The Shifting Single-Bullet Theory--It Always "Works" No Matter What

[Michael T. Griffith]

In another thread, a WC apologist argued that the conspiracy position is a constantly moving, shifting target, that it is "flexible enough to support whatever conclusion" is deemed suitable/necessary. Now, this is mighty strange criticism coming from someone who supports the magic bullet and the single-bullet theory (SBT). Consider:

-- At first the SBT required that Connally was rotated 20-30 degrees to the right when the missile struck, in order to make his back wound align with the magic bullet's trajectory from JFK's throat, but now we're assured the theory can still work even though many of the theory's defenders admit that Connally's torso was rotated only 10-15 degrees.

Of course, recently, Knott Laboratory, a forensic engineering and animation lab, proved that Connally's position and back wound make the SBT impossible. Knott Lab engineers did a laser test in Dealey Plaza, collecting millions of data points, and determined that the SBT is impossible because Connally's back wound does not and cannot align with a bullet fired from the sixth-floor window and exiting JFK's throat. Here's a video on the Knott Lab study:

Why the 'single bullet theory' in JFK assassination is impossible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss8XOQD1hEE&t=157s
The video has already had nearly half a million views since being posted last month.

-- At first the back wound was above the throat wound, but, to their credit, the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel (FPP) admitted that the wound was at least 1 inch lower than where the WC placed it. Yet, magically, the SBT still "works."

-- At first, pro-WC experts and apologists insisted that the bullet traveled downward through the neck to exit the throat wound, but the HSCA FPP, again to their credit, the HSCA FPP said the back-wound photos prove that the bullet entered the wound at a slightly upward angle.

But, more magic! The chairman of the FPP demonstrated how the SBT could still "work" by leaning at least 60 degrees forward. Well, yes, if JFK had been leaning that far forward, a bullet could have struck below the throat wound and at an upward angle and still have exited the throat. Just one small problem: No photo or footage shows JFK leaning that far forward during any of the proposed SBT timeframes (yes, there are more than one--more on this in the next point).

-- At first the alleged magic-bullet hit came at right around frame 210 of the Zapruder film (Z210). This was the WC's version. But then, the HSCA experts, to their credit, acknowledged the clear evidence that JFK was hit before Z190, and so the magic-bullet hit was changed to Z188-190. However, nowadays, WC apologists assure us that the magic-bullet hit was "positively" at Z224.

("What about the HSCA photographic experts' evidence that JFK was hit before Z190 and clearly begins to react before Z207," some might ask? Well, modern WC apologists uniformly reject that evidence because they realize it destroys the lone-gunman theory, since they base the alleged Z224 hit on the optical illusion of the lapel flip at Z224--and never you mind that the lapel flip was nowhere near Connally's exit wound or that there was a brisk breeze blowing in Dealey Plaza during the shooting.)

-- At first the alleged magic-bullet hit was the first shot (since the WC did not believe that their lone gunman could have missed not only JFK but the entire huge limo with his first, closest, and easiest shot), but now the magic-bullet hit was "positively" the second shot.

-- At first the SBT assumed Kennedy was sitting normally in his seat when the missile struck, but now the theory must assume he was leaning so far forward that most of his back was off the seat (a notion that is not supported by the photographic evidence).

-- At first the conflict between the holes in the back of the coat and shirt and the official locations for the back wound were explained by speculating that the coat and shirt "bunched" up to or beyond the collar, but now, in response to photographic evidence that shows the collar was never overlapped by the coat, we're told the coat and shirt bunched by forming a hump just below the collar. Yeah, uh-huh.

Now, try getting a WC apologist to explain how the bullet could have penetrated a coat and shirt bunched up in that way without creating two sets of overlapping holes in the bunched fabric.

-- At the very beginning, in its report, the WC indicated/implied, or deliberately allowed people to infer, that their wound ballistics tests did not contradict the SBT. This was one of the issues on which the WC got absolutely clobbered when the Commission's hearings and exhibits were released in November 1964. Not a single bullet in the WC's own wound ballistics tests emerged in CE 399's nearly pristine condition after doing damage similar to the damage that CE 399 allegedly caused.

Suffice it to say that no wound ballistics test and no real-world shooting case has produced an FMJ bullet that supposedly penetrated seven layers of skin and smashed through two sets of bones and yet emerged with its lands and grooves intact, with only slightly visible deformation to its base, and with only 2-3 grains of missing substance.

[Andrew Mason]

In another thread, a WC apologist argued that the conspiracy position is a constantly moving, shifting target, that it is "flexible enough to support whatever conclusion" is deemed suitable/necessary. Now, this is mighty strange criticism coming from someone who supports the magic bullet and the single-bullet theory (SBT). Consider:

-- At first the SBT required that Connally was rotated 20-30 degrees to the right when the missile struck, in order to make his back wound align with the magic bullet's trajectory from JFK's throat, but now we're assured the theory can still work even though many of the theory's defenders admit that Connally's torso was rotated only 10-15 degrees.

Of course, recently, Knott Laboratory, a forensic engineering and animation lab, proved that Connally's position and back wound make the SBT impossible. Knott Lab engineers did a laser test in Dealey Plaza, collecting millions of data points, and determined that the SBT is impossible because Connally's back wound does not and cannot align with a bullet fired from the sixth-floor window and exiting JFK's throat. Here's a video on the Knott Lab study:

Why the 'single bullet theory' in JFK assassination is impossible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss8XOQD1hEE&t=157s
The video has already had nearly half a million views since being posted last month.

Belief in the SBT by non-CTs relies on the same kind of fictions that CTs use to ignore the overwhelming evidence that Oswald fired all three shots.

Perhaps the Knott Laboratory model will help everyone see what I have been saying for over 20 years: that the SBT is not only wrong but that it is wrong to think it is needed to support the WC’s conclusions.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Belief in the SBT by non-CTs relies on the same kind of fictions that CTs use to ignore the overwhelming evidence that Oswald fired all three shots.

"Overwhelming evidence"?? Why do you suppose that even Dallas police chief Jesse Curry said that no one was ever able to put Oswald in the sixth-floor window with a rifle in his hands? Why do you suppose that even Norman Mailer said that a good defense attorney could have gotten Oswald acquitted?

I suspect you are unaware of all the problems with the case against Oswald. Here's some suggested reading for you:

“Faulty Evidence: Problems with the Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald”
“The HSCA and Fraud in the Backyard Rifle Photos”
“Did Oswald Shoot Tippit?”
“Was Oswald’s Palmprint Planted on the Alleged Murder Weapon?”
“Where Was Oswald During the Shooting?”

You can find these articles here: https://sites.google.com/view/myresearcharticles/home
 

Perhaps the Knott Laboratory model will help everyone see what I have been saying for over 20 years: that the SBT is not only wrong but that it is wrong to think it is needed to support the WC’s conclusions.

Huh? If the SBT is false, then more than one gunman must have been firing at JFK. We have known for years from released WC documents that the reason Specter et al initially cooked up the SBT was to avoid the conclusion that more than one shooter was involved. Good grief, how can you not know this?

Let's read an excerpt from WC staff attorney Norman Redlich's 4/27/64 memo to J. Lee Rankin, the WC's chief counsel:

----------------------------------------------------------
We have expert testimony to the effect that a skilled marksman would require a minimum 2 seconds between shots with this rifle.  Since the camera operates at 18 1/3 frames per second, there would have to be a minimum of 40 frames between shots.  It is apparent, therefore, that if Governor Connally was hit even as late as frame 240, the President would have to have been hit no later than frame 190 and probably even earlier. (p. 1)
----------------------------------------------------------

Since the Commission could not allow that JFK was hit at or before Z190, they had a serious problem on their hands. The Commission strongly leaned toward the view that JFK was hit at or shortly after Z210; they admitted that in Z225 JFK is already reacting to a wound; they acknowledged that Connally said he was hit no earlier than Z231; and they said that Connally must have been hit before Z240--but they knew that one gunman could not have fired two shots between Z210 and Z240.

This glaring timing problem is the main reason that WC apologists refuse to accept the HSCA PEP's finding that JFK was hit before Z190, that he begins to react to this hit at around Z200, and that Jackie begins to react to JFK's reaction before she disappears behind the freeway sign. WC apologists cling to the Z224 SBT myth, even though JFK is clearly already reacting to a wound in Z225.

The fact that JFK is already reacting to a wound in Z225 means he must have been hit a bare minimum of 30 frames earlier, since he had to stop waving, then bend both of his forearms inward, and then start to move his hands toward his throat--these actions would have taken at least 30 frames. It is ludicrous to argue that JFK miraculously performed these actions in less than 1/18th/second after allegedly being hit at Z224.

As the HSCA PEP noted, at around Z200, JFK's right hand not only stops suddenly in the middle of a wave, but it also starts moving to the level and area of his throat. When JFK reemerges from behind the freeway sign in Z224, he is also bringing his left hand up toward his throat. Obviously, he is reacting to a shot that occurred many frames before Z224.

You are the first person I've ever met who claims that the SBT is not needed to support the WC's conclusions.

[Marjan Rynkiewicz]

"Overwhelming evidence"?? Why do you suppose that even Dallas police chief Jesse Curry said that no one was ever able to put Oswald in the sixth-floor window with a rifle in his hands? Why do you suppose that even Norman Mailer said that a good defense attorney could have gotten Oswald acquitted?

I suspect you are unaware of all the problems with the case against Oswald. Here's some suggested reading for you:

“Faulty Evidence: Problems with the Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald”
“The HSCA and Fraud in the Backyard Rifle Photos”
“Did Oswald Shoot Tippit?”
“Was Oswald’s Palmprint Planted on the Alleged Murder Weapon?”
“Where Was Oswald During the Shooting?”

You can find these articles here: https://sites.google.com/view/myresearcharticles/home
 
Huh? If the SBT is false, then more than one gunman must have been firing at JFK. We have known for years from released WC documents that the reason Specter et al initially cooked up the SBT was to avoid the conclusion that more than one shooter was involved. Good grief, how can you not know this?

Let's read an excerpt from WC staff attorney Norman Redlich's 4/27/64 memo to J. Lee Rankin, the WC's chief counsel:

----------------------------------------------------------
We have expert testimony to the effect that a skilled marksman would require a minimum 2 seconds between shots with this rifle.  Since the camera operates at 18 1/3 frames per second, there would have to be a minimum of 40 frames between shots.  It is apparent, therefore, that if Governor Connally was hit even as late as frame 240, the President would have to have been hit no later than frame 190 and probably even earlier. (p. 1)
----------------------------------------------------------

Since the Commission could not allow that JFK was hit at or before Z190, they had a serious problem on their hands. The Commission strongly leaned toward the view that JFK was hit at or shortly after Z210; they admitted that in Z225 JFK is already reacting to a wound; they acknowledged that Connally said he was hit no earlier than Z231; and they said that Connally must have been hit before Z240--but they knew that one gunman could not have fired two shots between Z210 and Z240.

This glaring timing problem is the main reason that WC apologists refuse to accept the HSCA PEP's finding that JFK was hit before Z190, that he begins to react to this hit at around Z200, and that Jackie begins to react to JFK's reaction before she disappears behind the freeway sign. WC apologists cling to the Z224 SBT myth, even though JFK is clearly already reacting to a wound in Z225.

The fact that JFK is already reacting to a wound in Z225 means he must have been hit a bare minimum of 30 frames earlier, since he had to stop waving, then bend both of his forearms inward, and then start to move his hands toward his throat--these actions would have taken at least 30 frames. It is ludicrous to argue that JFK miraculously performed these actions in less than 1/18th/second after allegedly being hit at Z224.

As the HSCA PEP noted, at around Z200, JFK's right hand not only stops suddenly in the middle of a wave, but it also starts moving to the level and area of his throat. When JFK reemerges from behind the freeway sign in Z224, he is also bringing his left hand up toward his throat. Obviously, he is reacting to a shot that occurred many frames before Z224.

You are the first person I've ever met who claims that the SBT is not needed to support the WC's conclusions.

U said "he is bringing his left hand up" .
U said  "he is reacting to a shot" .
NNOOOOOOOO.
An involuntary "bringing" & an involuntary "reacting" are not the same as a voluntary bringing & reacting.
Involuntary acts take imo say two forms. The quickest taking say 0.01 sec (one Z frame).
An involuntary startle reaction might imo take say 0.1 sec (two Z frames).
And voluntary reactions involving the brain processing thoughts might take say 0.25 sec (five Z frames).

[Andrew Mason]

According to this, it was 2 1/4 seconds:

https://www.ratical.com/ratville/JFK/PG/PGappD.html

The short answer is no.

One second is equal to 18.333 Zapruder frames.
One second divided by 18.333 equates to 0.0545464462990236 seconds per Zapruder frame.
30 Zapruder frames multiplied by 0.0545464462990236 seconds equates to 1.636393388970709 seconds.

The human response time to external stimulus is quicker than 1.636393388970709 seconds.

It is not the human response time that is the issue. It is the time required to reload the bolt-action MC, re-aim and pull the trigger. That requires about 2.3 seconds.

[Andrew Mason]

"Overwhelming evidence"?? Why do you suppose that even Dallas police chief Jesse Curry said that no one was ever able to put Oswald in the sixth-floor window with a rifle in his hands? Why do you suppose that even Norman Mailer said that a good defense attorney could have gotten Oswald acquitted?

We aren't going to agree that there was a conspiracy involving dozens of police, FBI, and Secret Service officers, as well as civilian witnesses, Buell Frazier, Ruth Paine, Georges deM, Marina, etc. That is the only way all that evidence could exist if Oswald was innocent.

I suspect you are unaware of all the problems with the case against Oswald. Here's some suggested reading for you:

I am aware that all of the suggested problems are grossly overstated at best or otherwise demonstrably false. Perhaps you are not aware of all the evidence set out in the book and 1200 pages of footnotes in Bugliosi's Reclaiming History.

Huh? If the SBT is false, then more than one gunman must have been firing at JFK. We have known for years from released WC documents that the reason Specter et al initially cooked up the SBT was to avoid the conclusion that more than one shooter was involved. Good grief, how can you not know this?

I realise that most CTs and most LNs agree that JBC is reacting to his torso wound by z230.

But I also realise that there is a great deal of consistent evidence that must be discredited and rejected in order to conclude that he is reacting to either the first or second shot at this point. I see no reason to do that.

The 1.......2....3 shot pattern means there was only one shot until some time after the midpoint between the first and last shots.  There are over 40 witnesses to that pattern. These witnesses also recalled the last two shots were in rapid succession. 5 seconds (313-223) does not fit that description.

One would also have to conclude that the Connallys were mistaken that JBC turned around after the first shot and tried to see JFK (fearing an assassination was underway) before he felt the second shot hit him. He makes no effort whatsoever to even turn his neck, let alone his body, toward JFK until after z230.

One would have to conclude that George Hickey was imagining that he was turned forward watching JFK for the last two shots. He is still turned rearward in Altgens' #6 at z255.

One would also have to conclude that Nellie was imagining seeing JFK reacting to the first shot before her husband was hit and that she never looked back after the second shot. She was looking back until z268 or so.

This glaring timing problem is the main reason that WC apologists refuse to accept the HSCA PEP's finding that JFK was hit before Z190, that he begins to react to this hit at around Z200, and that Jackie begins to react to JFK's reaction before she disappears behind the freeway sign. WC apologists cling to the Z224 SBT myth, even though JFK is clearly already reacting to a wound in Z225.

The fact that JFK is already reacting to a wound in Z225 means he must have been hit a bare minimum of 30 frames earlier, since he had to stop waving, then bend both of his forearms inward, and then start to move his hands toward his throat--these actions would have taken at least 30 frames. It is ludicrous to argue that JFK miraculously performed these actions in less than 1/18th/second after allegedly being hit at Z224.

As the HSCA PEP noted, at around Z200, JFK's right hand not only stops suddenly in the middle of a wave, but it also starts moving to the level and area of his throat. When JFK reemerges from behind the freeway sign in Z224, he is also bringing his left hand up toward his throat. Obviously, he is reacting to a shot that occurred many frames before Z224.

You are the first person I've ever met who claims that the SBT is not needed to support the WC's conclusions.

I agree that, after emerging from behind the Stemmons sign, JFK is reacting to the first shot that occurred after z186 and before z202, most likely z190-z195. But I disagree that JBC begins reacting to the second shot that hit him in the back by z230 or even z240.  According to the evidence he was hit on the second shot and that did not occur until after the midpoint between z195 and z313 and after Hickey and Nellie turned around (after z268).

[John Mytton]

“The HSCA and Fraud in the Backyard Rifle Photos”

Thanks, Mr. Griffith, I took a look at your PDF and when I saw you refer to Jack White as a "photo expert" I immediately laughed and knew you were going to be led astray. You do realize that Jack White believes that the NASA photos taken on the moon are fake and that 9/11 imagery has been manipulated!?
Your "photo expert" Jack White also looked at the backyard photos and from a two dimensional image, measured the rifle(without allowing for the three dimensional depth) and compared this directly to the height of Oswald and made an irrational claim of something being amiss!?
And when asked by the HSCA if he was aware of "photogrammetry" which is a fundamental concept of image analysis and must be calculated when evaluating measurements in 2D photos, Jack White was completely unaware and clueless!
So we haven't got off to a very good start, but let's press on and see if we can step out of the Dark Ages and apply science to some of your claims.

1) Oswald's Chin was simply affected by the position of the sun and the resulting shadow created a square chin. When Oswald was arrested he was filmed with a variety of lighting conditions and when Oswald was lit from directly above, well, what do you know!



This overhead lighting technique is well known and gives a more masculine chiselled chin line, also take note of the shadows under their eyebrows and noses.



Besides, why on Earth would conspirators composite Oswald's head above someone else's chin? Why not utilize all of Oswald's head and use the much less obvious existing shadow area under their stand in's chin as their matte line?
Also, finding three outside photos of Oswald's head which correspond so accurately to the angle of the overhead sun as seen in the backyard photo's would be virtually impossible.

For example, a member on this Forum tried to pass off Ruby as being in the company of Nixon but the lighting, resolution, texture and crude cropping are easily detected as being fake, and it follows that any backyard photo fakery would have to address each of these problems and still be photorealistic and undetectable 60 years later!



2) The shadow under the nose was simply affected by the tilt and angle of Oswald's head.
The HSCA used a mannequin to address the issue.



And to make it clearer I created the following animation to drive home the HSCA's conclusion. Oswald's head tilts to his left because he's stabilizing his rifle being extended to his right and at the same time this body tilt affects his ground shadow. Very simple!



3) Oswald's backyard photo negative was examined at a microscopic level and the resulting distribution of film grain was consistent with the original film stock and the grain across the entire photo was evenly spaced and this is very important because when you start compositing images, each element must be photographed from exactly the same distance otherwise the resulting film grain will have differing dimensions. Also worth noting is when a photo has multiple elements it has to be rephotographed and the accumulation of grain is a tell tale sign of manipulation. The negative in the archives is consistent with the original film stock.



4) And since we know beyond all doubt that the negative was exposed only once in a camera, can we prove that the camera was in the possession of Oswald? Yes we can, this is easily accomplished by examining Oswald's previous photo's taken of Oswald's family and the same unique edge marking are seen in all photos.



5) A last point I'd like to make is that the backyard plant at Neely Street has shown considerable growth in the time between the backyard photos and the time of the assassination, which essentially means that someone had to take the backyard background plates many months before the assassination. Marina estimated that the photos were taken at a time which would be not long after Oswald received his rifle and this IMO would allow the plant to grow to it's larger size. How probable is it that the intricate "framing" of Oswald would be planned more than eight months before the assassination?



JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

U said "he is bringing his left hand up" .
U said  "he is reacting to a shot" .
NNOOOOOOOO.
An involuntary "bringing" & an involuntary "reacting" are not the same as a voluntary bringing & reacting.
Involuntary acts take imo say two forms. The quickest taking say 0.01 sec (one Z frame).
An involuntary startle reaction might imo take say 0.1 sec (two Z frames).
And voluntary reactions involving the brain processing thoughts might take say 0.25 sec (five Z frames).

This is too ridiculous to bother answering. You must be kidding.