Getting Some Facts Straight About the Single-Bullet Theory

[Michael T. Griffith]

Just curious but why would the tears be the same given the bullet was tumbling? Actually why would you ever think they would be the same under any circumstances?

Huh? Do you even understand the issue here? Now, I'll tell you what: Let's see you produce or find a diagram, just a basic one, that shows how a tumbling bullet--you pick the angle of the pitch and yaw--would produce two vertical tears that were parallel but markedly differed in length--differed by 35% (4.8 cm vs. 3.1 cm) and were joined in the middle by a third tear to form an H.

You don't seem to be taking into account the fact that the tears paralleled each other. We're not talking tears that ran different directions at different angles. We're talking about two parallel vertical tears, joined in the middle by a tear so that they and the joining tear form an H. Perhaps it would help to quote the Warren Commission's description of the tears:

A very irregular tear in the form of an "H" was observed on the front side of the Governor's shirt, approximately 1 1/2 inches high, with a crossbar tear approximately 1 inch wide, located 5 inches from the right side seam and 9 inches from the top of the right sleeve. (p. 94)

Do tell me how a single bullet that looked anything like CE 399 could have produced such a tear? Use some common sense to visualize in your mind how the bullet/fragment would have had to be shaped to produce an H-shaped tear with uneven sides. This is basic geometry.

Gov Connally is a poor choice for witness reliability.

Right! Because he was just the guy who experienced the hit! Yeah, what would he know?! And when he spent almost an hour looking at high-quality blowups of frames Z190-240 for Life magazine, he, being the person who was actually hit and knowing his own facial expressions, etc.--he was in no position to determine when he was hit!

His initial statement he states he saw JFK slumped after the first shot only to change his statement completely later.

This is nitpicking nonsense. Connally never, ever wavered from his insistence that he was not hit by the first shot and that was hit as he was turning after hearing the first shot, and the Zapruder film confirms this clearly.

Nelly's initial statement made through Julian Read was that she did not know anything about a third shot.

Gosh! Maybe because she was focused on her husband?! Lots of people only heard two shots, partly because two of the shots came in very rapid succession and partly because of where they were and/or what they were doing at the time.

JBC 11/27/63 Parkland Hospital--- First statement made by JBC was the  interview in the Parkland Hospital. JBC clearly states JFK was struck by the first shot which is exactly what Nelly, Jackie, Hill, and all the other eyewitnesses stated. His WC statement is completely opposite which leads you to question whether JBC really remembers exactly what happened. JBC goes from turning left and seeing JFK slump in the Parkland Hospital interview  to turning right and not seeing JFK at all in the WC Testimony.
“And then we had just turned the corner [from Houston onto Elm], we heard a shot; I turned to my left

I was sitting in the jump seat. I turned to my left to look in the back seat – the president had slumped. He had said nothing. Almost simultaneously, as I turned, I was hit and I knew I had been hit badly.”[Debunked HSCA testimony and arguments SNIPPED]

Did it ever occur to you that in his first statement Connally had not yet seen the Zapruder film, and that in his subsequent statements he was including hindsight observations based on his having seen the film? The point is that Connally never veered from his insistence that he was not hit by the first shot.

Any trajectory analysis that assumes a bullet exited Kennedy's throat is invalid from the outset, as I document in the OP of this thread. Again, no bullet exited the tie knot or the front of the shirt. No bullet penetrated the chest and lung cavities--we know this now from released documents. There was no path from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing through the spine, which is undoubtedly part of the reason that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said the back wound had no exit point.

Now, you need to explain how on this planet any bullet that looked anything like CE 399 could have produced an H-shaped tear with uneven vertical sides. Let's hear and/or see it. This is silly because the laws of geometry and physics tells us that there is no way a virtually pristine bullet could have produced an H-shaped tear with uneven sides. But, please do give it a shot.

[Bill Chapman]

That's what Bill said right? Unless I am misreading his post?

Connally WC testimony

CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn't conceivably have been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot, In the first place, don't know anything about the velocity of this particular bullet, but any rifle has a velocity that exceeds the speed of sound, and when I heard the sound of that first shot, that bullet had already reached where I was, or it had reached that far, and after I heard that shot, I had the time to turn to my right, and start to turn to my left before I felt anything.
It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first bullet, and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously a bullet, which I assumed was a bullet, and I never heard the second shot, didn't hear it. I didn't hear but two shots. I think I heard the first shot and the third shot.

Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any idea as to why you did not hear the second shot?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, first, again I assume the bullet was traveling faster than the sound. I was hit by the bullet prior to the time the sound reached me, and I was in either a state of shock or the impact was such that the sound didn't even register on me, but I was never conscious of hearing the second shot at all.
Obviously, at least the major wound that I took in the shoulder through the chest couldn't have been anything but the second shot. Obviously, it couldn't have been the third, because when the third shot was fired I was in a reclining position, and heard it, saw it and the effects of it, rather--I didn't see it, I saw the effects of it--so it obviously could not have been the third, and couldn't have been the first, in my judgment.

[John Iacoletti]

JAQer. Want some fries with that nothingburger?

Once again, Chapman has no answers, just assumptions and grandstanding.

[Bill Chapman]

Once again, Chapman has no answers, just assumptions and grandstanding.

Once again, Iacoletti is doing nothing more than JAQing.

[John Tonkovich]

And then there's Connally's suit. Odd that it was laundered before being admitted into evidence by the WC.

[John Iacoletti]

Once again, Iacoletti is doing nothing more than JAQing.

You don't even know what that means.  Just like "gaslighting" and "BUMP".  You're a poser.

[Jerry Organ]

Dr. Mantik's finding confirms what Dr. John Nichols deduced decades ago: Dr. John Nichols, who was a professor of forensic pathology at the University of the Kansas, had already reached the same conclusion, even though he was unable to study the autopsy x-rays. Dr. Nichols deduced from the trajectories involved and from his knowledge of human anatomy that no bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing into one of the transverse processes of the spine--not just grazing it but smashing into it.

Oh my. What drama! Time to look into this scholarly "clear contrary evidence" Griffith has been shoveling for decades.



Looks like a bullet traveling downward could have entered a man's lower neck at the back two-inches over from the mid-line, pass between the vertebra processes without a "smashing") and emerge at the lower mid-line of the throat. As that fellow from the South used to say: "Sur-prise, sur-prise, sur-prise!"

From Wikimedia Commons | C7 highlighted in animation.

[Tim Nickerson]

Oh my. What drama! Time to look into this scholarly "clear contrary evidence" Griffith has been shoveling for decades.



Looks like a bullet traveling downward could have entered a man's lower neck at the back two-inches over from the mid-line, pass between the vertebra processes without a "smashing") and emerge at the lower mid-line of the throat. As that fellow from the South used to say: "Sur-prise, sur-prise, sur-prise!"

From Wikimedia Commons | C7 highlighted in animation.

Jerry,  A few others things to consider. Nichols' diagram has the person facing fully forward. Kennedy's torso was rotated about 5 degrees to the right and his head was turned significantly to the right. While a 60 degree or more rotation of the head  would only result in a few degrees of rotation of the C7 vertebrae it would move the exit point on the trachea somewhat to the right. Perhaps as much as an inch.