A time to receive and give (CE399)

[Martin Weidmann]

It’s the only alternative that Joe can think of to the WC fiction.

Indeed. He seems to think that in a conspiracy every individual player needs to be a willing participant who knows the entire plan and goes along with it.

[Jack Trojan]

I don't think the original MC rifle ever fired 100 bullets after the assassination. My impression was it was fired as little as possible, maybe a dozen times, to ensure it was preserved. And didn't break it's firing pin.

The point was that none of the bullets fired looked like CE399. Clearly CE399 was the most damaged bullet fired into and retrieved from a swimming pool, otherwise it would have been smashed and covered with DNA.

As far as I know, Joseph Dolce's one test, was to fire a MC rifle directly into the wrist of a human cadaver at near muzzle velocity. Naturally, this would smash, even fragment (I expect) a WCC/MC bullet.

Joseph Dolce may have been a leading US Army ballistic expert. But he did not have extensive experience in criminal cases, where getting the details right is critical.

Question: Can you give me a single example, where in a criminal court of law, Joseph Dolce was called upon to give expert ballistic testimony?

You see, this is the sort of expert I'm looking for. One with extensive experience shooting a ballistic gel targets. Where one can actually see the path of a bullet and judge what it actually hit. Did the bullet strike bone? One cannot tell with animal cadavers. But one can tell with with ballistic gel, which is transparent. And whose expertise is trusted enough to be used in court.

You sound like a defense lawyer trying to discredit testimony you don't like.

Did CE 399 pass through and break Connally's wrist bone? Yes. Was it fired directly into a wrist bone, as "ballistic expert" ?!? Joseph Dolce recreated? No. What did CE 399 do?

The bullet traveled about 63 years yards.

Let's go with the WCR:

The magic bullet arced very slightly while traveling 189 ft (58 m) in a downward net angle of 19 degrees (allowing for the 3 degrees downward slope of Elm Street), after an initial supersonic rifle exit muzzle velocity of 1,850 to 2,000 feet per second (560 to 610 m/s), then entered President Kennedy's rear suit coat at about 1,700 feet per second (520 m/s)

Passed through the back of JFK's clothes.
Passed through the skin of the back of the neck of JFK.
Note: Both skin (and I assume clothes) are tough and would slow a bullet more than normal tissue. A tenth of an inch of skin slows a bullet the same as about two inches of muscle)
Passed through the skin of the front of the neck of JFK.
Passed through the clothes of JFK in front of his neck.

Clothes, skin and muscle do not appreciably slow down or deflect a full metal jacketed bullet shot with a muzzle velocity of 2000 fps.

Passed through six inches of JFK's neck without directly striking any bone.

Impossible. If JFK's backwound is connected to the throat wound, as you claim, then the bullet must pass thru bone.

Here is an overhead of the magic bullet’s trajectory thru JFK relative to the TSBD. It must have passed thru a vertebrae.
http://www.kohlbstudio.com/images/MRI_MB_T1_8b.png

JFK's alleged x-ray shows the magic bullet striking the T1 vertebrae, which would have smashed the MB.
http://www.kohlbstudio.com/images/x-ray_mb.gif

Started passing through Connally's, apparently somewhat sideways, judging from the shape of the entrance wound. While travelling sideways the bullet would decelerate at a much greater rate than before.

If the exit wound was a small hole in JFK's throat, the magic bullet wasn't tumbling as it struck Connally's 5th rib since there wasn't enough distance between JFK and Connally to tumble.

Now the bullet would be decelerating at three to five times it's former rate, due to it's much larger cross section.

A tumbling bullet's cross section has nothing to do with deacceleration over such a short distance.

Passed through the back of Connally's clothes.
Passed through the skin on the back of Connally.
Passed through an unknown (by me) amount of flesh, maybe one inch or so.

And then, finally, for the first time, directly striking bone, a rib bone of Connally.

Only bone (at anything less than muzzle velocity) can smash, damage, fragment, a WCC/MC bullet. And only if the bullet is still travelling fast enough, 1700 fps (travelling point first) or 1400 fps (travelling sideways), SPersonivan's estimates.

By the time the bullet reached the rib, it was travelling at (Larry SPersonivan's estimate) at about 1400 fps, just fast enough to slightly damage the bullet. And only because it was travelling sideways. Had the bullet still been travelling point first, it would not have been damaged at all.

The MB's trajectory from the TSBD goes thru JFK's T1 vertebrae yet exited cleanly thru a small hole in the throat in pristine condition. This meant it wasn't tumbling when it exited JFK and had not smashed thru bone. This irreconcilable contradiction is compounded by the MB continuing to smash thru Connally's 5th rib then into his wrist bone and was found on the wrong gurney in swimming pool condition. You do the math counsellor.

Note, I am, of course not a ballistic expert. I have just read a book by one, Larry SPersonivan's book "The JFK Myths". But SPersonivan's estimates sound plausible. The bullet passed through about 18 to 20 inches of flesh and bone, total. It first struck JFK at about 2000 fps. It had passed through about 7 inches of flesh when it first directly struck bone, Connally's rib and was still going 1400 fps. In the next 11 inches of bone and flesh, it slowed to 0 fps. All estimates of speed are SPersonivan's estimates. This sounds quite plausible. After travelling about a third of it's way through human bodies, the bullet only had about two thirds of it's speed left.

You can convince yourself that the MB was impossible using some photogrammetry and a simple reenactment:
Get in between 2 lasers aimed at each other at a 17 degree angle and note where each laser strikes your body and do whatever it takes to match JFK's autopsy photos of the alleged exit and entrance wounds. I couldn't do it, maybe you can.
www.kohlbstudio.com/images/JFK_2lasers.png

Your right. This is perfectly possible. The conspirators could totally control all the evidence. If one believed that Large-Secret-Conspiracies are not highly improbable.

The problem is that I don't believe that Large-Secret-Conspiracies are at all likely. That one can easily get everyone on board. And hide the evidence of a James Tague being wounded. And possibly others, in a worst cast scenario, like if Mrs. Kennedy, or Mrs. Connally or any Secret Service Agents are wounded. And get all the Secret Service agents to help plant false evidence. And all the autopsy doctors to eagerly join in. And all the rest of them.

If one believes in Large-Secret-Conspiracies, the conspiracy you described to control all the evidence is quite plausible. But to a skeptic, it's a very tough sell.

Skeptics are consistent. We are skeptical of all Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracies. And have been for centuries. Like the alleged conspiracies of:

The Freemasons
The Elders of Zion
U. S. Government / Space Aliens collaborations
The Fake Apollo Moon Landings
Fake 9/11 hijacking and building demolitions
Massive Vote fraud in the 2020 U. S. election

and yes, the:

U. S. Government extensive involvement in the JFK assassination.

This 'technique' of skeptics is useful, because Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracies are inherently fascinating to people and a surprising large number of false theories are Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracy theories. If you can recognize these, you can steer yourself away from a lot of false theories. Not all, but a lot.

Skeptics are consistently on the rational side.

Skeptics yes, scoftics no. But what you scoftics fail to explain are all the inconsistencies and contradictions associated with the LN hypothesis, which is a house of cards that toppled long ago. Nothing but endless excuse making remains from the diehard LNers. However, it is the LN hypothesis that is the nutbar conspiracy theory. It only takes 1 inescapable fact supporting a conspiracy that destroys decades of LN apologizing and excuse making. If you reenact the MB with 2 lasers, you can only come to 1 conclusion. But it appears the truth isn't what LNers are looking for.

[Martin Weidmann]

I see you added this to your post after I answered it. So, I'll reply to it now.

Skeptics are consistent. We are skeptical of all Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracies. And have been for centuries. Like the alleged conspiracies of:

The Freemasons
The Elders of Zion
U. S. Government / Space Aliens collaborations
The Fake Apollo Moon Landings
Fake 9/11 hijacking and building demolitions
Massive Vote fraud in the 2020 U. S. election

and yes, the:

U. S. Government extensive involvement in the JFK assassination.

This 'technique' of skeptics is useful, because Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracies are inherently fascinating to people and a surprising large number of false theories are Large-Secret-Enduring Conspiracy theories. If you can recognize these, you can steer yourself away from a lot of false theories. Not all, but a lot.

Skeptics are consistently on the rational side.

Freemasons do exist (don't ask me how I know, but I do) but I am clueless about what kind of conspiracy you are talking about involving them.

I am not only skeptical about;

The Elders of Zion
U. S. Government / Space Aliens collaborations
The Fake Apollo Moon Landings
Fake 9/11 hijacking and building demolitions
Massive Vote fraud in the 2020 U. S. election

I just don't believe any of those conspiracy theories nor do I believe the world is flat.

That only leaves the JFK case and there I am also skeptical, but mainly about the offical narrative. I do think it's possible there was a conspiracy but if there was one, it wasn't a "Large-Secret-Enduring" one. In fact most of the evidence for such a conspiracy is IMO buried in the official narrative and the records at the National Archives. It's all a matter of interpretation.

The best lie is one that stays as close to the truth as possible. It's very possible that's exactly what happened here.

[Jon Banks]

I see you added this to your post after I answered it. So, I'll reply to it now.


Freemasons do exist (don't ask me how I know, but I do) but I am clueless about what kind of conspiracy you are talking about involving them.

I am not only skeptical about;

The Elders of Zion
U. S. Government / Space Aliens collaborations
The Fake Apollo Moon Landings
Fake 9/11 hijacking and building demolitions
Massive Vote fraud in the 2020 U. S. election

I just don't believe any of those conspiracy theories nor do I believe the world is flat.

That only leaves the JFK case and there I am also skeptical, but mainly about the offical narrative. I do think it's possible there was a conspiracy but if there was one, it wasn't a "Large-Secret-Enduring" one. In fact most of the evidence for such a conspiracy is IMO buried in the official narrative and the records at the National Archives. It's all a matter of interpretation.

The best lie is one that stays as close to the truth as possible. It's very possible that's exactly what happened here.

I'm right there with you.

I'm a HUGE skeptic most of the time when people share conspiracy theories with me. But a conspiracy in the JFK assassination seems plausible based on the evidence.

In the Kennedy assassination, people don't even need to speculate about "who" did it. One can simply conclude that there might've been a conspiracy based on the hard and circumstantial evidence.

There are a number of JFK assassination researchers who make plausible arguments on "why" there was a conspiracy without speculating about "who did it". Josiah Thompson is the first name that comes to mind but there are many others.

[Joe Elliott]

Well, perhaps you don't know the right ballistic experts. Why don't you name a few who say that CE399 could have caused the wounds of JFK and Connally?

1. Luke Haag

2. Michael G. Haag

a website about him is at:

https://forensicfirearms.com/

Below is an interview of Luke and Michael Haag:

3. Larry SPersonivan

Since when do you have to be a ballistics expert to determine if a bullet could have caused all the wounds. Seems more a question for a medical examiner to answer, which is of course why Specter asked Humes.

No, it's a question for a ballistic expert. Only a true ballistic expert can determine what shape a bullet may end up in after causing a certain number of wounds.

I'm not sure who you are talking about. And what do you mean by a "true ballistic expert"? Could that be one who says what you want to hear? It sure looks that way!

I will go over this, one more time.

The type of ballistic expert I'm talking about is:

1. Some one who does real world testing shooting at ballistic gel targets.

Only in that way can one have a hope of recreating a shot. Firing into animals is not too good, because you can't see through their bodies. It's hard to tell if any bones were hit.

I is difficult, in a case like CE 399, but one can attempt this with ballistic gel targets.

From 63 yards away shoot through:

a six inch ballistic block
a second block three three away with an array of ribs bones
a third block with an array of wrist bones
a fourth block

Difficult because the exact path of the bullet is hard to predict. It generally won't be a perfectly straight line.

This kind of testing can indicate the conditions where a bullet will be greatly deform from striking a bone, like if it is fired almost directly into the bone, striking the bone at very high speed
and the conditions where this will not happen, like when a bullet hits a bone after being slowed by several inches of ballistic gel.

I would like a ballistic expert to have extensive experience with these types of expertiments.

2. Has testified in criminal cases as a ballistic expert. Which shows that his knowledge is considered by the legal profession to be very high.

These are the ideal qualifications. Luke and Michael Haag meet both conditions. Larry SPersonivan meets qualification 1 but not 2, as far as I know.

I am not really interested in what you think or believe you know. Dolce is on video saying that he was given the original rifle and 100 bullets to conduct tests. Hear and see the man say it himself at 42.34.

I'm not an expert on all the minutia of this case. I was under the impression the rifle was not fired too many times. But it doesn't matter if the rifle was fired one hundred times, or one thousand times, or ten thousand times. Dolce seems to be saying he fired directly into dead animal torsos, directly into dead animal wrist (or equivalent) bones. No one denies this will greatly deform the bullet. The question is "What happens if the bullet is first slowed by something else, like JFK's neck?".

No where does Dolce say that he tried to account for this. No where does Dolce indicates that he is even aware of this problem, and needs to slow down the bullet to better replicate the Single Bullet Theory. You need to first slow down the bullet some, as JFK's neck would have done. If nothing else, you can make special bullets with less of a powered charge. Anything is better than simply firing the rifle almost directly into bone.

Dolce is not the ideal choice for three reasons:

1. He works for the Army. The Army is not interested in "Who done it?". So throughout his career, he wasn't doing the sort of experiments a regular ballistic expert would do, like Luke and Michael Haag.

2. He did not work with ballistic gel, where, with each firing test, you can see the path of the bullet and see which targets (bones) the bullet hit and which it missed.

3. But for all these disadvantages, it could have occurred to him that he needs to slow the bullet, as the 63 yards to the target, and the path through JFK's neck, would have done, before hitting a dead animals rib cage. But this never seems to have occurred to him. His biggest weakest, in my opinion, is that he did not think things through.

And yet, Dolce was the man picked by the WC to do the tests. Your argument that he did not have experience in criminal cases is invalid. Dolce saw plenty of gunshot wounds in WW2 and there is no difference whatsoever between a bullet striking a man in combat or a bullet striking a man during a crime. Dolce got the details exactly right, but they just were not what Arlen Specter wanted to hear, which is why Dolce's testimony and report were left out of the WC report.

This is an irrelevant question. I don't know enough about Dolce to say if he was ever called as an expert in a criminal proceeding. He was in the miitary and may well not have been allowed to be involved in crimimal cases. The bottom line is that the WC called upon him to do the work, which is exactly what he did. You second guessing his procedures is of no importance.

The WC might not have made a wise decision with Dolce. Specter and the other WC investigators were recent graduates from law school. Perhaps, with more experience, they would have picked someone else. And, in 1964, the science of ballistic investigation might not have been as advanced as it is today. I don't know if anyone was doing the sort of recreations that we can see Luke and Michael Haag did on the NOVA program.

[Joe Elliott]

Indeed. He seems to think that in a conspiracy every individual player needs to be a willing participant who knows the entire plan and goes along with it.

Well, they might all need to know the entire plan. But they all would have to go along with it. And you seemed to indicate that it didn't matter how much evidence had to be covered up, the conspirators controlled everything. They controlled everyone. It would be no problem.

[Martin Weidmann]

Well, they might all need to know the entire plan. But they all would have to go along with it. And you seemed to indicate that it didn't matter how much evidence had to be covered up, the conspirators controlled everything. They controlled everyone. It would be no problem.

Well, they might all need to know the entire plan. But they all would have to go along with it.

Go along with what? Be precise and please give an example.

For example, what would SA Frazier have to go along with when all that happened was that he was given a bullet and some fragments and told the latter came from the limo?

[Martin Weidmann]

You made a bit of a mess of your previous post, so I can't quote from it correctly. Instead I'll do it this way;

Well, perhaps you don't know the right ballistic experts. Why don't you name a few who say that CE399 could have caused the wounds of JFK and Connally?

1. Luke Haag
2. Michael G. Haag

a website about him is at:

https://forensicfirearms.com/

Below is an interview of Luke and Michael Haag:

3. Larry SPersonivan

I was aware of that video. All it tells me is that not all the experts agree.

So, let's have a look at another, recent, video

I don't think he is a ballistics expert but, as the video will show, he basically does the same thing as the Haag team said they did. Except - as he explains this in the video - he used a skull filled with gel and fake blood and containers with water to catch the bullet.

Something to consider. You said that the bullet went through Kennedy's neck meeting very little resistance but slowing it down nevertheless. Well, in this video the bullet does hit skull bone twice, going in an out of the head, and still had enough speed to destroy the first couple of water containers. Just look how it came out.

The destructive power of the bullet is perhaps best shown in the first attempt he used a skull. Two things stand out; (1) despite hitting bone the bullet completely destroyed the first water bottle and (2) unlike the bullet that hit Kennedy it did not disintegrate but I came out of the skull at the other side. This of course justifies the question if the bullet that hit Kennedy in the head was indeed a 6.5 MJ bullet.

Another thing I noticed was a comment he made that the bullet that allegedly came through Kennedy's neck and met very little resistance, left the body leaving only a small hole, which in turn would mean that the bullet wasn't yet tumbling. But, the story is that Connally was hit by a tumbling bullet. So, if that's true, when did the bullet start tumbling? It doesn't make sense!

I'm not an expert on all the minutia of this case. I was under the impression the rifle was not fired too many times. But it doesn't matter if the rifle was fired one hundred times, or one thousand times, or ten thousand times. Dolce seems to be saying he fired directly into dead animal torsos, directly into dead animal wrist (or equivalent) bones. No one denies this will greatly deform the bullet. The question is "What happens if the bullet is first slowed by something else, like JFK's neck?".

I'm not an expert on all the minutia of this case.

Then why are you expressing opinions about something you don't know about?

Dolce seems to be saying he fired directly into dead animal torsos, directly into dead animal wrist (or equivalent) bones.

"Seems to be saying"? You really need to read his report before you make such a comical claim. It's in the National Archives. Read it!

No where does Dolce say that he tried to account for this. No where does Dolce indicates that he is even aware of this problem, and needs to slow down the bullet to better replicate the Single Bullet Theory. You need to first slow down the bullet some, as JFK's neck would have done. If nothing else, you can make special bullets with less of a powered charge. Anything is better than simply firing the rifle almost directly into bone.

For crying out loud, what you saw was a short clip of a few seconds in a documentary. Do you really expect him to explain the entire procedure? You haven't got a clue about how the tests were done.
 

Dolce is not the ideal choice for three reasons:

1. He works for the Army. The Army is not interested in "Who done it?". So throughout his career, he wasn't doing the sort of experiments a regular ballistic expert would do, like Luke and Michael Haag.

2. He did not work with ballistic gel, where, with each firing test, you can see the path of the bullet and see which targets (bones) the bullet hit and which it missed.

3. But for all these disadvantages, it could have occurred to him that he needs to slow the bullet, as the 63 yards to the target, and the path through JFK's neck, would have done, before hitting a dead animals rib cage. But this never seems to have occurred to him. His biggest weakest, in my opinion, is that he did not think things through.

Amazing. You are throwing a guy under the bus who the WC hired for his credentials. The leading ballistics expert of the US army .... and why? For one reason only; you don't like what he has to say.

The WC might not have made a wise decision with Dolce. Specter and the other WC investigators were recent graduates from law school. Perhaps, with more experience, they would have picked someone else. And, in 1964, the science of ballistic investigation might not have been as advanced as it is today. I don't know if anyone was doing the sort of recreations that we can see Luke and Michael Haag did on the NOVA program.

And now you're also throwing the WC and Specter under the bus because they had not enough experience. Don't you see just how hilarious this is?

Face it, experts will always disagree with eachother. You see it happening in every courtroom. But the bottom line is that the WC hired Dolce (and a bunch of other experts) and they produced a report that basically said that none of the 100 bullets they fired came even close to looking as CE399, Specter not only did not call Dolce to testify but also buried the report. Now, what does that tell you about CE399?