my remembrance once we had communication with Dallas and Dr. Humes had determined that there was a wounded exit in the lower neck anterior at the time that the President arrived at the hospital in Dallas. I think once that fact had been established that my part in the proceedings were finished.
Dr. PETTY. May I ask two questions further. One, did you see the wound in the neck and associate it with a bullet wound of exit after it had been pointed out that the tracheostomy had been through that area?
Dr. EBERSOLE. No, sir, I can't say that I did. After the dissection had started I saw the area that Dr. Humes was very interested in. He pointed out to us that this was a track running over the apex of the lung -- I think he used the term bruising the apex of the lung and pointed to the middle line. I remember the area was open and he was pointing this out to us. I cannot recollect if I saw this area again after that information was known to him.
--------------------------------------------------------
Mr Canning independently concluded the trajectory of both jFK's wounds and JBC's wounds could be traced to the 6rh floor window of the SN.
Mr. CANNING. Well, I want to be sure that I am responding to your question. I am not saying that the bullet's travel itself was affected. What I am saying is that our interpretation of the data tells us that if we were to determine one trajectory based on the two pieces of information, one the Governor's wound, and the President's neck wound, that that will give us one line.
The other wound, the other wound pair in the President, will give us a second line. Those two lines do not coincide simply
because of experimental error. We cannot expect to make all of the myriad of measurements such as wound location, body position and limousine position with absolute perfection. Therefore we expect slightly different answers. The two trajectories should be close enough so that they fall within a reasonable error of one another, which is what we found.
Dr Canning? Mr. Canning is a Staff Engineer with NASA.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Did you need any information about the location of the limousine?
Mr. CANNING. We needed to know the location of the limousine, and we needed to know the location of the people in the limousine, and, in two cases we needed to know the actual angular orientation of the people in the limousine.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. At this time I would ask that the witness be shown what has been marked for identification as JFK No. F-146.
Mr. Canning, I would ask you to read that exhibit and to indicate whether the prerequisites necessary to determining the trajectory of these bullets are accurately summarized on this chart.
Mr. CANNING. Yes, those are precisely what one needs to do the job.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. Fine.
How was all of this information made available to you, sir?
Mr. CANNING. It was made available from a variety of sources. The forensic pathology panel supplied the wound information. The USGS survey map that we have on the right was another source, and then the photographic record made by the various amateur photographers in the plaza were used to supply most of the third.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. How many trajectories did you attempt to determine for the committee?
Mr. CANNING. Three.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. My understanding is, at least according to the present record, only two bullets struck the President and the Governor, one striking the Governor, two striking the President. Why is it that you determined three trajectories?
Mr. CANNING. We determined three trajectories in order to examine the validity of the single bullet theory that has received so much attention.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. What specific trajectories did you attempt to construct?
Mr. CANNING. A trajectory based on the two head wounds in the President, a second trajectory based on the two wounds, one in his upper back and the other near the center of his neck, and the third
trajectory was based on the hypothesis that the projectile which came out of Mr. Kennedy's neck passed into the back of Governor Connally.
======================
Dr Baden was one of 10 pathologists on a panel and relayed their conclusions.
------------------
Zapruder stated there was only two shots as did his assistant Marilyn Sitzman. Jiggle Analysis perfored on Zapruder indicated there was only two shots.
(e) Conclusion
81. 1. Two pronounced series of jiggles or blurs on the Zapruder film, one during frames 189-197, a time when other visual evidence suggests that President, Kennedy was first shot, (30) and another during the following impact of the head shot, may reasonably be attributed to the photographer's startle reaction to the sound of gunshots.
