Forward And Back And To The Left

[Dan O'meara]

LOL. For someone that admits they don't know anything about ballistics, forensics and physics you sure seem to know a lot about how wrong and crazy I am. You need to learn how to recognize nonsense before you can dismiss it. Otherwise, your critique is of very limited value. But go ahead and print it out and post it on your fridge. That one's a keeper.

Really?
So you're sticking to your explanation - the initial forward head motion is caused by a shot from the front that causes a blowout at the back and the jet effect from that blowout causes the forward motion.
How much ballistics, forensics and physics do I need to know to call that out for the nonsense it is?
From your explanation it's possible to assess exactly how much ballistics, forensics and physics you know.

[Jack Trojan]

Really?
So you're sticking to your explanation - the initial forward head motion is caused by a shot from the front that causes a blowout at the back and the jet effect from that blowout causes the forward motion.
How much ballistics, forensics and physics do I need to know to call that out for the nonsense it is?
From your explanation it's possible to assess exactly how much ballistics, forensics and physics you know.

I gave you a possible explanation since frangible bullets cause the jet effect when they blow out holes in your head. Unlike you, I do research before I call something nonsense. Maybe if you did the same all this stuff wouldn't seem so ridiculous to you.

I'm not even acknowledging that JFK's head moved forward at all. There is too much camera motion during the headshot at Z313 to get a reliable relative measurement. I noticed this when I stabilized the Z film 7 years ago and created a 3D anaglyph video (you need red/blue(cyan) glasses to see the 3D). When you stabilize the film you are essentially measuring the camera motion.

At any rate, the movement of the head does not necessarily conflate with the direction a bullet strikes the skull, especially if it's a frangible bullet exploding in your head. Comprende?

[Dan O'meara]

I gave you a possible explanation since frangible bullets cause the jet effect when they blow out holes in your head. Unlike you, I do research before I call something nonsense. Maybe if you did the same all this stuff wouldn't seem so ridiculous to you.

I'm not even acknowledging that JFK's head moved forward at all. There is too much camera motion during the headshot at Z313 to get a reliable relative measurement. I noticed this when I stabilized the Z film 7 years ago and created a 3D anaglyph video (you need red/blue(cyan) glasses to see the 3D). When you stabilize the film you are essentially measuring the camera motion.

At any rate, the movement of the head does not necessarily conflate with the direction a bullet strikes the skull, especially if it's a frangible bullet exploding in your head. Comprende?

"Unlike you, I do research before I call something nonsense..."

So this is what you're saying -

A bullet crashes through the front/side of JFK's skull causing a force moving his head backwards.
The bullet (or fragments of bullet) travel through JFK's brain until they reach the inside of the back of JFK's skull.
The bullet/fragments pass through JFK's skull at the back - another force causing JFK's head to move backwards.
This blowout at the back creates a Jet Effect which moves JFK's head forward.

Please let me know if I've got anything wrong here.

[Dan O'meara]

It's hardly surprising no-one, especially the Tinfoil Brigade, wants to touch this as the initial head movement at the moment of impact is forward and can only reasonably be explained by a shot from behind.
Just as important is the fact there is no "blowout" at the back of JFK's head shown in the Z-film but this is brushed off as an alteration to the film as if this was no big deal, as if there was plenty of time to make such a sophisticated alteration. There was no alteration to the film.
This Gif, created by John Mytton I believe, also demonstrates there was no blowout at the back of the head:



Of course, all the autopsy photos/x-rays were faked as well.
Try to imagine the thousands of papers, articles, books etc., written specifically to demonstrate this fakery.
It is my contention that all this wasted effort has emanated from a misunderstanding of the "back and to the left" motion.

[Dan O'meara]

I know zero about guns and ammunition but, as far as I can see, both the bullets that cause the wounds to JFK and JBC fragment. IMO CE399 has got absolutely nothing to do with the actual assassination.

I believe there is evidence the bullet that strikes JFK's head fragments and causes the damage to the windscreen and metal trim of the limo.

Hi Dan, It's a shame that you know nothing about guns and ammo......  But I believe that you are a bright guy, who understands physics. 

So I'm sure that you can understand that a missile like an arrow has much greater penetrating ability than a bowling ball traveling at the same speed.  The Bowling ball will impact a target ( cardboard box for example) with far greater energy than the arrow, but the  arrow will easily pass through the box whereas the bowling ball will not.

The point being.....The dent on the chrome molding above the rear view mirror was created by a slow moving projectile while the damage to JFK's head appears to have been caused by a high velocity projectile.   IOW ...   TWO different weapons .... And I believe the high velocity weapon was fired from in front of the Lincoln. ( one of the high velocity bullets hit JFK in the throat)

But I want to stress the point that the dent in the chrome molding appears to have been created by a slow moving heavy ( low velocity, subsonic) bullet. It definitely was NOT created by a light weight piece of a 6.5mm bullet.  The dent in he chrome appears to have been created by a 45 caliber bullet....( the diameter is the correct size)    It's no secret that the 45 caliber cartridge is not a high velocity cartridge, and the big heavy projectile ( .451" dia.  - 185 grain)  leaves the muzzle of the 45 pistol at near subsonic velocity so it is easily silenced with a muzzle muffler ( Silencer) Therefore the discharge of a weapon equipped with a silencer would be inaudible.  The big slow moving .45 caliber bullet has poor penetrating ability ( like the bowling ball) but it packs one hell of a wallop!....

Bottom line....The dent in the chrome molding was created by a silencer equipped .45 caliber weapon, fired from behind.

Although I know nothing about guns and ammunition, I don't buy any of this.

IMO the dent in the chrome and the crack in the windshield were caused at the same time.
In his WC testimony, Roy Kellerman describes a 'flurry of shells' coming into the limo:

"So, in the same motion I come right back and grabbed the speaker and said to the driver, "Let's get out of here; we are hit," and grabbed the mike and I said, "Lawson, this is Kellerman,"--this is Lawson, who is in the front car. "We are hit; get us to the hospital immediately." Now, in the seconds that I talked just now, a flurry of shells come into the car. "

After hearing the first shot Kellerman turns round and sees JFK is hit. He turns, grabs the mike and tells Greer to get them out of there. It is during this very brief period of time (less than two seconds) the 'flurry of shells' comes into the car. It is no coincidence that at exactly the same moment the headshot occurs.
I believe this bullet hits JFK from behind and causes his head to move forward (as we see in the OP of this thread), at which point the bullet fragments and it is these fragments of bullet flying into the windshield and chrome strip that Kellerman describes as a 'flurry of shells'. The clip below shows this moment, notice the reaction of the two men up front to the fragments peppering the front of the limo.

[Zeon Mason]

My only question is if it’s reasonably probable that 6.5 ball nosed MC bullet  will shatter up to 9 pieces when striking a human skull at nearly tangential to the upper curve area of the rear skull,  at range of 90 yds and 2000 ft/sec velocity approx.

[Dan O'meara]

My only question is if it’s reasonably probable that 6.5 ball nosed MC bullet  will shatter up to 9 pieces when striking a human skull at nearly tangential to the upper curve area of the rear skull,  at range of 90 yds and 2000 ft/sec velocity approx.

Really good question. In the opening clip below we see the initial movement JFK's head is forward. We also see the top of his head exploding upwards leaving a large 'crater' where the top of his head was. Part of the scalp, ripped from the top of his head, hangs down by the side of his head:





The destruction to the top of JFK's head is confirmed by the Mytton Gif:



So, can a single bullet cause such devastation? At first I didn't believe so but after reading chapter 16 of the Pat Speer website (http://www.patspeer.com/), I became convinced it could.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

It's hardly surprising no-one, especially the Tinfoil Brigade, wants to touch this as the initial head movement at the moment of impact is forward and can only reasonably be explained by a shot from behind.
Just as important is the fact there is no "blowout" at the back of JFK's head shown in the Z-film but this is brushed off as an alteration to the film as if this was no big deal, as if there was plenty of time to make such a sophisticated alteration. There was no alteration to the film.
This Gif, created by John Mytton I believe, also demonstrates there was no blowout at the back of the head:



Of course, all the autopsy photos/x-rays were faked as well.
Try to imagine the thousands of papers, articles, books etc., written specifically to demonstrate this fakery.
It is my contention that all this wasted effort has emanated from a misunderstanding of the "back and to the left" motion.

Yes. You've aptly summarized what is being proposed.

Look again at the clip. There is no exit wound coming out of the back of JFK's head. None. There is no blood or brain matter exiting backwards. The back of his head is intact. As is shown in the x-rays and autopsy photos. It's why they order autopsies and don't rely on eyewitness accounts.

The witnesses who say they saw a exit wound in the back were simply wrong about its location.