Y’know what, everyone? I’m still bugged by those autopsy neck shot pictures linked to earlier in this thread. IIRC, some theory was advanced years ago to explain why the wounds were pretty much on a level plane. Supposedly, it would have been possible that Kennedy was leaning forward to adjust his position in the seat or some such, and happened to be hit at that time, thus explaining the level neck wounds. Of course, the Zapruder film puts the lie to that notion.
And, I don’t know about all of you, but when I look at myself from the side in a mirror, the area of my neck that corresponds with the location of the exit wound in Kennedy’s neck is on a pretty level line with the same location in my back where Kennedy’s entrance wound was located. Why don’t some of you check and do the same? I’m suspecting hanky-panky or just sloppy measuring on the part of the good doctor there. If so, then we’re back to the idea that the neck wound came from a bullet fired from roughly ground-floor level in the building directly across the street from the book depository to the right (as you view it from the front).
And another thing, it’s been many years since I’ve seen a reconstruction of the assassination that was testing the Oswald theory. But it seems to me the height of Oswald’s window and the relative proximity of Kennedy in the limo would necessitate a much larger angle that the bullet had to follow than 21 degrees. Does anyone who has studied this and/or been to Dealy Plaza lately and took a good enough look at the school book depository and the limo’s location relative to it, have an opinion or any facts in regard to this?
And if you had bothered reading the first of the links, you would realise that Brennan had already testified that he had seen Oswald shoot at Kennedy from the TBD when he gave evidence to the Warren Commission. In other words, he had told that bit of his story, amid the greatest possible publicity, as early as March 1964. It is also consistent with the information he gave to the police within minutes of the assassination. Brennan was the star witness right from the very beginning.
By your own admission, you almost immediately discounted the Warren Commission and have not taken a close interest in the case since. Which makes your confident assertions about what witnesses have or have not claimed completely worthless. Small wonder then that, on this point, Little Nemo knew something (quite a big thing, actually) that you did not.
It is one thing to consider evidence and then deciding to discount it. Taking pride in just ignoring it only reinforces your ignorance.
APB, while I see your point and how you could feel as you do regarding my lack of interest in the Warren Commission’s findings, I would remind or (or point out, if you’re too young to have been there) that there were all sorts of hooey, claims and speculation flying around as to what happened and how. Being in my early teens at the time, I’m sure I felt I had no way to realistically separate the wheat from the chaff, so to speak, and since the Zapruder film clearly (sorry, I don’t know why people seem to find my use of this word offensive) shows Kennedy being hit from ahead and to his right, I saw no point reading an exhaustive report by a commission who, for whatever motives, obviously arrived at an erroneous conclusion.
OK, Starving Artist, I went back and looked at the Zapruder film again to see what you’re talking about, and I can’t see it. Again, I’m asking you to be specific. I don’t have the movie available, but I have high-resolution JPEGs of the individual frames, which I can quickly scroll through with IrfanView, so it’s better.
After the head explodes in Z313, the next frame shows his head going down, back, and to the left. Then his right elbow starts coming up around Z316, with it peaking and putting his right shoulder at a max height in Z318-Z319. However, this is a delayed response - the momentum of the initial explosion is alread finished and there’s something else going on, such as muscle spasms or something. And it is movement mostly in his right arm, not any motion of his head that’s pulling his body around.
Then there’s the problem of where a frontal shot would have come from. There could have been no shooter from directly in front of the limo, because the windshield would have blocked the bullet path. The grassy knoll was pretty much perpindicular to the limo at that instant, so a bullet would have had to exit on the left side, which we know it didn’t. So what are you saying exactly here?
About the neck shot, you can see the layout of the path of the bullet in the diagram I linked to earlier, http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/angle.jpg . And I don’t know about your physique, but when I locate those two points on my body, the back wound is definitely above the neck wound (I’m a 43 year old man, somewhat thinner than Kennedy, but close enough).
CurtC, I’m beginning to see what the problem is. It’s his left shoulder I’ve been talking about. I think I must have discussed this so many times with people in the same room that I could point to the shoulder and it was clear what I was talking about. I forgot that people on this board wouldn’t necessarily know it was his left shoulder I was referring to.
Regarding the vantage point, it’s never been my contention that the shooter was directly in front of the limo, but rather ahead of the limo and off to the right. (Again, we may be having a communication problem since I’ve been making reference to the shot having come from in front of and to the right of Kennedy’s body.) The area of the grassy knoll that everyone seemed to be looking toward, and that I remember a motorcycle cop charging toward, would have been the part of the grassy knoll that was just about the furthest away from the limo and toward the overpass. IIRC, there was a fence at the back of the grassy knoll and speculation had it that had the shooter been firing from behind this fence. As for myself, and as I said, I’ve been somewhat conflicted on this myself. It seems to me the bullet would still have come from further ahead of the limo than such a vantage point would suggest. This is why I thought the manhole scenario might have some validity. I really don’t have a firm idea exactly where the shot came from, only that it was ahead of and to Kennedy’s right.
Regarding your physique and the relative location of what would be the wounds, do you feel there is enough of a difference between the two points to be in keeping with a shot fired from high and to the right, or is the point on your throat only a little lower? As I said with me (I’m 55 and stocky) they are virtually even.
Why does it matter where they fall on either of your physiques? On Kennedy’s, they were at exactly the right angle for the shot to have come from Oswald. How do you refute that set of photos?
To be succinct, by not taking them at face value. There could be some sort of trick of perspective involved, or Kennedy’s head and body are not aligned the same way as in life, or there could be outright doctoring of the photos going on. As I said before, even long ago the neck wound was thought to be so level and inconsistent with the Oswald theory that proponents of that theory suggested such things as Kennedy leaning forward just before the shot struck, thus bringing the path of the bullet more in line with the wound.
And with regard to the relevence of our respective physiques, Kennedy was not a deformed individual. Assuming his physique was like everyone else I know, for the bullet to have entered his back at the place it did relative to the base of his neck and his shoulder blades, his throat would have to be somewhere in the lower half of the sternum of the average individual.
What are you basing “where it did” on? The photos that have been linked at least three times now show it entering in the back and exiting through the front of Kennedy, with a resultant 21-degree angle. If we are not to believe those photos, what better evidence do you have for us?
Do you not see what you are doing here, Artist? You are focussing on miniscule details which you dispute and using them to justify jumping to a wildly different conclusion (a second gunman) which is so glaringly unsupported and in many ways downright contradicted by the evidence that one cannot help but think of three little words:
As I’ve been trying to find out from what other posters here have to say about their own bodies, the evidence may come from the fact that the photos just don’t seem to jibe with the normal human physique.
Other than that, I really don’t feel all that compelled to come up with evidence for you, or anyone else. The OP was in regard to what the various posters thought in regard to who killed Kennedy. I’ve stated what I thought, and where it seemed like a good idea I’ve tried to explain and counter-explain my thinking in this regard. I don’t feel it’s incumbent upon me here to pursuade the other posters here absolutely to my way of thinking. I’m just tossing out ideas and observations and asking for input. Everyone else is free to agree or not, based upon what they think is correct.
Well, if I may go off on a bit of a tangent here, the truth is in the miniscule details. At one time I was a big fan of the Perry Mason novels, which you may or may now know were written by a man who was lawyer himself. In one of the novels Mason was grilling a police detective over the inconsistencies of certain “minor” details in the prosecution’s version of events. The detective responded that in every case there were little things that didn’t add up, but you just have to ignore those because they can’t be answered and you focus on what you do know. Mason’s response was that if your theory is correct in the first place, you don’t have to ignore and set aside inconsistencies that don’t add up because they are then no longer “inconsistencies.” They add up perfectly once all the facts are known.
I would suggest you look more closely at the inconsistencies that don’t add up rather than ignoring them in favor of your preconceived notion of events.
The only person with inconsistencies in their story is you. And yours aren’t little inconsistencies - they’re gaping holes you could drive a truck through.
People show you photos that prove that the bullet holes are perfectly aligned with Oswald’s position. Your response is to stick your finger in your ears and say “They must be wrong! They must be wrong! Trick photography! Trick photography!”
With all due respect: Bullshit! I’ve explained why they don’t add up. In the case of the neck wound, I looked to see if the same type of wound would occur given my physique, and I’ve asked for other posters here to do the same and post their results so as to substantiate that my observation with my own physique is not incorrect. I wouldn’t say this constitutes the type of behavior you are accusing me of. If anyone is turning a blind eye to the facts, my friend, it is you.
And I’ll say again. I don’t care if you or anyone else here is persuaded by my point of view. I’ve said what I think – as requested in the OP – and why I think it. You are free to agree or disagree. It doesn’t matter to me.
'Scuse me for repeating myself from earlier in the thread, but Starving Artist must have missed it. Compare frame 312 (before bullet makes contact) with frame 313 (after bullet makes contact) and it is clear that the head moves forward.
It really is not too much to ask you read the Warren Report before you dismiss it. You’ll probably be surprised at how thorough (and openminded) it was. Whitewash? What whitewash ever bootstrapped its critics by publishing 25 volumes of evidence?
Much as I wish reality weren’t full of inconsistencies, it is. It’s easy for writers like Erle Stanley Gardner to create perfect worlds because they aren’t constrained by reality. (Here’s a thought: by your logic, since no one can put together a “complete” explanation of all the “evidence” in the JFK assassination, then it must not have ever happened. Eh? Life is ambiguous. Get used to it.)
The evidence I’ve seen shows that the bullet entered Kennedy’s back at a 21-degree angle with the ground, and then exited. This is perfectly consistent with my physiology; I have several points on my body that form a 21-degree angle with the ground.
If you’re trying to compare some other points than the ones shown in the photo, please let me know where you’re getting these points from. The photo shows two bullet holes at a 21-degree angle; trying to fit a 21-degree angle onto these holes is quite easy, since that’s the angle they’re at.
