Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
Since the trajectory of the bullet through Kennedy’s back and neck was slightly downward, for that trajectory to have come from the front, that would have required a gun firing from inside the limousine from the level of Governor Connally’s back, and the Zapruder film shows no gun inside the limousine.
|
Whoa. You are making some unfounded claims here -
1.That one bullet entered the back and exited at the throat. As mentioned earlier, all the Parkland doctors stated that the throat wound was a very small entry wound, and the autopsy clearly established that the back wound was a shallow entry wound with no exit point.
2.A downward trajectory for the neck wound is also an unfounded claim. The actual trajectory of the throat wound was not established, and was described by all the doctors at Parkland as a small entrance wound.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
For one shot to go into Kennedy’s back at the same time another separate bullet went into Connally’s back, would have required two shooters from the same window of the TSBD.
|
Where has it been established that two separate bullets would need to hit both JFK and Connally at precisely the same time? And why would the shots both have to originate from the same TSBD window?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
For the shot into Connally’s back to not go through Kennedy and to produce an oblong wound in Connally’s back would have required a bullet to be fired from the book depository and travel sideways all the way to Connally’s back.
|
Why do you assume any and every bullet hitting Connally (and JFK) must originate from the TSBD? And why would the bullet have to travel "sideways", when the back wound in Connally was stated by Dr. Shaw to be 1.5 cm
"in its greatest diameter" and that it created
"..a smaller tunneling wound..."?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
Didn’t you state earlier that some doctor claimed the bullet that hit Kennedy in the back didn’t go all the way through? And now you say that the neck wound was a front entrance wound? So he was hit by two bullets going in exactly the opposite directions at the same time, one hitting from the front and another hitting from the back?
|
I said that all those present at the autopsy, including the doctors, had established beyond any doubt that JFK's back wound was shallow and had no exit point. And yes, the throat wound was also solidly established at Parkland as an entry wound. Why do you claim that both wounds had to be from two bullets hitting JFK "in exactly the opposite directions at the same time"?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
You can’t take brief initial observations and opinions from several different witnesses and try to solve a case with that information while assuming it is all correct. Garrison did that and that’s how he wound up with 3 foreign guns coming out of the Book Depository (two were actually initial misidentifications by eyewitnesses) and 7 shooters in Dealey Plaza (taken from various witnesses who heard echoes of the shots coming from different directions).
|
No - all the observations, whether brief or not, corroborate the fact that JFK's back wound was a shallow wound with no exit point, and his throat wound was a very small entry wound. Furthermore, the throat wound was at most only 5 mm in diameter, likely only 3 mm dia. - too small to have been made by the alleged 6.5 mm bullets fired from the Carcano rifle allegedly used by Oswald.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
While you are quoting only some of the initial testimony that you want to quote, professional researchers and investigators have studied the whole case and have worked out what actually happened and the reason why some of the initial eyewitness testimony was not correct.
|
If you want to make this claim, then please provide specific examples that you are disputing.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sam5
After drilling its way through Kennedy’s back and out his neck, the Carcano bullet left a small exit wound that could have easily been mistaken for an entrance wound during the quick observations before the tracheotomy, since the Parkland doctors were not familiar with Carcano wounds. It would have been quite different had a group of WW II American doctors, who were familiar with Carcano wounds, been working in Parkland that day.
|
Unfounded SBT claim once again - why insist a single bullet entered the back and exited the throat when it's well established that it didn't?
As for experience - Dr. Humes, who conducted the autopsy was not only unfamiliar with "Carcano wounds", he was unfamiliar with
any bullet wounds. He was conducting his first ever autopsy involving bullet wounds - starting with the President no less! (Only the best for our dearly departed Jack).