Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments  (Read 36329 times)

Offline Chris Davidson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 185
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #128 on: December 13, 2023, 06:58:04 AM »
Advertisement
(65.3 feet above JFK and 265.3 feet direct distance as surveyed and shown in CE884). 
Would you care to re-check this data for accuracy?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #128 on: December 13, 2023, 06:58:04 AM »


Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #129 on: December 13, 2023, 02:24:24 PM »
Aye me Hearties ye olde chestnut, unlike some i.e. you, I'm not a sheeple being mindlessly herded along with the flock but have intellectually chosen to utilize  deductive reasoning skills to draw the only inescapable conclusion.
Having lived in the real World for more than half a Century, one starts to understand People, who they are, what they are and what they are capable of. The enormous conspiracy that you suggested in your second to last post, which btw is just the tip of the iceberg compared to the mountain of conspiracy you've outlined in your book is no small undertaking and involves many compliant conspirators across a vast number of fields, who need to lie from innocent civilians, to cops walking the beat, to FBI, CIA through to the Goddam newly sworn in President of the United States, manipulate, insert manipulated evidence into microfilms, gaining access to federal departments, inserting manipulated evidence into crime scenes, create masses of altered evidence from corroborating films, then faking these films by some unknown processes, faking photographs, forging documents, modifying X-rays, and all this faked evidence is so perfect that real experts 60 years later still can't detect any signs of manipulation.

And on the other hand a lone nut took a mail order rifle to work and shot the President. JohnM

Humm, well, during all this time you've spent in the "real World" [sic], you apparently have not taken the time to get yourself a decent education so you can avoid making high-school-level writing and grammatical errors.

I won't waste time dissecting your strawman misrepresentation of the case for conspiracy in JFK's death, but I will list a few of the people who have concluded and stated that JFK was killed by a conspiracy/killed by more than one gunman:

-- Robert F. Kennedy, brother of JFK and JFK's Attorney General. (Although RFK publicly endorsed the WC, we now know that privately he told many friends and family members that he believed his brother had been killed by a right-wing conspiracy, and that he planned on reopening the case if he won the White House. Historian David Talbot discusses RFK's numerous private statements on the assassination in his book Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years. We also now know that soon after the assassination, RFK and Jackie sent a private message to the Kremlin that they did not believe the Soviets were involved in JFK's death and that JFK was killed by "domestic opponents," a "right-wing conspiracy.")

-- Morris Wolff, a former White House aide to JFK and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy who later served as a legislative assistant to WC member Senator Sherman Cooper. (Wolff revealed in 2022 that Cooper did not believe the SBT, did not believe that Oswald acted alone, and did not believe that Ruby had no serious Mafia connections.)

-- Dr. David Wrone, a professor emeritus of history at the University of Wisconsin.

-- Dr. Joseph Dolce, an Army wound ballistics expert who played a leading role in the WC's wound ballistics tests. (Dr. Dolce was considered to be one of the Army's top wound ballistics experts at the time.)

-- The late Senator Richard Schweiker, who served on the Church Committee.

-- Former Senator Christopher Dodd, who served on the HSCA when he was a member of the House of Representatives.

-- Dr. Gary Aguilar, a clinical professor of ophthalmology at the University of California.

-- Dr. Roger McCarthy, a ballistics expert with Failure Analysis, which assisted with the American Bar Association's mock Oswald trials in the 1990s.

-- Dr. Arthur Snyder, formerly a physicist at the University of Indiana and then at Stanford University's Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC).

-- Journalist Robert MacNeil, formerly of the McNeil-Lehrer News Hour on PBS.

-- The late Ambassador William Atwood, former Special Assistant to the U.S. delegation to the United Nations.

-- President Lyndon Johnson. (We now know from the Johnson White House tapes that Johnson rejected the single-bullet theory. We also know from former Johnson aides and associates that Johnson believed Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy.)

-- The late Dr. Milton Helpern, a renowned forensic pathologist and formerly the medical examiner for New York City.

-- The late Dr. John Nichols, a forensic pathologist and formerly a professor of pathology at the University of Kansas.

-- The late Carlos Hathcock, a Marine sniper who was widely regarded as the greatest sniper of the 20th century.

-- The late Evelyn Lincoln, who was Kennedy's White House secretary.

-- The late Dr. George Burkley, Kennedy's personal physician.

-- Robert K. Tanenbaum, a former HSCA deputy chief counsel and a former assistant district attorney in NYC who became chief of the Homicide Bureau and then the chief of the NYC Criminal Courts.

-- G. Robert Blakey, a former HSCA chief counsel and a professor of law at Notre Dame University.

-- Gary Cornwell, a former HSCA deputy chief counsel and a former DOJ prosecutor who served as the chief of the Organized Crime Strike Force in Kansas City, where he successfully tried and convicted the chiefs of the Mafia families in both Kansas City and Denver.

-- The late Gaeton Fonzi, a respected investigative journalist whose work was published in major newspapers, including the New York Times, and who served as an investigator for the Church Committee and the HSCA.

-- Ed Lopez, a former HSCA investigator who investigated Oswald's activities in Mexico City and who co-authored the Lopez-Hardway Report (aka the Lopez Report).

-- Dan Hardway, a former HSCA investigator who worked with Ed Lopez to investigate Oswald's time in Mexico City and who co-authored the Lopez-Hardway Report.

-- Dr. David Mantik, who holds a doctorate in physics and an M.D. in radiation oncology. He is a board-certified radiation oncologist. He completed fellowships in physics at the University of Illinois and in biophysics at Stanford University. He was a professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin and at the University of Michigan. He has authored scientific papers that have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The list could continue for many pages.







« Last Edit: December 13, 2023, 02:27:37 PM by Michael T. Griffith »

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1485
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #130 on: December 13, 2023, 04:21:24 PM »
Aye me Hearties ye olde chestnut, unlike some i.e. you, I'm not a sheeple being mindlessly herded along with the flock but have intellectually chosen to utilize  deductive reasoning skills to draw the only inescapable conclusion.
Having lived in the real World for more than half a Century, one starts to understand People, who they are, what they are and what they are capable of. The enormous conspiracy that you suggested in your second to last post, which btw is just the tip of the iceberg compared to the mountain of conspiracy you've outlined in your book is no small undertaking and involves many compliant conspirators across a vast number of fields, who need to lie from innocent civilians, to cops walking the beat, to FBI, CIA through to the Goddam newly sworn in President of the United States, manipulate, insert manipulated evidence into microfilms, gaining access to federal departments, inserting manipulated evidence into crime scenes, create masses of altered evidence from corroborating films, then faking these films by some unknown processes, faking photographs, forging documents, modifying X-rays, and all this faked evidence is so perfect that real experts 60 years later still can't detect any signs of manipulation.

And on the other hand a lone nut took a mail order rifle to work and shot the President.

JohnM
Democrats and Republicans in Washington loathe one another, couldn't agree to go to lunch. But he and his fellow conspiracists have multiple generations of them - and multiple generations of Americans from various backgrounds - for decades planning this out, executing it, then covering it all up. And then covering up the coverups. And all remaining silent.

There is no such thing as "the government" or "the CIA" or "the FBI". They all consist of people of various backgrounds and views. With departments and divisions and personalities and interests. The idea that all of this, this vast array of interests and people and departments, could be controlled, directed, ordered and that all of it would carry those orders out (no one object? no one liked JFK?) is a fantasy. It cannot be done. A Hitler, a Stalin couldn't do it in a closed society. How about the American system with its openness, its bureaucracy, its independent agencies, its check and balances? You think this could be planned and carried out and then covered up. In secret? Again it cannot be done.

Not only could it not be done there is no evidence for it. So they are left with staring at photos and images and finding evidence for this fantasy (the Soviets said it was Oswald who visited them in Mexico City: What's the conspiracy response? They all lied and are also part of the conspiracy!! Yes, a CIA/FBI/KGB conspiracy). Good for us; it keeps them off the street.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2023, 07:49:01 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #130 on: December 13, 2023, 04:21:24 PM »


Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #131 on: December 13, 2023, 06:39:21 PM »
The forward head lean is more than 30 degrees relative to the car horizontal*(see below).  But Donohue is wrong that the path requires a 60 degree downward angle.  Draw an 11 degree angle to the car horizontal at that point, which was the angle from the SN, entering the back of the head and see where it exits. It exits the top front of the head.   You don't need to measure angles. Just draw the line:

Since the head is also turned to the left by about 30 degrees more than a line from the SN to the head, it exits the right side at the top of the head.  That could not possibly be done by a shot from where Hickey was with JFK turned and leaning like that.

*  The horizontal angle from the SN to JFK's head was arcsin(65.3/265.3)=14.25 degrees (65.3 feet above JFK and 265.3 feet direct distance as surveyed and shown in CE884).  Subtracting 3 degrees for the slope of the road, this means the angle to the car horizontal was about 11.25 degrees.  The path through JFK's head was from the entry wound located 3" below the top of the head to the exit wound which was 6" farther forward and at the top of the right side of the head, that is an upward angle of arctan(3/6)=26.5 degrees.  In other words:  the forward tilt of JFK's head relative to the car horizontal has to equal the 11.25 degrees downward slope from the SN relative to the car horizontal plus the angle of the bullet path to the head horizontal (26.5 degrees)=38 degrees. So the forward lean of JFK just has to be about 38 degrees, not 60.

Your willingness to simply brush aside contrary evidence is remarkable. Let's get a few basic facts straight to cut through all of this smoke, and then let's look at some problems with the cowlick entry site that you have never addressed (probably because you know nothing about them):

One, first and foremost, the 60-degree figure comes from the WC's own diagram of the bullet's alleged path. This is CE 388. CE 388 has Kennedy's head leaning nearly 60 degrees forward, as scholars have been noting for decades. You can see the diagram at this link:

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0504b.htm

Two, when I first pointed out that CE 388 shows JFK's head leaning nearly 60 degrees forward, you erroneously claimed that the Muchmore frame shows JFK leaning just about that far forward, saying "kind of like the way JFK is leaning at the time of the head shot" and then you presented the Muchmore frame. But, now you say that JFK was leaning forward by 38 degrees. Sorry, but 38 degrees is not "kind of like" 60 degrees.

Three, you apparently have no clue about the HSCA medical experts' diagram of the bullet's path, which has JFK's head leaning forward by about 27 degrees. The key fact about this diagram is that it was based on the FPP's locations for the entry and exit wounds, whereas Canning operated without that information.

Four, your arguments above "see above" do not explain how a bullet entering at a downward angle of 15 degrees and moving from right to left could have hit the cowlick entry site and yet exited above the right ear while leaving a fragment trail (1) that does not start even close to the entry point, (2) that is located visibly above the entry point, and (3) that is concentrated several inches away from the entry point, in fact practically on the other side of the skull.

As mentioned, the HSCA FPP could only create the appearance that this trajectory was plausible by leaning JFK's head forward by about 27 degrees. Lattimer leaned the head even a bit farther forward, but still not as much as CE 388 does. Yet, you say it all works out if you assume the head's forward tilt was 38 degrees. Amazing.

This is not to even mention the enormous problem of the two separate wound paths/tracks, which we'll address in a minute.

Five, you also appear unaware of the devastating problems posed for the cowlick entry site by the fragment in the supraorbital ridge. Let me quote neuroanatomist Dr. Joseph Riley:

Quote
It is difficult, if not impossible, to explain how a bullet that has a trajectory almost tangential to the skull [required by the assumption that the bullet came from the sixth-floor window] could fragment extensively in the superficial brain layers, have major portions of the bullet exit (based on fragments recovered in the limousine), yet a large fragment (which retains a circular profile) deviates down to penetrate the supraorbital ridge but no fragments are distributed along the pathway. (Joseph N. Riley, “The Head Wounds of John F. Kennedy: One Bullet Cannot Account for the Injuries,” The Third Decade, 2004, http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/R Disk/Riley Joe/Item 04.pdf)

Six, you also appear unaware of the devastating problem posed for the cowlick entry site by the rear subcortical damage, which is separate from the cortical damage. The HSCA FPP, though aware of subcortical damage, did not even try to explain how a bullet entering at the cowlick site could have caused it. Dr. Riley:

Quote
However, there is an even more compelling reason to reject the Panel's [the HSCA medical panel’s] conclusions. The Panel describes the subcortical damage adequately (see previous description) but provides no analysis or explanation of how such wounds could be produced. If a bullet entered where the Panel places the entrance wound, it is anatomically impossible to produce the subcortical wounds. A description of the trajectory necessary to produce the subcortical wounds borders on parody. . . .

Even the most superficial examination of the evidence demonstrates that the high entrance wound [the cowlick site] cannot account for all of the posterior subcortical damage, yet the Panel provides no explanation or analysis of the subcortical wounds. It is difficult to understand how a panel of competent forensic pathologists could have ignored the subcortical damage in their report. . . .

There is no evidence of continuity between the cortical and subcortical wounds. There is no evidence of significant fragmentation along the subcortical trajectory and no anatomical or radiographic evidence of a path from the subcortical trajectory and the damaged cortex. In addition, as described previously, the distribution of fragments in the cortex is superficial, without evidence of subcortical penetration, and the pattern of distribution is inconsistent with a subcortical penetration. (Joseph N. Riley, “The Head Wounds of John F. Kennedy: One Bullet Cannot Account for the Injuries,” The Third Decade, 2004, http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/R Disk/Riley Joe/Item 04.pdf)

If you don't grasp Riley's technical language, let me translate it for you: the autopsy materials show two separate bullet tracks through the brain (not fragment trails, but tracks or wound paths), one path being well above the other, and those tracks are not connected in any way, which can only mean that two bullets entered JFK's skull.

Seven, regardless of your effort to fit square pegs into round holes with the impossible trajectories, you need to explain how an FMJ bullet whose nose and tail were found in the limo could have deposited two fragments, one on the outer table and the other between the galea and the outer table, both of which are 1 cm below the alleged cowlick entry site. Even assuming this one FMJ bullet behaved like no other FMJ bullet has ever behaved and magically "sheared off" two fragments from its cross section as it entered the skull, how could the fragments have ended up 1 cm below the entry point, especially given the fact that the bullet would have entered at a 15-degree downward angle?





Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1485
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #132 on: December 13, 2023, 07:31:06 PM »
Zapruder, about 40 feet away, views and films the assassination. Immediately after he has that film - and three copies - made. He views the original film at the studio. He then gives two copies - copies not the original - to the Forrest Sorrels, the SS agent the government. Just one copy to Sorrels. Sorrels - "thuh government" doesn't take all four. No, they take - are given - two copies. Zapruder keeps the original and shows it the next day to potential buyers.

Fast forward to the Clay Shaw trial in 1967 1969. At the trial Zapruder shows the film to the jury. It's shown multiple times. It shows the explosion on JFK's head at the top/right not the back. Again, not the back. Zapruder doesn't see this change? The original film supposedly shows the explosion out of the back. Here, the film shows the top/side. It's been changed by the CIA from back to top? Zapruder doesn't see this?

You have be quite a fantasist to think Zapruder saw a blowout in the back of the head on the original but then *doesn't* notice that it has changed to the top/right in the film shown at the trial.

Fantasists indeed.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2024, 06:01:16 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #132 on: December 13, 2023, 07:31:06 PM »


Online John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4274
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #133 on: December 13, 2023, 08:59:34 PM »
Humm, well, during all this time you've spent in the "real World" [sic], you apparently have not taken the time to get yourself a decent education so you can avoid making high-school-level writing and grammatical errors.

I won't waste time dissecting your strawman misrepresentation of the case for conspiracy in JFK's death, but I will list a few of the people who have concluded and stated that JFK was killed by a conspiracy/killed by more than one gunman:

-- Robert F. Kennedy, brother of JFK and JFK's Attorney General. (Although RFK publicly endorsed the WC, we now know that privately he told many friends and family members that he believed his brother had been killed by a right-wing conspiracy, and that he planned on reopening the case if he won the White House. Historian David Talbot discusses RFK's numerous private statements on the assassination in his book Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years. We also now know that soon after the assassination, RFK and Jackie sent a private message to the Kremlin that they did not believe the Soviets were involved in JFK's death and that JFK was killed by "domestic opponents," a "right-wing conspiracy.")

-- Morris Wolff, a former White House aide to JFK and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy who later served as a legislative assistant to WC member Senator Sherman Cooper. (Wolff revealed in 2022 that Cooper did not believe the SBT, did not believe that Oswald acted alone, and did not believe that Ruby had no serious Mafia connections.)

-- Dr. David Wrone, a professor emeritus of history at the University of Wisconsin.

-- Dr. Joseph Dolce, an Army wound ballistics expert who played a leading role in the WC's wound ballistics tests. (Dr. Dolce was considered to be one of the Army's top wound ballistics experts at the time.)

-- The late Senator Richard Schweiker, who served on the Church Committee.

-- Former Senator Christopher Dodd, who served on the HSCA when he was a member of the House of Representatives.

-- Dr. Gary Aguilar, a clinical professor of ophthalmology at the University of California.

-- Dr. Roger McCarthy, a ballistics expert with Failure Analysis, which assisted with the American Bar Association's mock Oswald trials in the 1990s.

-- Dr. Arthur Snyder, formerly a physicist at the University of Indiana and then at Stanford University's Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC).

-- Journalist Robert MacNeil, formerly of the McNeil-Lehrer News Hour on PBS.

-- The late Ambassador William Atwood, former Special Assistant to the U.S. delegation to the United Nations.

-- President Lyndon Johnson. (We now know from the Johnson White House tapes that Johnson rejected the single-bullet theory. We also know from former Johnson aides and associates that Johnson believed Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy.)

-- The late Dr. Milton Helpern, a renowned forensic pathologist and formerly the medical examiner for New York City.

-- The late Dr. John Nichols, a forensic pathologist and formerly a professor of pathology at the University of Kansas.

-- The late Carlos Hathcock, a Marine sniper who was widely regarded as the greatest sniper of the 20th century.

-- The late Evelyn Lincoln, who was Kennedy's White House secretary.

-- The late Dr. George Burkley, Kennedy's personal physician.

-- Robert K. Tanenbaum, a former HSCA deputy chief counsel and a former assistant district attorney in NYC who became chief of the Homicide Bureau and then the chief of the NYC Criminal Courts.

-- G. Robert Blakey, a former HSCA chief counsel and a professor of law at Notre Dame University.

-- Gary Cornwell, a former HSCA deputy chief counsel and a former DOJ prosecutor who served as the chief of the Organized Crime Strike Force in Kansas City, where he successfully tried and convicted the chiefs of the Mafia families in both Kansas City and Denver.

-- The late Gaeton Fonzi, a respected investigative journalist whose work was published in major newspapers, including the New York Times, and who served as an investigator for the Church Committee and the HSCA.

-- Ed Lopez, a former HSCA investigator who investigated Oswald's activities in Mexico City and who co-authored the Lopez-Hardway Report (aka the Lopez Report).

-- Dan Hardway, a former HSCA investigator who worked with Ed Lopez to investigate Oswald's time in Mexico City and who co-authored the Lopez-Hardway Report.

-- Dr. David Mantik, who holds a doctorate in physics and an M.D. in radiation oncology. He is a board-certified radiation oncologist. He completed fellowships in physics at the University of Illinois and in biophysics at Stanford University. He was a professor of physics at the University of Wisconsin and at the University of Michigan. He has authored scientific papers that have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

The list could continue for many pages.

Quote
Humm, well, during all this time you've spent in the "real World" [sic], you apparently have not taken the time to get yourself a decent education so you can avoid making high-school-level writing and grammatical errors.

Here we go with yet another self serving deflection! Who do are you think you're impressing with this pompous nit-picking, as I said in the previous thread "language" is designed to convey ideas, just because I don't use the occasional capitalization or a comma, do you honestly believe that this erroneous diversion is enough for the readers to see your total lack of a worthwhile refutation of my scientifically reinforced facts?
Btw the ability to construct an anally grammatically correct sentence pales in comparison of my chosen field of JFKA image analysis and the fact that you are currently going to these extraordinary lengths just proves that you have an inferior understanding of what you are exactly arguing.



Quote
I won't waste time dissecting your strawman misrepresentation of the case for conspiracy in JFK's death

Yeah, you better run because when all the conspirators required for your endless conspiracies are tallied, the total of which encompasses hundreds of individuals across all facets of diametrically opposed professions and beliefs, your entire argument for conspiracy becomes an untenable mess and you don't seem to realize that every time you throw yet another innocent person under your bus that you are unintentionally revealing the impossibility of your paranoid beliefs!
But by all means keep it up because you're just making my job easier.

JohnM
« Last Edit: December 14, 2023, 12:15:23 AM by John Mytton »

Online John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4274
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #134 on: December 13, 2023, 09:27:14 PM »
Zapruder, about 40 feet away, views and films the assassination. Immediately after he has that film - and three copies - made. He views the original film at the studio. He then gives two copies - copies not the original - to the Forrest Sorrels, the SS agent. Sorrels - "thuh government" doesn't take all four. No, they take - are given - two copies. Zapruder keeps the original and shows it the next day to potential buyers.

Fast forward to the Clay Shaw trial in 1967. At the trial Zapruder shows the film to the jury. It's shown multiple times. It shows the explosion on JFK's head at the top/right not the back. Again, not the back. Zapruder doesn't see this change? The original film supposedly shows the explosion out of the back. Here, the film shows the top/side. It's been changed by the CIA from back to top? Zapruder doesn't see this?

You have be quite a fantasist to think Zapruder saw a blowout in the back of the head on the original but then *doesn't* notice that it has changed to the top/right in the film shown at the trial.

Fantasists indeed.

Before there was any thought of "conspiracy" the first day Dealey Plaza innocent civilian eyewitnesses were interviewed within an hour or two and they describe just like as seen in the Zapruder film, an explosion of matter out the front.



Upon close inspection of the Zapruder film, the initial forward movement of Kennedy is undeniable.



JohnM

« Last Edit: December 13, 2023, 10:13:51 PM by John Mytton »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #134 on: December 13, 2023, 09:27:14 PM »


Online John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4274
Re: LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments
« Reply #135 on: December 13, 2023, 10:48:09 PM »
Your willingness to simply brush aside contrary evidence is remarkable. Let's get a few basic facts straight to cut through all of this smoke, and then let's look at some problems with the cowlick entry site that you have never addressed (probably because you know nothing about them):

You probably don't know this but Andrew is a Lawyer who has repeatedly demonstrated on this Forum that he has a powerful understanding of geometry and physics and IIRC that he's done this type of analysis in court and is clearly making you look like the amateur that you are! Hilarious!
Btw the bottom line is, if in some alternate universe this ever went to court, you would be bumbling and stumbling with your childish hysterics and Andrew would be convincing the jury of the actual reality.

JohnM
« Last Edit: December 13, 2023, 10:58:28 PM by John Mytton »