Two inches FORWARD ON IMPACT.
Posted on 05/18/2007 3:02:33 AM PDT by Aussie Dasher
A NEW analysis of remaining bullet fragments from the 1963 assassination of US president John F Kennedy suggests a second shooter may have been involved.
The findings suggest the prevailing theory that a sole gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, killed Kennedy is wrong, according to a research team that published its findings yesterday.
The researchers "show that evidence used to rule out a second assassin is fundamentally flawed," wrote William Tobin, the main author of the report, published in the latest issue of the Annals of Applied Statistics.
Mr Tobin, a former FBI agent and forensic scientist, teamed with bullet lead analysis expert Cliff Spiegelman of Texas A & M University to re-examine the five bullet fragments recovered after Kennedy's assassination, using new scientific advances.
The findings countered testimony to the House Select Committee on Assassinations hearing in 1978 in which Dr Vincent Guinn said the bullet fragments recovered signalled that two bullets of an unusual kind of ammunition were used.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
Two inches FORWARD ON IMPACT.
In the Zapruder still you posted, I see a 4 inch disk of bone hanging down on the right, doubling the apparent size of the wound (the wound and the bone below it), and a lot of blood and tissue on Kennedy’s face.
In the first autopsy picture, it looks like the right side of his temple is gone. In the second, you see a disk of bone everted next to his right temple. The first picture shows what looks like brain all over his hair - it looks like there is a wound in the upper right posterior portion of his head but conceivably there could just be a mess of brains smeared on his hair. The lst picture shows an entrance wound on the lower part of his head, just left of center. His hair has been washed.
The pictures don’t seem inconsistant to me.
If there was an Establishment conpiracy to kill him, they could keep it simple - one deadly sniper, no need to fudge with autopsy pictures. Throw in Oswald as the fall guy if you want, but multiple shooters would be a foolish complication on the part of the conspirators.
Mrs VS
I believe that conspiracy theories exist because there are people who don't have the aptitude to remember facts and would rather use their artistic ability to make up the story as they go. It's like the kid who does a book report on a book that doesn't exist.
I read a book by the son of Sam (Giancana, that is) who said, "Daddy did it."
Contrary to what other poster have said, I HAVE seen demonstrations showing that the three shots could have been delivered by one person in the time frame, and Lee Harvey Oswald was trained by the USMC in marksmanship.
Having said all that, I still am reluctant to believe the "Acted alone" conclusion. But the key word here is "believe." All of the conspiracy "proofs" I have seen are too suspect.
Saw a show where an Aussie marksman went to great lengths to recreate the shot that hit Kennedy and the Governor. He proved pretty conclusively that it could have happened as described.
The marksman posts occasionally on a hunting board I go to, and talked about the show. He seems pretty legit.
It took these guys 40 years to figure out what 90% of America already knew about a second gunman? Oy.
When you have to explain away the testimony of 180 witnesses, conclusions to the contrary will always be suspect. Same with TWA 800. If it was one or two witnesses, that would be a bit different.
Oswald was a Marine-corps trained shooter, and was quite competent.
“... JFK murder is a conspiracy”
You can have more than one shooter without a conspiracy. My view is that there were two or three independent individuals or groups of individuals gunning for JFK in Dallas that day, and at least two of them fired shots.
“Just goes to show what one motivated Marine and his rifle can do.”
too funny.!
drill instructor used that one on us in boot camp...only it was in regards to Charles Whitman.
The temple was not "destroyed". As the bullet exited, the temple portion of his skull, which was attached to the skin of the temple, fell down like a flap, covering the right eye. In the autopsy photo, the flap has been moved back to its normal position, revealing that the right eye is still intact. What you see in your frame capture from the Zapruder film is the inside of the piece of skull as it flapped over the eye.
Morticians who worked on JFK's body to prepare it for burial actually had done a good job of restoring the head and face with the intent of having an open casket display. Jackie nixed the open casket, but it could have been done.
Wow. That’s pretty amazing video and analysis.
The Clintoons learned the lesson?
You are right Mrs. VS. The other shooters would have just increased the number of shooting signatures and increased the Murphy’s Law factor.
The Carcano and Oswald were capable and could have fired the three shots in the time frame. The distances involved were very modest. The multi-shooter theorists always give the distances in feet instead of yards to make it seem that Oswald made longer shots. But the 2nd and 3rd shots (hits) were made at less than 66 yards.
Give me a Carcano with a cheapie scope and I’ll get hits on a pie plate-sized target at 200 yards.
CASE CLOSED is still the best book on the subject.
Kennedy's wound and brain material were cleaned up by that time.
Conspiracists have been trying to establish Lifton's 'Best Evidence' theory using the difference between the Bethesda autopsy photographs and the medical illustrations for decades, just as you're doing now, but gave up quite a long time ago.
I am not saying the facts support or do not support a conspiracy, but if there were a conspiracy it wouldn’t be a surprise that 50 years was ample time to eliminate any of the sealed evidence that might be damning.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.