The Shifting Single-Bullet Theory--It Always "Works" No Matter What

[Michael T. Griffith]

The distinguished war surgeon and noted medical author Dr John Lattimer discovered that a tight shirt collar, with its multiple reinforced stitching, kept the exit wound to a small size. Here's a quote from an article that is about exit wounds being contained in general:

    "If the area of exit is pressed against a firm object (even a tight
     pants waistband), the skin edges will be abraded (or “shored”).
     Sometimes, the entrance and exit truly cannot be distinguished"

I've already debunked this nonsense in previous replies, but you just keep repeating it. Again, (1) JFK's collar was not tightly gripping his neck but, as everyone would expect, fit comfortably around it--it bore no resemblance to a "tight pants waistband." And, (2) the bullet, even one traveling at just 2200 fps, would have exited the neck before the neck tissue would have had time to expand to press against the comfortably fitting collar.

This is a good example of your practice of repeating arguments that you know have been debunked because they were debunked in replies to you in previous threads. Why didn't you mention, as I've documented for you in previous replies, that Lattimer was caught red-handed misrepresenting his test data, that Lattimer assumed that the back wound was above the throat wound and traveled downward through the neck, that Lattimer royally goofed in reading the skull x-rays, etc.? 

Folks, if you want the full story on Lattimer and his fraudulent tests and claims, I suggest you read Dr. Thomas's demolition of Lattimer in his book Hear No Evil. Here's an article written by Dr. Gary Aguilar and Dr. Cyril Wecht that deals with some of Lattimer's fraudulent claims (as well as those made by Luis Alvarez, Nicholas Nalli, and the Haags): https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/peer-reviewed-medical-scientific-journalism-has-been-corrupted-by-warren-commission-apologists.

We all can readily explain your falling for the Knott 3D study because you know little about perspective and line-of-sight analysis.

LOL! Well, of course you dismiss the only 3D laser analysis ever done on the SBT because the analysis proves that the SBT is impossible! You peddle Lattimer's quackery but dismiss the Knott Lab 3D laser analysis. You just don't care that Knott Laboratory is a respected and recognized forensic engineering firm that specializes in the digital reconstructions of events. We both know that if the Knott Lab analysis had found that the SBT was possible, you would be hailing Knott Lab's recognized expertise and experience.

Folks, if you are new and are just reading the latest replies in this thread, here is an article about Knott Lab's recent 3D laser analysis of the SBT that proves the SBT is impossible:

https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-lab-uses-forensic-science-to-refute-warren-commission-findings-on-jfk-assassination/

Here's a 24-minute podcast interview with Knott Lab CEO Stanley Stoll in which he explains the Knott 3D laser analysis and shows clips based on the digital reconstruction from the 3D laser data:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glUgE9RCwnw

For over a quarter of a century, you have promoted the claim that the Top-of-the-Head Photo shows the cowlick wound in a place that is actually the vertex area.

You know this is a lie. You know that I have always said that the cowlick site is about 1 inch above the lambda and 0.75 inches to the right of the sagittal suture, exactly where the HSCA FPP and Dr. Riley, among others, placed it. You must be hoping that most readers will not have read our previous exchanges on this issue, and that they will not have seen you grossly misrepresent Dr. Riley's placement of the cowlick site, even though Dr. Riley provided diagrams that place the wound exactly where the HSCA FPP did.

I'm guessing you're also hoping that readers will be unaware that in one exchange you argued that the cerebellum is part of the right cerebrum, or that you falsely claimed that Dr. McDonnel said the skull x-rays show no missing frontal bone, proving that you really have no business pretending to be any kind of an authority on the JFK case.

That there break is huge. Could only be made by 2 slugs, one entering, one exiting.

LOL! Is this supposed to be a joke?! That "break" is where the Parkland nurses cut the tie to remove it! Sheesh, are you kidding? Have you read nothing but pro-WC propaganda on this issue? You might start with Harold Weisberg's research on the matter--he was the one who finally obtained high-quality photos of the tie and shirt. He also examined the tie at the National Archives and interviewed Dr. Carrico.

Furthermore, that "break" in the tie--the cut--would have been nowhere near the throat wound but would have been inside the collar. If a bullet had exited the throat wound, it would have torn through the tie knot; if we assume for the sake of argument that JFK's tie was substantially off-center, the bullet would have at least nicked the knot's left edge.

So, allow me to repeat my questions, with a little bit of additional information:

-- Why did the first two drafts of the autopsy report say nothing about the throat wound being an exit wound for the back wound?

-- How could a bullet have exited the throat without tearing through the tie or at least nicking the edge of the tie knot? You realize that when Harold Weisberg finally obtained clear close-up photos of the tie from the National Archives, we learned that there was no hole through the tie and no nick on either edge of the tie, right? Right? You know about this, right?

-- Why did the Parkland doctors who saw and/or treated the throat wound describe a laceration of the pharynx and trachea that was larger than the wound itself? As Dr. Nathan Jacobs pointed out, the fact that the damage behind the throat wound was larger than the wound itself indicates that the throat wound was entrance wound (Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p. 158).

We should also keep in mind that autopsy x-ray technician Jerrol Custer told the ARRB that he was certain he took x-rays of the C3/C4 region of the neck and that those x-rays showed numerous fragments. Custer added that he suspected the reason those x-rays disappeared was that they showed a large number of bullet fragments in the neck (Deposition of Jerrol Francis Custer, ARRB, Transcript of Proceedings, October 28, 1997, pp. 168-170). Custer noted that when he drew attention to the bullet fragments in the C3/C4 area during the autopsy, he was told to “mind my own business” (p. 169).

These were probably fragments from the projectile that entered the throat and ranged downward. This would explain the damage to the pharynx and the trachea behind the wound. This would also explain why the autopsy doctors determined with absolute certainty, after prolonged and extensive probing after removing the chest organs, that the back wound was shallow and had no exit point. Several of the men standing near the autopsy table could see the probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity--that was where the back wound ended.

-- Why was the throat wound only about 4-5 mm in diameter and punched-in, when every single soft-tissue exit wound in the WC's own wound ballistics tests was much larger and punched-out? (Apparently even the WC's wound ballistics experts knew that the collar would have had no effect on the wound's appearance.)

-- Why did the three Parkland doctors who saw the throat wound before the shirt was removed and who commented on the wound's location state that the throat wound was above the tie knot/collar?

-- If the irregular slits in the collar were made by an exiting bullet, why did the FBI fail to find any metal traces in the fabric of the slits--or in the tie? As Rockefeller Foundation scholar Henry Hurt noted, "the FBI laboratory—after spectrographic analysis—could find no metal traces on the tie or the neckband of the collar, traces that should have been there if a bullet had caused the damage" (Reasonable Doubt, pp. 59-60). The FBI found metal traces around the holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat, but no traces on the tie or around the slits in the front. Why?

-- If the irregular slits in JFK's shirt collar were made by an exiting bullet, why is there no fabric missing from the slits? When bullets exit clothing, they invariably remove some fabric, just as the bullet that exited Connally's chest removed fabric when it made the holes in Connally's shirt and coat. FYI, the bullet that entered JFK's back also removed fabric when it made the holes in JFK's shirt and coat? What gives?

[Jerry Organ]

I've already debunked this nonsense in previous replies, but you just keep repeating it. Again, (1) JFK's collar was not tightly gripping his neck but, as everyone would expect, fit comfortably around it--it bore no resemblance to a "tight pants waistband." And, (2) the bullet, even one traveling at just 2200 fps, would have exited the neck before the neck tissue would have had time to expand to press against the comfortably fitting collar.

This is a good example of your practice of repeating arguments that you know have been debunked because they were debunked in replies to you in previous threads.

LOL! Anything "debunked" by you isn't debunked at all.

Why didn't you mention, as I've documented for you in previous replies, that Lattimer was caught red-handed misrepresenting his test data, that Lattimer assumed that the back wound was above the throat wound and traveled downward through the neck, that Lattimer royally goofed in reading the skull x-rays, etc.? 

The back wound was above the throat wound and traveled downward through the neck.

Folks, if you want the full story on Lattimer and his fraudulent tests and claims, I suggest you read Dr. Thomas's demolition of Lattimer in his book Hear No Evil. Here's an article written by Dr. Gary Aguilar and Dr. Cyril Wecht that deals with some of Lattimer's fraudulent claims (as well as those made by Luis Alvarez, Nicholas Nalli, and the Haags): https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/peer-reviewed-medical-scientific-journalism-has-been-corrupted-by-warren-commission-apologists.

LOL! Well, of course you dismiss the only 3D laser analysis ever done on the SBT because the analysis proves that the SBT is impossible! You peddle Lattimer's quackery but dismiss the Knott Lab 3D laser analysis. You just don't care that Knott Laboratory is a respected and recognized forensic engineering firm that specializes in the digital reconstructions of events. We both know that if the Knott Lab analysis had found that the SBT was possible, you would be hailing Knott Lab's recognized expertise and experience.

I don't dismiss the Knott Lab 3D SBT study because it "proves that the SBT is impossible". I dismiss it because the placement of the figures in their Z225 frame recreation is way off.

Folks, if you are new and are just reading the latest replies in this thread, here are some articles about Knott Lab's recent 3D laser analysis of the SBT that proves the SBT is impossible:

https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-lab-uses-forensic-science-to-refute-warren-commission-findings-on-jfk-assassination/

Here's a 24-minute podcast interview with Knott Lab CEO Stanley Stoll in which he explains the Knott 3D laser analysis and shows clips based on the digital reconstruction from the 3D laser data:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=glUgE9RCwnw

You know this is a lie. You know that I have always said that the cowlick site is about 1 inch above the lambda and 0.75 inches to the right of the sagittal suture, exactly where the HSCA FPP and Dr. Riley, among others, placed it. You must be hoping that most readers will not have read our previous exchanges on this issue, and that they will not have seen you grossly misrepresent Dr. Riley's placement of the cowlick site, even though Dr. Riley provided diagrams that place the wound exactly where the HSCA FPP did.

I'm guessing you're also hoping that readers will be unaware that in one exchange you argued that the cerebellum is part of the right cerebrum,

Reader, go to https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3641.msg153912.html#msg153912 and see where Griffith refers to the "right-rear occipital lobe" and the full cerebellum, and I refer to the"right cerebrum". I also show the brain drawing to further clarify I was referring to the right cerebrum as that is what is damaged in the drawing. Why would I claim the cerebellum was damaged?

Griffith is a Mormon. They must believe in bearing false witness because he practices it nonstop.

or that you falsely claimed that Dr. McDonnel said the skull x-rays show no missing frontal bone, proving that you really have no business pretending to be any kind of an authority on the JFK case.

I said the frontal bone per se wasn't missing, not that some small pieces along the posterior edge weren't missing. Pat Speer thinks the dark area where frontal bone would be in the lateral Xray doesn't mean all that area is missing.

LOL! Is this supposed to be a joke?! That "break" is where the Parkland nurses cut the tie to remove it! Sheesh, are you kidding? Have you read nothing but pro-WC propaganda on this issue? You might start with Harold Weisberg's research on the matter--he was the one who finally obtained high-quality photos of the tie and shirt. He also examined the tie at the National Archives and interviewed Dr. Carrico.

Griffith believes nurses at Parkland were using sharp-pointed scalpels to remove clothing. How dumb is that? Maybe Mormons aren't allowed to have scissors.

[Michael T. Griffith]

LOL! Anything "debunked" by you isn't debunked at all.

Translation: You will never admit when you make a mistake, no matter how obvious it is.

The back wound was above the throat wound and traveled downward through the neck.

LOL! Did you just beam here from the 1960s? I mean, holy cow, this nonsense was debunked in the 1970s!

Did you miss the news that the HSCA FPP determined that the back wound was below the throat wound, that the bullet struck the back at an upward trajectory, and that the tunneling inside the wound indicated that the bullet traveled upward after it entered the back? The HSCA FPP noted that "the wound beneath the skin appears to be tunneled from below upward" (7 HSCA 87). HSCA FPP Figure 12 shows the back wound slightly below the throat wound (7 HSCA 100). The upward-trajectory finding confirmed the 1975 finding of Dr. Werner Spitz of the Rockefeller Commission’s medical panel:

--------------------------------------------------------
There is no doubt that the bullet which struck the President’s back penetrated the skin in a sharply upward direction, as is evident from the width of the abrasion at the lower half of the bullet wound of entrance. The term "sharply upward direction" is used because it is evident from this injury that the missile traveled upwards within the body. (Report of Werner Spitz, 4/24/75, p. 1, Rockefeller Commission papers, see https://websites.umich.edu/~ahaq/correspondence.pdf)
--------------------------------------------------------

How can you not know this stuff and pretend to have any business discussing the JFK case? This information has been available and well known for decades, yet here you are still peddling the myth that the back wound was above the throat wound and that the bullet traveled downward through the neck.

Why do you suppose Dr. Baden's solution to the facts about the back wound's location and trajectory was to assume that JFK was leaning 50-60 degrees forward when the bullet struck? Humm?

I don't dismiss the Knott Lab 3D SBT study because it "proves that the SBT is impossible". I dismiss it because the placement of the figures in their Z225 frame recreation is way off.

Uh-huh. Says the guy who just claimed that the back wound was above the throat wound and that the bullet traveled downward. Says the guy who recently said that the cerebellum is part of the right cerebrum. Says the guy who compared the taking of optical density measurements to using "seer stones" (even though a neurologist took a separate set of OD measurements and those measurements agreed with the ones taken by a radiation oncologist who also happens to hold a PhD in physics and who taught physics at a major university). Says the guy who calls respected, recognized, PhD-holding, and peer-review-published experts "quacks" whenever he has no credible answer for their findings.

FYI, the Knott Lab engineers placed the JFK and JBC figures after creating a digital twin of Dealey Plaza and then using AI-assisted photogrammetric analysis of the Zapruder film, photos of the limo, and various other photos to place the figures in the limousine. They made the digital twin of the plaza by doing an exhaustive laser survey of the plaza, collecting millions of data points to enable a digital 3D recreation of the plaza that was an exact duplicate of the plaza in every aspect. After making the digital twin, they used photogrammetric analysis to place the Kennedy and Connally figures in the limousine (as well as to place the limousine in the correct position on Elm Street).

The Knott Lab website explains:

--------------------------------------------------------
Using a 3D laser scanner (Leica RTC360), we conducted 36 laser scans of Dealey Plaza. This laser scanner captures up to two million points per second and HDR imagery, resulting in a point cloud, or digital twin, of the scene. This provides forensic engineers with a scientifically accurate model from which measurements can be taken. The Dealey Plaza point cloud has over 851 million data points.

The next step was to reconstruct the scene to historic accuracy for November 22, 1963. To do so, our visualization experts used historic photographs of the plaza and presidential limousine, as well as the “Zapruder film,” which is widely considered the best video footage of the incident. Using a process called photogrammetry, the visualization team was able to place these images into the point cloud, syncing their locations within the scene. Altogether, 25 historic photographs and 7 frames of the Zapruder film were used for this photogrammetry. . . .

Photogrammetry, camera matching, camera tracking and object matching processes were also used to establish the location of Oswald’s perch, the correct dimensions of the limousine, create the digital models of President Kennedy and Governor Connally, and establish their positions, frame by frame, throughout the incident. (https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-laboratory-presents-digital-reconstruction-and-findings-on-the-assassination-of-president-john-f-kennedy/)
--------------------------------------------------------

This is a good time to point out to any newcomers that WC apologists have produced several different and conflicting SBT graphics over the years, graphics that have Connally turned to markedly different degrees, graphics that have Connally seated in different horizontal positions on the seat, etc., etc. And, all of them ignore the hard physical evidence of the rear holes in JFK's coat and shirt, claiming, in the face of clear evidence to the contrary (Willis 5 and Betzner 3), that JFK's coat and shirt both magically markedly bunched perpendicularly in almost perfect millimeter-for-millimeter correspondence and without going high enough to block a rear view of JFK's collar!

Reader, go to https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3641.msg153912.html#msg153912 and see where Griffith refers to the "right-rear occipital lobe" and the full cerebellum, and I refer to the"right cerebrum". I also show the brain drawing to further clarify I was referring to the right cerebrum as that is what is damaged in the drawing. Why would I claim the cerebellum was damaged?

You're lying, and anyone who reads our exchanges will readily see that you're lying.

I made the factual observation that the cerebellum and the right-rear occipital lobe are virtually undamaged in the autopsy brain photos (my exact words were that they are "virtually pristine" in the brain photos). You claimed I was wrong because the "right cerebrum" is damaged in the brain drawing. Let's read what you said, again:

The brain drawing shows the right cerebrum "virtually intact". Are you wearing your Mormon underwear too tight?

You clearly did not understand that the cerebellum is not part of the right cerebrum. You also clearly did not realize that the right-rear occipital lobe is only a small part of the right cerebrum.

When I pointed out your blunder, you came up with the childish lie that you said "right cerebrum" because you somehow thought that I believed that the right-rear occipital lobe was part of the cerebellum, even though I had always distinguished them as separate areas.

You invented the nonsense about my allegedly placing the cowlick site near/at the vertex out of thin air. Anyone who looks at the diagrams that I referenced and linked can see that I have always placed the site about 1 inch above the lambda and about 0.75 inches from the sagittal suture, just as Dr. Riley did and just as the HSCA FPP did. You created this diversion because you can't explain the fact that the top-of-head photos show intact cerebral cortex in the same location as the cowlick site.

Griffith is a Mormon. They must believe in bearing false witness because he practices it nonstop.

I think I'll let your bigoted, childish comment speak for itself.

I said the frontal bone per se wasn't missing, not that some small pieces along the posterior edge weren't missing.

You're lying again. You not only said that the "charge" of missing frontal bone was an "annoying error," you claimed that the missing frontal bone was merely "normal luminosity" and then implied that Dr. McDonnel identified no missing from bone. Let me quote your own words to "refresh your memory":

Monte Evans' fine review of High Treason 2 omitted more than one annoying error. Among them: Livingstone's charge of missing frontal bone in the x-rays. . . .

Of course, the "missing" frontal bone is nothing more than normal luminosity. . . .  Dr. McDonnel reported the frontal bone present (1 HSCA 205). (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/R Disk/Riley Joe/Item 04.pdf)

McDonnel said no such thing. If we turn to 1 HSCA 205, we see that he said just the opposite:

--------------------------------------------------------
Nearly complete loss of right parietal bone, the upper portion of the right temporal bone, and a portion of the posterior aspect of the right frontal bone. (Report of G. M. McDonnel, 8/4/1978, p. 2, in 7 HSCA 218 and in 1 HSCA 205).
--------------------------------------------------------

And did you miss the news that Dr. Lawrence Angel, the HSCA FPP's forensic anthropology consultant, determined that the  large triangular skull fragment is frontal bone? Did you miss the news that Dr. Boswell's autopsy diagram showed a sizable chunk of missing frontal bone? Did you miss the news that Dr. Mantik confirmed the large amount of missing frontal bone with OD measurements?

Folks, I cover this issue in detail in my recent thread "The Missing Frontal Bone: Another Fatal Blow to the Lone-Gunman Theory" (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,3914.0.html).

Pat Speer thinks the dark area where frontal bone would be in the lateral Xray doesn't mean all that area is missing.

Pat Speer?! Pat Speer has no medical training and has made a number of bogus claims about the medical evidence.

Again, folks, see my thread "The Missing Frontal Bone."

Griffith believes nurses at Parkland were using sharp-pointed scalpels to remove clothing. How dumb is that? Maybe Mormons aren't allowed to have scissors.

So, uh, are you supporting Marjan's ridiculous claim that the cut in the tie was not made by a nurse but was made by a bullet? You can't be serious. How about if you conjure up a graphic that shows how a bullet exiting the throat could have torn through that part of the tie?! Hey? Let's see it? You aren't really supporting Marjan's bizarre argument, are you?

And, here's a thought about the cutting instrument that the nurses used to cut the tie to remove it: Isn't it entirely logical and plausible to believe that the nurse who cut the tie was in a great hurry, given the identity of the patient and his dire condition, and that she therefore grabbed the first cutting instrument that she saw and that this instrument happened to be a sharp-edged instrument, since there are many such instruments in your typical ER? How about that?

[Andrew Mason]

We all can readily explain your falling for the Knott 3D study because you know little about perspective and line-of-sight analysis.

I would be interested in your list of the errors that you have found in the Knott model.  If you have a problem with their placement of JFK and JBC you should be able to explain the problem.

Knott Laboratory concluded that the path through JFK at z223 cannot strike JBC anywhere close to his right armpit.  They say that the straight line path through JFK's midline goes 6 inches to the left of JBC's armpit. 

Now we know that it did not strike him 6 inches left of the right armpit.  My point has been that z223 is not where the JFK neck shot occurred.  There is a lot of evidence that it was the first shot and that the first shot was just before z202 - likely z190-195, at which time JBC was turned to the right:


 and the right to left angle from the SN to the car direction was 15 degrees:



At that angle, a shot through JFK exiting on the left side of hit tie knot about 1 cm left of his midline, will travel 6.4 inches or 16.3 cm farther left over the 24 inch distance between JFK's throat exit wound and the plane of Gov. Connally's seatback (24tan(15)=6.43).  The photographic experts at Itek working for the HSCA concluded that JBC may have been inside JFK anywhere 10.2 to 20.3 cm (4-8 inches) (6 HSCA 49 - footnote).  The distance from JBC's midline to his right armpit entry wound was 20 cm (6 HSCA 48 - figure II-18).  All I am saying is that this still puts the bullet through JFK anywhere from 6.1 cm left of JBC's midline to 4 cm to the right of his midline when it crossed the plane of JBC's seatback.  That is 16 cm to 26.1 cm left of his right armpit entry wound. 

So in the best case scenario for the SBT at z193, the bullet passes 16 cm left of JBC's right armpit entry wound and it could have been up to 26.1 cm left of the actual wound.

With JBC turned to the right as he is at that point, this does two things:  It moves the left side of his back farther away from the seatback, allowing he bullet to travel even farther to the left.  It also reduces the effective width of his back for the bullet to strike.

[Michael T. Griffith]

I would be interested in your list of the errors that you have found in the Knott model.  If you have a problem with their placement of JFK and JBC you should be able to explain the problem.

Knott Laboratory concluded that the path through JFK at z223 cannot strike JBC anywhere close to his right armpit.  They say that the straight line path through JFK's midline goes 6 inches to the left of JBC's armpit. 

Now we know that it did not strike him 6 inches left of the right armpit.  My point has been that z223 is not where the JFK neck shot occurred.  There is a lot of evidence that it was the first shot and that the first shot was just before z202 - likely z190-195, at which time JBC was turned to the right:

 and the right to left angle from the SN to the car direction was 15 degrees:

At that angle, a shot through JFK exiting on the left side of hit tie knot about 1 cm left of his midline, will travel 6.4 inches or 16.3 cm farther left over the 24 inch distance between JFK's throat exit wound and the plane of Gov. Connally's seatback (24tan(15)=6.43).  The photographic experts at Itek working for the HSCA concluded that JBC may have been inside JFK anywhere 10.2 to 20.3 cm (4-8 inches) (6 HSCA 49 - footnote).  The distance from JBC's midline to his right armpit entry wound was 20 cm (6 HSCA 48 - figure II-18).  All I am saying is that this still puts the bullet through JFK anywhere from 6.1 cm left of JBC's midline to 4 cm to the right of his midline when it crossed the plane of JBC's seatback.  That is 16 cm to 26.1 cm left of his right armpit entry wound. 

So in the best case scenario for the SBT at z193, the bullet passes 16 cm left of JBC's right armpit entry wound and it could have been up to 26.1 cm left of the actual wound.

With JBC turned to the right as he is at that point, this does two things:  It moves the left side of his back farther away from the seatback, allowing he bullet to travel even farther to the left.  It also reduces the effective width of his back for the bullet to strike.

Have you bothered to read the Knott Lab material? For one thing, they tested trajectories using Z210 and Z225. See the following sources:

https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-laboratory-presents-digital-reconstruction-and-findings-on-the-assassination-of-president-john-f-kennedy/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GkQyYgr_aqY

As I mentioned in my previous reply, the Knott Lab engineers placed the JFK and JBC figures after creating a digital twin of Dealey Plaza and then using AI-assisted photogrammetric analysis of the Zapruder film, photos of the limo, and various other photos to place the figures in the limousine. They made the digital twin of the plaza by doing an exhaustive laser survey of the plaza, collecting millions of data points to enable a digital 3D recreation of the plaza that was an exact duplicate of the plaza in every aspect. After making the digital twin, they used photogrammetric analysis to place the Kennedy and Connally figures in the limousine (as well as to place the limousine in the correct position on Elm Street).

The Knott Lab website explains:

--------------------------------------------------------
Using a 3D laser scanner (Leica RTC360), we conducted 36 laser scans of Dealey Plaza. This laser scanner captures up to two million points per second and HDR imagery, resulting in a point cloud, or digital twin, of the scene. This provides forensic engineers with a scientifically accurate model from which measurements can be taken. The Dealey Plaza point cloud has over 851 million data points.

The next step was to reconstruct the scene to historic accuracy for November 22, 1963. To do so, our visualization experts used historic photographs of the plaza and presidential limousine, as well as the “Zapruder film,” which is widely considered the best video footage of the incident. Using a process called photogrammetry, the visualization team was able to place these images into the point cloud, syncing their locations within the scene. Altogether, 25 historic photographs and 7 frames of the Zapruder film were used for this photogrammetry. . . .

Photogrammetry, camera matching, camera tracking and object matching processes were also used to establish the location of Oswald’s perch, the correct dimensions of the limousine, create the digital models of President Kennedy and Governor Connally, and establish their positions, frame by frame, throughout the incident. (https://knottlab.com/blog/knott-laboratory-presents-digital-reconstruction-and-findings-on-the-assassination-of-president-john-f-kennedy/)
--------------------------------------------------------

Questions about the SBT that bear repeating and that WC apologists can't credibly and rationally answer:

-- Why did the first two drafts of the autopsy report say nothing about the throat wound being an exit wound for the back wound?

-- How could a bullet have exited the throat without tearing through the tie or at least nicking the edge of the tie knot? You realize that when Harold Weisberg finally obtained clear close-up photos of the tie from the National Archives, we learned that there was no hole through the tie and no nick on either edge of the tie, right? Right? You know about this, right?

-- Why did the Parkland doctors who saw and/or treated the throat wound describe a laceration of the pharynx and trachea that was larger than the wound itself? As Dr. Nathan Jacobs pointed out, the fact that the damage behind the throat wound was larger than the wound itself indicates that the throat wound was entrance wound (Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p. 158).

We should also keep in mind that autopsy x-ray technician Jerrol Custer told the ARRB that he was certain he took x-rays of the C3/C4 region of the neck and that those x-rays showed numerous fragments. Custer added that he suspected the reason those x-rays disappeared was that they showed a large number of bullet fragments in the neck (Deposition of Jerrol Francis Custer, ARRB, Transcript of Proceedings, October 28, 1997, pp. 168-170). Custer noted that when he drew attention to the bullet fragments in the C3/C4 area during the autopsy, he was told to “mind my own business” (p. 169).

These were probably fragments from the projectile that entered the throat and ranged downward. This would explain the damage to the pharynx and the trachea behind the wound. This would also explain why the autopsy doctors determined with absolute certainty, after prolonged and extensive probing after removing the chest organs, that the back wound was shallow and had no exit point. Several of the men standing near the autopsy table could see the probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity--that was where the back wound ended.

-- Why was the throat wound only about 4-5 mm in diameter and punched-in, when every single soft-tissue exit wound in the WC's own wound ballistics tests was much larger and punched-out? (Apparently even the WC's wound ballistics experts knew that the collar would have had no effect on the wound's appearance.)

-- Why did the three Parkland doctors who saw the throat wound before the shirt was removed and who commented on the wound's location state that the throat wound was above the tie knot/collar?

-- If the irregular slits in the collar were made by an exiting bullet, why did the FBI fail to find any metal traces in the fabric of the slits--or in the tie? As Rockefeller Foundation scholar Henry Hurt noted, "the FBI laboratory—after spectrographic analysis—could find no metal traces on the tie or the neckband of the collar, traces that should have been there if a bullet had caused the damage" (Reasonable Doubt, pp. 59-60). The FBI found metal traces around the holes in the back of JFK's shirt and coat, but no traces on the tie or around the slits in the front. Why?

-- If the irregular slits in JFK's shirt collar were made by an exiting bullet, why is there no fabric missing from the slits? When bullets exit clothing, they invariably remove some fabric, just as the bullet that exited Connally's chest removed fabric when it made the holes in Connally's shirt and coat. FYI, the bullet that entered JFK's back also removed fabric when it made the holes in JFK's shirt and coat? What gives?

-- Why did the first FBI lab report on the shirt slits said only that the slits could have been made by a bullet fragment? Clearly, the FBI experts, before they knew what they were supposed to say, recognized that the slits were not bullet holes.

 

[Jerry Organ]

I would be interested in your list of the errors that you have found in the Knott model.  If you have a problem with their placement of JFK and JBC you should be able to explain the problem.

Knott Laboratory concluded that the path through JFK at z223 cannot strike JBC anywhere close to his right armpit.   

(John Mytton)

That Griffith and you are on the same page in not seeing the mismatches of the Knott 3D frame superimposed on Z225 is telling.

They say that the straight line path through JFK's midline goes 6 inches to the left of JBC's armpit.

That is helped when they have the bullet enter JFK's back at (or maybe a bit left of) the mid-line and exit the left chest. Their study doesn't have the bullet exit at Kennedy's throat mid-line. That fix alone would gain six inches lateral.

Now we know that it did not strike him 6 inches left of the right armpit.  My point has been that z223 is not where the JFK neck shot occurred.  There is a lot of evidence that it was the first shot and that the first shot was just before z202 - likely z190-195, at which time JBC was turned to the right:


 and the right to left angle from the SN to the car direction was 15 degrees:



At that angle, a shot through JFK exiting on the left side of hit tie knot about 1 cm left of his midline, will travel 6.4 inches or 16.3 cm farther left over the 24 inch distance between JFK's throat exit wound and the plane of Gov. Connally's seatback (24tan(15)=6.43).  The photographic experts at Itek working for the HSCA concluded that JBC may have been inside JFK anywhere 10.2 to 20.3 cm (4-8 inches) (6 HSCA 49 - footnote).  The distance from JBC's midline to his right armpit entry wound was 20 cm (6 HSCA 48 - figure II-18).  All I am saying is that this still puts the bullet through JFK anywhere from 6.1 cm left of JBC's midline to 4 cm to the right of his midline when it crossed the plane of JBC's seatback.  That is 16 cm to 26.1 cm left of his right armpit entry wound. 

So in the best case scenario for the SBT at z193, the bullet passes 16 cm left of JBC's right armpit entry wound and it could have been up to 26.1 cm left of the actual wound.

With JBC turned to the right as he is at that point, this does two things:  It moves the left side of his back farther away from the seatback, allowing he bullet to travel even farther to the left.  It also reduces the effective width of his back for the bullet to strike.

Not to worry. Those good folks at Don Knotts Lab will get your theory to work.

[Michael T. Griffith]

The Knott Laboratory digital illustration of trajectory alignment at Zapruder frame 225 is misleading and requires rectification to portray a more accurate representation of events. The green line entry point is at JFK's midline, not at the actual bullet wound entry location, which was approximately 3-4 centimetres to the right of his spine. Also, the green line exit location appears to be imprecisely placed further to the left of the actual location of the throat exit wound.

Therefore, when Knott Laboratory uses Zapruder frame 225 as the time of the second shot—instead of the actual bullet strike at Zapruder frame 224—a correction to their placement of wound entry and exit locations to the precise locations at this frame (225) would place the green trajectory line at a different angle, and align more accurately with the entry wound near Governor Connally's right armpit.

The change in the President and Governor Connally's positions relative to each other between Zapruder frames 224 and 225 are so minuscule that it is almost negligible. There will be a slight difference in trajectory alignments to the sixth-floor window between these two frames.

This is all nonsense. The Knott Lab 3D simulation gives the SBT the benefit of the doubt by not considering the fact that the back-would bullet entered at a sharply upward angle and traveled sharply upward after it made the wound, as the HSCA FPP established from the photo of the wound and as numerous private experts have confirmed. The Knott simulation also gives the SBT the benefit of the doubt regarding the throat wound's location.

But, the Knott Lab analysis does place the back wound where the clear weight of the evidence places it (especially the hard physical evidence of the rear clothing holes), i.e., at around T3. However, the most severe alignment problem is the horizontal misalignment, not the vertical.

Furthermore, Knott Lab's horizonal placement of the back wound is perfectly valid. It is not at JFK's "midline." Where do you get that? Have you looked at the simulation still frames that show the back wound's location? It is clearly and visibly to the right of the midline.

You guys are the gang that time has passed by. Your Z224 hit was destroyed over 40 years ago by the HSCA PEP. You guys are still in denial over this fact.

Even worse, your SBT was blown to pieces when Harold Weisberg obtained clear photos of the tie, which prove that no bullet went through the tie or nicked either edge of the tie. This explains why the FBI found no metallic traces on the tie or in the front shirt slits, whereas it did find metallic traces around the rear coat and shirt holes. If a bullet had exited the shirt beneath the tie and had transited or nicked the tie, it would have left metallic traces in/around those locations, just as it did in the rear clothing holes. But you guys are still in denial about these facts too.

[Andrew Mason]

(John Mytton)

That Griffith and you are on the same page in not seeing the mismatches of the Knott 3D frame superimposed on Z225 is telling.

That is helped when they have the bullet enter JFK's back at (or maybe a bit left of) the mid-line and exit the left chest. Their study doesn't have the bullet exit at Kennedy's throat mid-line. That fix alone would gain six inches lateral.

What is the basis for that claim, Jerry?  Here is what Knott shows as the trajectory at z225:

Not to worry. Those good folks at Don Knotts Lab will get your theory to work.

Thanks Jerry. I am always impressed with your graphics skills.  But I would be more impressed with your points if you acknowledged the error range in your assumptions.  For example, you have JFK's elbow completely outside the car and his rib cage pressed against the side of the car.  There has to be an error range associated with that position. Also, you are making assumptions about the distance from JFK's rib cage to his spine, and the width of JBC's back.  You are also using a downward angle of exactly 18 degrees.  That is based on the height of the SN above the entry wound and the horizontal distance from the rifle to the entry wound as well as the exact angle that the car is to the horizontal.  There are all error ranges in those figures.

Also:
1. you have the jump seat inside the car by 6 inches.  The Hess & Eisenhardt drawings show 2.5 inches.  Simple measurement on an actual photo from CE874 (allowing a generous amount for the space between the seat edge and door) shows that the space between the door and right edge of the jump seat shows that the space is between 15 and 18% of the seat width, which was 20.5 inches wide according to H&E.  That works out to 3.1 to 3.7 inches.



2. you have JBC's left leg out to the side but not with his knee very high. The jump seat was on the floor and the knees had to be well above the seat:


Taking all those errors and error ranges into account, the bullet through JFK goes close to the left thigh.  Keep in mind that the bullet was almost certainly tumbling after exiting JFK's neck.  Even if the trajectory was to the left edge of JBC's back, a tumbling bullet striking very obliquely on the turned back might have grazed the back of his suit but not penetrated.  It would be interesting to see what a close examination of the back of the jacket might show....