A time to receive and give (CE399)

[Martin Weidmann]

Check this website to see what Jean Davison thinks of Dr. Dolce, from an email (or letter) sent to someone named Willy:

https://jfkfacts.org/milicent-cranors-response-to-jean-davison/

So, it appears the bullets were

On Dr. Dolce:

So, it appears Dr. Dolce's expertise was as a medical doctor, with experience with treating bullet wounds, but not a ballistic expert on what bodies do to bullets. Only an expert on what bullets do to bodies.

Now, does anyone have any evidence that Jean Davison was wrong?

That the bullets in the Edgewood tests were not fired directly into "torsos" or "wrists".

That Dr. Dolce was not a medical doctor but a real ballistic expert, an expert on what bodies do to bullets?

Now, does anyone have any evidence that Jean Davison was wrong?

Not the way it works in the real world. When you make a claim you need to provide the evidence for it. Even if nobody can prove you're wrong that still doesn't mean you are right. So, instead of pulling the same old "prove me wrong" LN crap, why don't you provide the evidence that Davison was right.

In the meantime, this might be useful.

https://palmbeachpost.newspapers.com/clip/86888004/joseph-dolce-2/

[Joe Elliott]

When was the last time you had your eyes checked. The first bullet was far more damaged than CE399 and yes the second one could still roll but also had far more damage than CE399. Did you even watch the video?

Btw both bullets went through the "head"

Of course, it would have fragmented, if the model was similar enough to a real head, with "bones" between twice the density of water.

Or alternatively the bullet that fragmented in Kennedy's head wasn't a 6.5.

Irrelevant. We don't know WCC/MC bullets fragment in human heads when striking at a high speed (>= 1900 fps) just from the fragments found in the limousine. Let's ignore that evidence.

We know this just from ballistic tests. If a WCC/MC strikes bone at speeds at or over 1900 fps, it will fragment. Indeed, if it strikes any material with a density twice that of water, it will fragment.

And yet, a WCC/MC bullet, in the video, struck the Ballistic Dummy Labs "skull" and did not fragment.

The obvious explanation? The "bone" in these Ballistic Dummy Labs "skulls" do not have twice the density of water. Hence, they do not cause WCC/MC bullets to fragment. Hence, they are not very good models for a real human head. Regardless of what a Ballistic Dummy Labs sales brochures may say.

I knew in advance you were going to question the work done by Ballistic Dummy Labs. Too bad that anybody can look up their website and find out for themselves.

It's pretty obvious that you are stubbornly looking for anything, no matter how trivial, you can use to discredit information you don't like.

If you can find definitive information that shows differently, that Ballistic Dummy Labs "skulls" are good models of a human head, that the "bone" in these models have twice the density of water, just like human bones, let's hear it. Find us something on the Ballistic Dummy Labs website, or from some other source.

Now, let's test your knowledge of ballistics:

Question:

What is the highest velocity a WCC/MC bullet will NOT start to deform (the first stage of fragmentation) upon first striking human bone?

* 2000 fps ?

* 1500 fps ?

* 1000 fps ?

* 500 fps ?

* 0 fps, because a WCC/MC bullet will always fragment upon striking bone regardless of the speed?

If you don't know, then stop questioning the judgment of people like Larry SPersonivan who do know, from the systematic ballistic experiments they have run using WCC/MC bullets.

That is the source of my information. If you think his information is no good, then who does have this information?

[Joe Elliott]

Now, does anyone have any evidence that Jean Davison was wrong?

Not the way it works in the real world. When you make a claim you need to provide the evidence for it. Even if nobody can prove you're wrong that still doesn't mean you are right. So, instead of pulling the same old "prove me wrong" LN crap, why don't you provide the evidence that Davison was right.

Evidence? I suppose none. Since the Edgewood people did not record their experiments on film.

But we have various people, like Jean Davison, who claim the Edgewood people fired their rifles directly into "torsos" and "wrists". And none who say otherwise.

And we have experiments conducted by Luke and Michael Haag, and other experiments involving Larry SPersonivan show, time and time again, that WCC bullets fired directly into bones do fragment (like in the Edgewood experiments), but the same bullets slowed down, just a modest amount, like by six inches of ballistic gel, do not fragment nor become greatly deformed. Much like CE-399.

So, we don't have to rely on the Edgewood experiment, which I think is flawed because the bullets were fired directly into the targets, and which you think is flawed (if you are rational) because you basically say we don't know if the rifles were fired directly fired into the targets, or the bullets were first slowed down some how.

We can rely on experiments that are recorded on film, like that shown on the NOVA program with Luke and Michael Haag. But that is no good to you because it doesn't give the answer you want. So you insist on using the Edgewood experiment, which resulted in greatly deformed bullets, but the details on those experiments are disputed, but seem to be that the rifles were fired directly into the targets, making them invalid for judging if CE-399 is valid evidence.

In the meantime, this might be useful.

https://palmbeachpost.newspapers.com/clip/86888004/joseph-dolce-2/

This is helpful. It conforms that Dr. Dolce was a medical doctor. Not a real ballistic expert.

I think the confusion comes form the term "ballistic expert" There are two types of "ballistic experts".

1. Medical doctors. Who determine what a bullet can do to a human body.

2. Real Ballistic Experts. Who determine what a human body can do to a bullet.

Dr. Dolce's opinion on the SBT was based on the condition of CE-399. He didn't think the human body can do this to a WCC/MCbullet.

This opinion is totally out his field of expertise. It would be as if Dr. Dolce determined that a murder victim died from an excessive loss of blood and Ballistic Expert Luke Haag, said no, the victim died from shock.

[Martin Weidmann]

Irrelevant. We don't know WCC/MC bullets fragment in human heads when striking at a high speed (>= 1900 fps) just from the fragments found in the limousine. Let's ignore that evidence.

We know this just from ballistic tests. If a WCC/MC strikes bone at speeds at or over 1900 fps, it will fragment. Indeed, if it strikes any material with a density twice that of water, it will fragment.

And yet, a WCC/MC bullet, in the video, struck the Ballistic Dummy Labs "skull" and did not fragment.

The obvious explanation? The "bone" in these Ballistic Dummy Labs "skulls" do not have twice the density of water. Hence, they do not cause WCC/MC bullets to fragment. Hence, they are not very good models for a real human head. Regardless of what a Ballistic Dummy Labs sales brochures may say.

The "obvious explanation"? Really? What about the most self-serving explanation? And as for Ballistic Dummy Labs, I understand they are one of the main suppliers in the country of dummies for all sorts of ballistic experts. That should tell you something, but it probably doesn't. I don't need to defend them because you've got nothing but hot air to attack them with.

If you can find definitive information that shows differently, that Ballistic Dummy Labs "skulls" are good models of a human head, that the "bone" in these models have twice the density of water, just like human bones, let's hear it. Find us something on the Ballistic Dummy Labs website, or from some other source.

Now, let's test your knowledge of ballistics:

Question:

What is the highest velocity a WCC/MC bullet will NOT start to deform (the first stage of fragmentation) upon first striking human bone?

* 2000 fps ?

* 1500 fps ?

* 1000 fps ?

* 500 fps ?

* 0 fps, because a WCC/MC bullet will always fragment upon striking bone regardless of the speed?

If you don't know, then stop questioning the judgment of people like Larry SPersonivan who do know, from the systematic ballistic experiments they have run using WCC/MC bullets.

To answer your question; I don't know because, just like you, I'm not an expert and I don't pretend to be one. And when did I question the judgment of Larry SPersonivan? Never! I don't know the man or his background and I haven't read his book, so what is there for me to question. What I do question is your ability to understand this stuff and reach sound conclusions. Just reading his book somehow makes you an expert? Really? Pathetic.

If anybody questions the judgment of an actual expert it's you. You are the one who was badmouthing Joseph Dolce in every way possible, questioning his credentials and his wide range of experience for one reason only; you did not like what he said. First you claimed that he never was given the original MC rifle and 100 bullets. When that didn't work you started to attack him personally. Because you read something in SPersonivan's book, you suddenly decided that Dolce did the tests wrong, despite the fact that you don't even know what he did, because you refused to read his report. Then, when you were show an unbiased factual video of MC bullets being fired through a skull into water and coming out more damaged than CE399 is, you started to claim that the skulls were not up to par and trash one of the leading suppliers of ballistic materials. So, if anybody is judgmental about anything it's you.

And there is something you completely overlooked when you claimed Dolce was incompetent. And that is that the WC put him in charge of a team of experts doing the tests. So, now you have to start attacking those guys as well..... Have fun!

That is the source of my information. If you think his information is no good, then who does have this information?

I can not judge of SPersonivan's information is any good or not and neither can you. All I can say is that Dolce and his team were hired by the WC to do the tests and when the WC got their report they buried it and Dolce's testimony. So much for an honest fact finding investigation. To the best of my knowledge Dolce and his team are the only ones who actually conducted tests with the original weapon! Everybody else has only theories!

[Martin Weidmann]

Evidence? I suppose none. Since the Edgewood people did not record their experiments on film.

But we have various people, like Jean Davison, who claim the Edgewood people fired their rifles directly into "torsos" and "wrists". And none who say otherwise.

And just because nobody said otherwise, that makes it true? Really?  Let me ask you this; if the Edgewood team didn't record their experiments on film, how did Jean Davison (and others) know what they did or did not do?

And we have experiments conducted by Luke and Michael Haag, and other experiments involving Larry SPersonivan show, time and time again, that WCC bullets fired directly into bones do fragment (like in the Edgewood experiments), but the same bullets slowed down, just a modest amount, like by six inches of ballistic gel, do not fragment nor become greatly deformed. Much like CE-399.

So, we don't have to rely on the Edgewood experiment, which I think is flawed because the bullets were fired directly into the targets, and which you think is flawed (if you are rational) because you basically say we don't know if the rifles were fired directly fired into the targets, or the bullets were first slowed down some how.

We can rely on experiments that are recorded on film, like that shown on the NOVA program with Luke and Michael Haag. But that is no good to you because it doesn't give the answer you want. So you insist on using the Edgewood experiment, which resulted in greatly deformed bullets, but the details on those experiments are disputed, but seem to be that the rifles were fired directly into the targets, making them invalid for judging if CE-399 is valid evidence.

We can rely on experiments that are recorded on film,

Really? Just not on the experiments recorded on video by a guy who fired through a skull and into water bottles, right? You keep saying that the Edgewood experiment is flawed but you haven't presented a shred of evidence for that claim.

like that shown on the NOVA program with Luke and Michael Haag. But that is no good to you because it doesn't give the answer you want.

Where did I say any of this. I have been aware of the conclusions of Haag for some time. It's nothing new. In fact, it's just one opinion that means very little unless they used actual human bone. Because that needs to be used to get the right results, right? Well, did they?

So you insist on using the Edgewood experiment, which resulted in greatly deformed bullets,

Did I say that? Where exactly? All I said is what Dolce said on video. But, let's stay accurate; it resulted in 100 greatly deformed bullets! Not a single bullet came even close to looking like CE399.

but the details on those experiments are disputed,

Only by people like yourself, who don't like the result.

You sound like Trump saying that he 2020 elections result is disputed, when in fact he is the only one doing the disputing.

but seem to be that the rifles were fired directly into the targets, making them invalid for judging if CE-399 is valid evidence.

Seem to be? You wouldn't have to speculate anymore if you read their report. So why don't you?

One more comment; at least Dolce and his team used real animal bone for their experiments, unlike the Haag team who merely fired a bullet through a block of gel.

This is helpful. It conforms that Dr. Dolce was a medical doctor. Not a real ballistic expert.

I think the confusion comes form the term "ballistic expert" There are two types of "ballistic experts".

1. Medical doctors. Who determine what a bullet can do to a human body.

2. Real Ballistic Experts. Who determine what a human body can do to a bullet.

Dr. Dolce's opinion on the SBT was based on the condition of CE-399. He didn't think the human body can do this to a WCC/MCbullet.

This opinion is totally out his field of expertise. It would be as if Dr. Dolce determined that a murder victim died from an excessive loss of blood and Ballistic Expert Luke Haag, said no, the victim died from shock.

Oh please, give me a break. You really need to stop with this "real ballistic expert" crap. It's total BS and you know it. Dolce was a little bit more than just a medical doctor. But I can understand your desperate need to play down his credentials. The fact remains - and there is no way you can get around this - that the WC hired him, as the US Army’s most senior expert in wound ballistics and they had good reason to do so. The self-serving opinion of a narrowminded man behind a computer keyboard doesn't alter that one bit. 

Btw, you can attack Dolce as much as you like, but the report that was submitted to the WC was the opinion of a team of experts! Let's not overlook that! That the WC buried the report tells us all we need to know about their agenda.

Two more questions; (1) Unless Jean Davison was a bonafide expert on ballistics, which I don't believe she was, why would her opinion on this subject be of any significant value? And (2), how can you describe Larry SPersonivan as a "real ballistic expert" when he calls himself a research physical scientist in his HSCA testimony? When asked, he told the HSSCA that he studies the behavior of bullets and the effect they have on a human body. That sounds very much like what you called above a "medical doctor", wouldn't you say?

[Joe Elliott]

To answer your question; I don't know because, just like you, I'm not an expert and I don't pretend to be one. And when did I question the judgment of Larry SPersonivan? Never! I don't know the man or his background and I haven't read his book, so what is there for me to question. What I do question is your ability to understand this stuff and reach sound conclusions. Just reading his book somehow makes you an expert? Really? Pathetic.

You can make the same criticism about anyone who posts here. Like, one can say:

"Reading the Warren Report, or the Edgewood Report, or the Autopsy Reports, is that supposed to make you can expert?"

No, I am not an expert. But I do choose quality sources. Dr. Joseph Dolce is not a bad source because he thinks CE-399 thinks it could not have caused the wounds. He is a bad source because he was not a ballistic expert. He was a medical doctor, who worked with the Edgewood Arsenal. But not a ballistic expert. His opinion on CE-399 was no more valid that that of a janitor who worked at the facility.

On the question of "Could CE-399" have wounded JFK and Connally, you need to access real ballistic experts. You need to answer basic questions, like "What is the minimum velocity needed to deform a WCC/MC?" If you don't know it's 1400 to 1700 fps, it's real hard to say. You're just guessing, like Dr. Dolce. You don't need to become an expert, but you should at least read books or reports from real ballistic experts. But you have no need to do that. You think you already know.

A medical doctor (Dr. Joseph Dolce), who was a consultant with the Edgewood Arsenal, is not a ballistic expert. An expert is one who conducts scientific tests, with WCC/MC bullets, to learn what can and cannot happen to bullets. And does so in an appropriate way, like test the SBT by including a "neck" in the bullet path to account for the effects of JFK's neck on a bullet.

Question:

Why can't you find a real ballistic expert who disputes CE-399?

[Martin Weidmann]

You can make the same criticism about anyone who posts here. Like, one can say:

"Reading the Warren Report, or the Edgewood Report, or the Autopsy Reports, is that supposed to make you can expert?"

No, I am not an expert. But I do choose quality sources. Dr. Joseph Dolce is not a bad source because he thinks CE-399 thinks it could not have caused the wounds. He is a bad source because he was not a ballistic expert. He was a medical doctor, who worked with the Edgewood Arsenal. But not a ballistic expert. His opinion on CE-399 was no more valid that that of a janitor who worked at the facility.

On the question of "Could CE-399" have wounded JFK and Connally, you need to access real ballistic experts. You need to answer basic questions, like "What is the minimum velocity needed to deform a WCC/MC?" If you don't know it's 1400 to 1700 fps, it's real hard to say. You're just guessing, like Dr. Dolce. You don't need to become an expert, but you should at least read books or reports from real ballistic experts. But you have no need to do that. You think you already know.

A medical doctor (Dr. Joseph Dolce), who was a consultant with the Edgewood Arsenal, is not a ballistic expert. An expert is one who conducts scientific tests, with WCC/MC bullets, to learn what can and cannot happen to bullets. And does so in an appropriate way, like test the SBT by including a "neck" in the bullet path to account for the effects of JFK's neck on a bullet.

Question:

Why can't you find a real ballistic expert who disputes CE-399?

Why can't you find a real ballistic expert who disputes CE-399?

That's easy. I simply haven't looked for one. Unlike you, I am not in the habit of looking for experts who say what I want to hear. Besides, your question is once again a loaded one, because who ever I would name you would simply dismiss as not a "real ballistic expert", just like you did with Joseph Dolce, despite the fact that he and his team were the only ones who used the original rifle and fired bullets at actual bones. I'm simply not playing your utterly dishonest game.

For me, the far more important take away is not that the bullet could have gone through two bodies - as Haas claims, based on experiments where he only fires bullets through gel and does not use bone, human or otherwise - but the fact that the WC buried the report of Dolce and his team when it didn't confirm Specter's theory. That's what a really unbiased commission would do, right?   

I have already explained why your entire "real ballistics expert" nonsense is utter BS.

Jean Davison is not an ballistics expert which makes her basically nothing more than another person with an opinion.

Larry SPersonivan is, by your own definition, not a "real ballistic expert" because he called himself a research physical scientist in his HSCA testimony. He studied the behavior of bullets and the effect they have on a human body, which is what your definition would call a medical doctor.

And the Haas team set out to prove that CE399 could have gone through two bodies and come out nearly pristine. But in their tests, shown in the PBS/Nova show, they only fired bullets through blocks of gel and they did not use human bone or anything that comes close to it. And even then, all they could say is that they believe the bullet could have come out nearly pristine, which is hardly conclusive.

A "could have" may be good enough for you, but for me it is meaningless. Show me a "real ballistics expert" that can conclusively show that the bullet did in fact go through Kennedy and Connally and then we'll have something to talk about.

You can make the same criticism about anyone who posts here. Like, one can say:

"Reading the Warren Report, or the Edgewood Report, or the Autopsy Reports, is that supposed to make you can expert?"

The answer is; no.

No, I am not an expert. But I do choose quality sources.

This is just plain stupid. When you are not an expert, how in the world can you determine a "quality source"?
The answer is of course that you can't, so what you really do is consider anybody who supports your point of view to be a "quality source".

[Mike Orr]

CE 399 is still in John Connallys left thigh because as far as we know what's left of CE 399 was never removed from Connallys thigh . the conundrum of CE 399 is that there can't be " 2 " CE 399 bullets . Dr. Shaw at a press conference said that the bullet was still in John Connallys left thigh and would be removed later . We know there were some fragments in the wrist and of course the bullet broke ribs but it was still said that CE 399 was not damaged enough to have caused all this damage . Let's be honest , we have not seen the bullet that ended up in Connallys thigh because the bullet went with Connally to his grave .