The thigh wound: How many bullets struck Governor Connally?

[Andrew Mason]

My analysis of the Croft photo shows Connally's much of right shoulder was to the left of Kennedy's midline. See in the photo how much larger Jackie's head is than Kennedy's, and that Connally's head is a little bigger than JFK? That's because they're closer in space to Croft than is the President. The model reflects the position of Kennedy and Connally in terms of where their heads are. The head positions in the model also relate perfectly to where their heads are recorded in the Altgens photo on Houston.

What I would like to see is how your images look from the vantage point of Zapruder.  One sees in the Zfilm that the heads of JFK and Roy Kellerman seem to align in a straight line parallel to the car side and JBC's is slightly inside that line (see zframe 189 as well as 193, both of which are reasonably clear).

Also, you have JFK's elbow quite far forward which seems unnatural. I don't see the upper arm pointing that much forward in the zfilm.  The elbow is farther back. The way you have it, his elbow is about the same elevation as his right shoulder.  The shoulder is much higher as seen in z193.  This necessarily puts the side of JFK's torso farther inside than you have him.

You also seem to have JBC's jump seat quite far to the left.  What is the distance you are using between the edge of the jump seat and the right inside door panel?

My model for Z195 shows Connally inboard of Kennedy. Do you have any of your own 3D work of comparable quality?

You do great 3D images, Jerry.  I wish I had the time to learn how to do it as well as you do.

You're not referring to your "FAIL" use of muddy frames from the 1963 SS reenactment film? They were so muddy, you thought the car was a convertible five-feet shorter than the model seen in the SS film.

It doesn't matter what the length of the car is.  What matters is where JFK is positioned.

[Mitch Todd]

You are right that Gregory did not go quite as far as Shires and did not say that the fragment was in the femur.  But Gregory did say that xrays showed that a fragment was lying close to the femur (6H99):

"Mr. SPECTER. What did the X-rays reveal with respect to the presence of a missile?
Dr. GREGORY. In the thigh there was a very small shadow, perhaps 1 mm. by 2 mm. in dimension, lying close to the medial aspect of the femur, that is, the thigh bone, but was in my opinion much too small to have accounted for the dimensions of the wound on the medial aspect of his thigh or a wound of that character."
Shires said that the fragment was in the femur (6H106):

"Dr. SHIRES. The wound on the thigh was a peculiar one. There was a 1 cm. punctate missile wound over the junction of the middle and lower third of the leg and the medial aspect of the thigh. The peculiarity came in that the X-rays of the left leg showed only a very small 1 mm. bullet fragment imbedded in the femur of the left leg. Upon exploration of this wound, the other peculiarity was that there was very little soft tissue damage, less than one would expect from an entrance wound of a centimeter in diameter, which was seen on the skin. So, it appeared, therefore, that the skin wound was either a tangential wound or that a larger fragment had penetrated or stopped in the skin and had subsequently fallen out of the entrance wound."

In Shires' medical report he says (CE392, 17H535) :

"X-rays of the thigh and leg revealed a bullet fragment which was imbedded in the body of the femur in the distal third."

They were looking at these same xrays, presumably:


Those xrays are certainly consistent with the fragment being embedded in the femur and the condition of CE399 indicates that the butt end struck something hard enough to dent it.  It is consistent with some kind of sudden impact causing the bullet to dent and to shed a fragment.  Dr. Shires explored the bullet tract down to the region of the femur and did not find the fragment in the tissue.
Perhaps you can explain how an "artifact" or defect in the film can occur at different locations on two films and yet at the exact same location relative to the bone. The top yellow line in the above photo is between the same points of the bone.  The lower yellow line is between the two marks that were identified as the fragment.  They are at the same location in the bone. 
No one is saying it is deep into the bone.  The xrays don't show that much information.  They really only show that it is very close to the bone and consistent with it being embedded on the surface of the bone.  But why would it be hard to believe that the butt end of the bullet struck the femur and left a lead fragment? Lead is relatively soft as a metal. The butt end struck something - enough to dent it.

So, am I correct in understanding then that if Shires was correct, you don't disagree that the thigh wound could have been made by a separate bullet?

If pigs could fly, bacon would be an Olympic shooting sport. A tasty, tasty, Olympic shooting sport.

What it boils down to is, Shires is standing on one side of the road. The other side of the road is occupied by every other physician who has examined the x-rays. I suspect that Shires is lonely out there all by himself, and it's commendably kind of you to go and hang out with him. While you two are out there, If you have time, we need a quick poll of the local chicken population as to motivation.