On The Trail Of Delusion

[Jerry Freeman]

Before we drift too far off topic...
Not posted yet [I guess], the note on back of the photo--
 

Oswald wanted historical credit not legal responsibility for his heinous crimes. 

What the hell does that mean?

[Fred Litwin]

"JFK Revisited" Misleads on JFK's Throat Wound
Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass, misleads on JFK's throat wound. The film alleges that it is an entrance wound. The preponderance of evidence indicates that it is a wound of exit.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/jfk-revisited-misleads-on-jfk-s-throat-wound

[Jerry Organ]

"JFK Revisited" Misleads on JFK's Throat Wound
Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass, misleads on JFK's throat wound. The film alleges that it is an entrance wound. The preponderance of evidence indicates that it is a wound of exit.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/jfk-revisited-misleads-on-jfk-s-throat-wound

3D analysis of the back wound autopsy photo shows the entry wound was above the exit wound at the throat.

[Andrew Mason]

Fred, in one of your other postings ( Link ) about the Wecht book, you ask:

    "I would very much like to see his trajectory diagram to show how the
     bullet missed Connally but hit the windshield. And where does he think
     that bullet came from? Of course, he presents no such diagram."

I don't know if this is what persuaded Wecht, but Mark Fuhrman--in his 2006 book "A Simple Act of Murder"--proposed something similar:

If that top drawing is what Fuhrman based the trajectory on, I would point out:

1.  At a distance of 175 feet from a point directly below the SN window (around z210), the angle of the SN to JFK's back wound was a shade more than 19 degrees below horizontal with the SN. This assumes the rifle was 65 feet above the road (CE884) and JFK's back wound was 4 feet above the road (a vertical difference of 61 feet from the rifle).  So the angle would have been arctan(61/175) = 19.2°. This diagram shows that angle as shade under 28 degrees.
2.  the exit point of the bullet was under and to the left side of JFK's tie knot, which is much lower than the exit point shown.
3.  the car was also on a downward 3° slope, so the effective angle to JFK's back if he was sitting perfectly vertical in the car would have been 16° below horizontal.

With a 16 degree downward angle, the bullet exits at the nape of the neck, which is about where JFK's tie knot would have been positioned.

[The drawing is supposed to be an accurate drawing of JFK's head, neck and shoulders but it looks a bit odd. ]

[Jerry Organ]

If that top drawing is what Fuhrman based the trajectory on, I would point out:

1.  At a distance of 175 feet from a point directly below the SN window (around z210), the angle of the SN to JFK's back wound was a shade more than 19 degrees below horizontal with the SN. This assumes the rifle was 65 feet above the road (CE884) and JFK's back wound was 4 feet above the road (a vertical difference of 61 feet from the rifle).  So the angle would have been arctan(61/175) = 19.2°. This diagram shows that angle as shade under 28 degrees.
2.  the exit point of the bullet was under and to the left side of JFK's tie knot, which is much lower than the exit point shown.
3.  the car was also on a downward 3° slope, so the effective angle to JFK's back if he was sitting perfectly vertical in the car would have been 16° below horizontal.

With a 16 degree downward angle, the bullet exits at the nape of the neck, which is about where JFK's tie knot would have been positioned.

[The drawing is supposed to be an accurate drawing of JFK's head, neck and shoulders but it looks a bit odd. ]

Say, shifty Defense Attorney dude. Aren't you kind of on shaky ground when you critique a LN Alternative Theory given that your Pet Theory is ten-times more error-prone and unlikely?

[Andrew Mason]

Say, shifty Defense Attorney dude. Aren't you kind of on shaky ground when you critique a LN Alternative Theory given that your Pet Theory is ten-times more error-prone and unlikely?

Yes. I forgot that my "batspombleprofglidnoctobuns crazy" notion, as you call it, that the first shot struck JFK in the back on a right to left trajectory and was not deflected,  precludes me from pointing out facts that follow from evidence.

[Gerry Down]

If that top drawing is what Fuhrman based the trajectory on, I would point out:

1.  At a distance of 175 feet from a point directly below the SN window (around z210), the angle of the SN to JFK's back wound was a shade more than 19 degrees below horizontal with the SN. This assumes the rifle was 65 feet above the road (CE884) and JFK's back wound was 4 feet above the road (a vertical difference of 61 feet from the rifle).  So the angle would have been arctan(61/175) = 19.2°. This diagram shows that angle as shade under 28 degrees.
2.  the exit point of the bullet was under and to the left side of JFK's tie knot, which is much lower than the exit point shown.
3.  the car was also on a downward 3° slope, so the effective angle to JFK's back if he was sitting perfectly vertical in the car would have been 16° below horizontal.

With a 16 degree downward angle, the bullet exits at the nape of the neck, which is about where JFK's tie knot would have been positioned.

[The drawing is supposed to be an accurate drawing of JFK's head, neck and shoulders but it looks a bit odd. ]

Dale Myers says the angle is about 17.5 degrees (http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl2.htm ). He puts the SBT at Z224.

[Ray Mitcham]

3D analysis of the back wound autopsy photo shows the entry wound was above the exit wound at the throat.

I wonder who "blacked out" the back of JFK's head in the top left photo.