Getting Some Facts Straight About the Single-Bullet Theory

[Bill Chapman]

Says the guy who thought Jackie said "Top, behind the forehead"

You are responsible for putting words into Jackie's mouth that she didn't say.  By the way, it's not a "graphic" -- it's a table.

That's how I recalled it. And the person who entered the sum-up in the non-graphic is the one responsible for putting words in her mouth.

Not that you're nitpicking or splitting hairs.

[Bill Chapman]

When did this become a Literary Forum?

When these characters start playing the semantics game as they hit the wall with nowhere else to go.

[Bill Chapman]

"Ignored"?  Chapman has no friggin' clue what Jackie said.  He reads McAdams' site, misunderstands it, and then misquotes it.  Which is what he does with all the details of the case.

'Details', or CT-authored misrepresentations, Barrister?

Chapman is waiting for that link to what MTG thinks she meant.
And what you think she meant. And for your when-the-wheels-fall-off-last-resort-cop-out 'how does that prove Oswald shot anybody?'

[Andrew Mason]

Nellie Connally and Jackie both stated that the first shot hit both men, referencing when JBC cried out Oh No No No, which Gov Connally stated he cried out when he was hit.

Neither Nellie Connally  nor Jackie Kennedy  said that the first shot hit both men.  Jackie seemed to recall that JFK reacted to the first shot but it is not clear.  She said her attention was drawn by Gov. Connally shouting.  She did not say Connally had been hit.

The eyewitnesses state JFK reacted to the first shot.

That is a bit of an understatement.  Every witness who observed JFK's reaction to the first shot said he reacted visibly in ways that are not seen until after z223.  They recalled things he is not seen doing before disappearing behind the Stemmons sign: moving left, bringing his hands up to his face/neck, pretending to duck etc.   When you combine that evidence with the photographic evidence and the absence of any reliable evidence of a missed first shot, let alone any reasonable explanation of how he could have missed the entire vehicle from above at less than 60 yards, there is no reason at all to conclude that the first shot did not hit JFK.   But there is no evidence at all that it hit Gov. Connally in the back/armpit and fairly cogent evidence (from the Connally's themselves) that it did not.

A large number of them also stated there was only two shots.

It depends on what you mean by "large".  It is certainly a very small proportion of the witnesses who heard only two shots - less than 10%.  As tabulated for the HSCA of 178 witnesses: 17 recalled hearing two; 7 said they heard two or three shots; 132 reported hearing exactly three shots; 6 people said they heard four shots; and 9 said they were not sure how many shots they heard. A further 7 bystanders reported hearing 1, 5, 6, or 8 shots. (D. M. Green, “Analysis of Earwitness Reports Relating to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy”, Report No. 4034, 8 HSCA 128 at 142).

[John Tonkovich]

Three shots. Three hits. Two in the head.

[John Iacoletti]

That's how I recalled it.

Sure, just like you recalled that Callaway was 12-15 feet away from his trotting man.

Which is why you’re a joke.

And the person who entered the sum-up in the non-graphic is the one responsible for putting words in her mouth.

Nope. You’re the one who wrote “said she”.

[John Mytton]

What part of "rear quadrant" are you having trouble with?

Just how dense are you? Exactly what have I got to do with where Clint Hill indicates JFK's wound location to be and if Clint personally considers anything past a persons face or some other position to be the rear of someone's head then who are we to argue and how can that possibly overrule his actual physical demonstration?



JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

A few other fatal problems with the single-bullet theory (SBT):

* Dr. Charles Gregory, the surgeon who operated on Gov. Connally’s wrist, said the wrist wound appeared to have been made by an “irregular bullet,” a bullet with sharp edges:

Dr. GREGORY: The wound of entrance (on the wrist) is characteristic in my view of an irregular missile in this case, an irregular missile which has tipped itself off as being irregular by the nature of itself.
Mr. DULLES: What do you mean by irregular?
Dr. GREGORY: I mean one that has been distorted. It is in some way angular, it has sharp edges or something of this sort It is not rounded or pointed in the fashion of an ordinary missile. (4 H 124)

Obviously, this rules out CE 399.

* Dr. Robert Shaw, Connally’s chest surgeon, told the Warren Commission (WC) that the thigh wound appeared to have been made by a fragment, not by a whole bullet:

Dr. SHAW: I have always felt that the wounds of Governor Connally could be explained by the passage of one missile through his chest, striking his wrist and a fragment of it going on into his left thigh. (6 H 91)

This is by far the most logical, credible, and forensically likely explanation for the thigh wound, especially given that at least three sizable fragments were removed from Connally’s wrist, according to both Dr. Gregory and Nurse Audrey Bell.

* Nurse Bowron told WC that she and Nurse Henchliffe cut off JFK’s clothing:

Miss BOWRON. We tried to start an I.V. cutdown and I don't know whether it was his left or his right leg, and Miss Henchliffe and I cut off his clothing. . . . (6 H 136)

* When former Senate investigator Harold Weisberg interviewed Dr. Charles Carrico, who was the only doctor who saw the throat wound before the shirt and tie were removed, Carrico confirmed that the throat wound was above the collar; he was “definite on this” (Weisberg, Never Again, 2007 edition, p. 241). Weisberg continued:

When I asked him if he saw any bullet holes in the shirt or tie, he was definite in saying “No.” I asked if he recalled Dulles’s question and his own pointing to above his own shirt collar as the location of the bullet hole. He does remember this, and he does remember confirming that the hole was above the collar. . . . (Never Again, p. 242; the interview was done in 1975)

* Dr. Carrico also told Weisberg that the nurses used scalpels to remove the president’s shirt and tie because they were, understandably, in a great hurry, and that it was “likely” that the nurses made the slits and the nick in the tie, adding, “I saw neither the nick in the tie nor the cuts in the shirt before the nurses started cutting” (Weisberg Subject Index File, under “Dr. Carrico,” items 02 and 03, http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/C%20Disk/Carrico%20Charles%20J%20Dr/Item%2002.pdf; http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/N%20Disk/New%20York%20Times/Item%2093.pdf, p. 4; https://books.google.com/books?id=SC-wBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA95&lpg=PA95&dq=henchliffe+bowron+cut+slits+jfk%27s+shirt+tie+nick&source=bl&ots=ef1P2ARFOz&sig=ACfU3U21sIV4eKHljvOHhXi5T684t1VgZA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiM-bKcnaDrAhVDrVkKHRT6AHcQ6AEwBXoECA0QAQ#v=onepage&q&f=true, pp. 95-96).