A time to receive and give (CE399)

[John Iacoletti]

Let's go back to what I said:

For Shaw to have been right, the bullet could not have come out at any point before he left the OR.

This statement is completely agnostic as to when Shaw became aware of the thigh wound and the possibility of a bullet therein, at least so long as he knew before he left the OR after the chest procedure. Of course, if you think differently, you could always provide your reasoning, rather than belching out unsupported assertion after unsupported assertion.

That's what you're doing.  Why couldn't Shaw have become aware of the bullet prior to Connally having entered the OR? 

What evidence is there that the bullet came out or was removed at any time during Connally's presence in the OR?

Why couldn't it have come out or been removed prior to Connally's presence in the OR?

In his book Unnatural Death, Michael Baden says that, once they're all the way in, bullets do not fall out. As the bullet penetrates through the soft tissues, the tissue stretches before failing. The result is that the permanent wound cavity is slightly smaller than the object that made it. So when everything comes to rest, the wound track closes behind the projectile, holding the object inside. I've read that there are cases where a bullet that lodged near the surface was worked outwards by the cumulative effects of body movement to a point where it can penetrate the skin and be removed by hand. However, this takes months or years after the initial injury, so that doesn't apply here. The idea that Connally's thigh wound went from hole with a bullet hidden inside to Free Willy without human intervention is also vanishingly small.

Uh.....isn't that exactly what the narrative says was the case with CE399?

If you want to assert that Connally still had a bullet in him when he entered the OR,

Nope, that was one of your assumptions.

but became mysteriously bullet-free when Gregory took over,

That too.

then you need to explain how that happened, when it happened, who made it happen, and (hopefully, though not necessarily required) why it happened. If you lack evidence to answer any of these questions, then assumptions must be substituted instead of evidence.

Which is exactly what you did with your speculation that Shaw reported a bullet in the leg merely because he "saw one hole".  There's no evidence for that.

[Mitch Todd]

That's what you're doing.  Why couldn't Shaw have become aware of the bullet prior to Connally having entered the OR? 

I've never argued that Shaw couldn't have become aware of the bullet wound (which is all the claimed to have seen himself) in Connally's thigh before Connally entered the OR.

Why couldn't it have come out or been removed prior to Connally's presence in the OR?

If the bullet came out of Connally's thigh before Connally was wheeled into the OR, then Shaw's press conference statement is wrong, just like I've said from the very beginning. Do you not know what you've been arguing?

MT: In his book Unnatural Death, Michael Baden says that, once they're all the way in, bullets do not fall out. As the bullet penetrates through the soft tissues, the tissue stretches before failing. The result is that the permanent wound cavity is slightly smaller than the object that made it. So when everything comes to rest, the wound track closes behind the projectile, holding the object inside. I've read that there are cases where a bullet that lodged near the surface was worked outwards by the cumulative effects of body movement to a point where it can penetrate the skin and be removed by hand. However, this takes months or years after the initial injury, so that doesn't apply here. The idea that Connally's thigh wound went from hole with a bullet hidden inside to Free Willy without human intervention is also vanishingly small.

Uh.....isn't that exactly what the narrative says was the case with CE399?

Nope. I've yet to find a take on the SBT/CE399 that said that the bullet penetrated all the way into the thigh.

MT: If you want to assert that Connally still had a bullet in him when he entered the OR

Nope, that was one of your assumptions.

If there was a  bullet in Connally's thigh when Shaw left the OR, then it had to have been there when Connally entered the OR. Unless you want to argue that Shaw installed the bullet into the thigh himself, you have to assume that the bullet was in the thigh when the Governor was pushed into the OR, if you wan to argue that Shaw was right at the press conference. Do you not know what you've previously been arguing?

MT: but became mysteriously bullet-free when Gregory took over,

That too.

If you assert that Shaw and Gregory were both correct, then you have to assume that the bullet was in the thigh when Shaw was in the OR, but had mysteriously vanished by the time  Gregory had x-rays made.

Which is exactly what you did with your speculation that Shaw reported a bullet in the leg merely because he "saw one hole".  There's no evidence for that.

Shaw's only seeing one hole is a matter of record, not a speculation nor an assumption. That is the only statement he made about what he knew of the wound. By his own account, he did not examine the wound other than just looking at it to note it's location. He never claimed, in any interview or testimony after 11/22/63 that there was a bullet in the leg, that anyone else told him that there was a bullet in the leg, or that he knew for any reason that there was a bullet in the leg. The only way this corpus of (non) statements works with Shaw's original press conference statements, the x-rays, and the testimony and interviews of Shires and Gregory is for Shaw to have been wrong about the bullet that afternoon. The simplest and most reasonable way to explain the discrepancy is to say that Shaw saw the one wound in Connally's thigh and assumed that it still had a bullet inside.

[John Iacoletti]

I've never argued that Shaw couldn't have become aware of the bullet wound (which is all the claimed to have seen himself) in Connally's thigh before Connally entered the OR.

I didn’t say bullet wound, I said bullet.

If the bullet came out of Connally's thigh before Connally was wheeled into the OR, then Shaw's press conference statement is wrong, just like I've said from the very beginning. Do you not know what you've been arguing?

No, you’ve been arguing that Shaw’s report of a bullet in the leg was merely an assumption.

Nope. I've yet to find a take on the SBT/CE399 that said that the bullet penetrated all the way into the thigh.

Now, I’m not sure if you really know what you’re arguing. Why does Shaw’s bullet have to be “all the way in” (whatever that means)?

If there was a  bullet in Connally's thigh when Shaw left the OR, then it had to have been there when Connally entered the OR.

Just because Shaw mentioned the bullet after he left the OR, doesn’t mean that the bullet was still there when Shaw left the OR. Remember, he didn’t examine the wound in the OR.

Shaw's only seeing one hole is a matter of record, not a speculation nor an assumption.

It’s an assumption that this is the reason he reported that a bullet remained in Connally’s leg.

That is the only statement he made about what he knew of the wound. By his own account, he did not examine the wound other than just looking at it to note it's location. He never claimed, in any interview or testimony after 11/22/63 that there was a bullet in the leg, that anyone else told him that there was a bullet in the leg, or that he knew for any reason that there was a bullet in the leg.

You know what else he never claimed in any interview or testimony after 11/22/63? That he had reported a bullet remaining in the governors leg merely on the basis that he saw a single hole.

[Mitch Todd]

I didn’t say bullet wound, I said bullet.

You said "Why couldn't Shaw have become aware of the bullet prior to Connally having entered the OR?" This question presupposes something that hasn't been established. I figured that you were maybe back to trying to insinuate something that you haven't been able to prove, so I stated the question in terms of what has bee established in my reply.

MT: If the bullet came out of Connally's thigh before Connally was wheeled into the OR, then Shaw's press conference statement is wrong, just like I've said from the very beginning

No, you’ve been arguing that Shaw’s report of a bullet in the leg was merely an assumption.

I've been arguing from the beginning that Shaw was wrong. The assumption bit is the explanation of how he could be wrong. This is what I originally wrote:

Shaw did not treat the wound. Shaw never even claimed that he really examined the wound. Nor did he ever claim to have seen an x-ray showing a bullet in the thigh. For that matter, no one else claimed that a bullet was found in the wound, or that bullet could be seen in the x-rays taken of the Governor's thigh.

From his own testimony, all Shaw would have known at the time was that there was one, and only one, wound in the thigh. It's no stretch to think that Shaw concluded that a projectile had entered the thigh through the wound and remained in the leg, based on what little he knew. But he knew little about it, as he admitted.

You can choose to believe the physician who treated the wound and the x-rays created to facilitate this treatment, or you can choose to believe something said by another doctor who'd left the OR while the thigh surgery was being performed. A doctor who admitted that he "didn't examine [the thing wound] that closely, except for its general location." This shouldn't be a difficult choice.

The bit about Shaw assuming that a bullet was still in the thigh takes up all of one sentence in three paragraphs. The rest explains that Shaw wasn't in position to actually know if there was still a bullet in Connally's thigh, and that Shires and the x-rays tell a different story than what we got from Shaw's press conference.

Now, I’m not sure if you really know what you’re arguing. Why does Shaw’s bullet have to be “all the way in” (whatever that means)?

You don't know what "all the way in" means? My my!

In this case, it means that the bullet is embedded completely within the body. Had part of it been sticking out, Shaw (and/or someone else) would have said so at some point.

Just because Shaw mentioned the bullet after he left the OR, doesn’t mean that the bullet was still there when Shaw left the OR. Remember, he didn’t examine the wound in the OR.

He *did* examine the wound in the OR. He testified that when he was in TR2, he "observed no wounds on the Governor at this time. It wasn't until he was taken to the operating room that I properly examined him from the standpoint of the wound."

It’s an assumption that this is the reason he reported that a bullet remained in Connally’s leg.

It's a single assumption that neatly ties together Shaw's statement with the evidence given by Gregory, Shires, and Parkland's radiology department without requiring any additional baggage. This is something that none of the inchoate alternative explanations that you've tentatively wiggled forward can accomplish.                                           

MT: That is the only statement he made about what he knew of the wound. By his own account, he did not examine the wound other than just looking at it to note it's location. He never claimed, in any interview or testimony after 11/22/63 that there was a bullet in the leg, that anyone else told him that there was a bullet in the leg, or that he knew for any reason that there was a bullet in the leg.

You know what else he never claimed in any interview or testimony after 11/22/63? That he had reported a bullet remaining in the governors leg merely on the basis that he saw a single hole.

Sour grapes, Mr Iacoletti. Sour grapes that do not change the lack of any subsequent attempt by Shaw to defend his press conference statement.

[John Iacoletti]

Shaw did not treat the wound. Shaw never even claimed that he really examined the wound.
. . .
He *did* examine the wound in the OR

Make up your mind.  Did he examine the wound or not?

You don't know what "all the way in" means? My my!

In this case, it means that the bullet is embedded completely within the body. Had part of it been sticking out, Shaw (and/or someone else) would have said so at some point.

Funny....nobody ever said that they saw part of CE399 "sticking out" at some point.  Apparently this is only a requirement for Shaw's bullet.
 

He *did* examine the wound in the OR. He testified that when he was in TR2, he "observed no wounds on the Governor at this time. It wasn't until he was taken to the operating room that I properly examined him from the standpoint of the wound."

He's talking about the chest wound there.

[Mitch Todd]

Make up your mind.  Did he examine the wound or not?

As far as Shaw was concerned, he examined it, just superficially: "No; I didn't examine it that closely, except for its general location."

Funny....nobody ever said that they saw part of CE399 "sticking out" at some point.  Apparently this is only a requirement for Shaw's bullet.

It might be a surprise to some, but Connally was fully clothed when he was hit, and remained so until he was undressed in the flurry of activity in TR2. It could have come out at any time between Dealey Plaza and TR2, falling out of his pants at some point unnoticed because Connally, and not his pants, was the center of the activity flurry. There is also this provocative coincidence that I find interesting, but that's a story for another day.

He's talking about the chest wound there.

More than that:

Mr. SPECTER - What wounds, if any, did you observe on the Governor at that time?
Dr. SHAW - I observed no wounds on the Governor at this time. It wasn't until he was taken to the operating room that I properly examined him from the standpoint of the wound

Note the "s" in wounds, and that Specter's question isn't specific to any part of the body. Though the singular 'wound' is probably is a reference to the chest wound, which had been obscured by an 'occlusive seal'

[Andrew Mason]

The bit about Shaw assuming that a bullet was still in the thigh takes up all of one sentence in three paragraphs. The rest explains that Shaw wasn't in position to actually know if there was still a bullet in Connally's thigh, and that Shires and the x-rays tell a different story than what we got from Shaw's press conference.

I agree with the comment that "Shires and the x-rays tell a different story". I am not sure why Dr. Shaw's or even Dr. Gregory's comments are all that important. Dr. Shires had the closest and longest look at the thigh wound and x-rays.

In my view, the most significant issue is the location of the metal piece that remained in the thigh.

Dr. Gregory thought the metal piece appeared just below the skin but it is not clear what he based that on.

Dr. Shires had debrided the wound down to the region of the femur. This involved cleaning the wound and removing dead tissue. I am not sure why he would be removing dead tissue down as far as the femur unless the bullet had travelled that far.

Dr. Shires always maintained that the metal piece was embedded in the femur.  That metal piece shows up on both the anterior-posterior and lateral views at the same location relative to the femur (CE694, 695, 696).

If Dr. Shires was right, the object that made the thigh wound was a missile that had entered the thigh obliquely along the direction of the femur, travelled down to the femur where it left a small amount of lead, but did not remain in the thigh for some reason.  How long it was in the thigh cannot be determined from the evidence we have. There is evidence that CE399, whose condition fits the wound characteristics of the thigh wound, was found on Connally's stretcher.  It is a reasonable inference that CE399 caused the thigh wound.  That is about all we can say from that evidence.

[Martin Weidmann]

I agree with the comment that "Shires and the x-rays tell a different story". I am not sure why Dr. Shaw's or even Dr. Gregory's comments are all that important. Dr. Shires had the closest and longest look at the thigh wound and x-rays.

In my view, the most significant issue is the location of the metal piece that remained in the thigh.

Dr. Gregory thought the metal piece appeared just below the skin but it is not clear what he based that on.

Dr. Shires had debrided the wound down to the region of the femur. This involved cleaning the wound and removing dead tissue. I am not sure why he would be removing dead tissue down as far as the femur unless the bullet had travelled that far.

Dr. Shires always maintained that the metal piece was embedded in the femur.  That metal piece shows up on both the anterior-posterior and lateral views at the same location relative to the femur (CE694, 695, 696).

If Dr. Shires was right, the object that made the thigh wound was a missile that had entered the thigh obliquely along the direction of the femur, travelled down to the femur where it left a small amount of lead, but did not remain in the thigh for some reason.  How long it was in the thigh cannot be determined from the evidence we have. There is evidence that CE399, whose condition fits the wound characteristics of the thigh wound, was found on Connally's stretcher.  It is a reasonable inference that CE399 caused the thigh wound.  That is about all we can say from that evidence.

There is evidence that CE399, whose condition fits the wound characteristics of the thigh wound, was found on Connally's stretcher.

What would that evidence be?

Tomlinson couldn't even say on which stretcher he found the bullet nor is there - as far as I know - any evidence that confirms the stretcher used for Connally was indeed in the room when Tomlinson found the bullet.