Post by Rob Caprio on May 17, 2021 12:54:43 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2025
cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iCYgqesYdjfUrEwyutLRWU-1200-80.jpg
image5.slideserve.com/9555371/single-bullet-theory-magic-bullet-l.jpg
The Single Bullet Theory (SBT) can be viewed from many angles this and is one of them. This one is from the angle of BEFORE there was a SBT!
********************************
On December 18, 1963, the The New York Times published the following in their newspaper.
Quote on
The first bullet made what was described as a small, neat wound in the back and penetrated two or three inches…The second bullet to strike Mr. Kennedy , the source said, entered the back of the skull and tore open his forehead…The pathologists at Bethesda, the source said, concluded that the throat wound was caused by the emergence of a metal fragment or piece of bone resulting from the fatal shot in the head. (New York Times, December 18, 1963, p. 27, cols. 4-6.)
Quote on
Some of these statements are inaccurate based on the known details. First of all, we know John F. Kennedy’s (JFK) forehead was NOT “torn open” as we can see it intact in the autopsy photographs that have come out. Secondly, who can show that a metal fragment or a piece of bone caused the THROAT wound? Isn’t this indicative of a desperate attempt to show the wound was caused by something from the INSIDE of JFK rather than dealing with the more likely (based on the comments of the doctors at Parkland Hospital (PH)) scenario of an ENTRY wound in the throat area? Finally, who was this “source” anyway?
What made the Warren Commission (WC) alter this scenario? Injured bystander James Tague would have NOTHING to do with a metal fragment or piece of bone causing the throat wound so that can’t be it. IF this scenario was IGNORED by the WC, and it seems it was, how can we put any faith in the SBT since that is just another theory with NO evidence behind it? We can’t of course.
Let’s look at what the WC’s lead counsel, Lee J. Rankin, said about this topic.
Quote on
We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent now, since we have the PICTURE of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered BELOW THE SHOULDER BLADE TO THE RIGHT OF THE BACKBONE, which is below the place where the PICTURE shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy DIDN'T STRIKE ANY BONE AT ALL.. (Emphasis mine) (Weisberg 1975, p.307) (taken from WC Executive session 1/27/64)
Quote off
We see his comment about the bullet coming out of the neckband, he does NOT mention a fragment or a piece of bone. Sadly for him, the WC and its current day defenders, John Gallagher showed NO 6.5 mm bullet CAME OUT OF THE PRESIDENT’S THROAT. Go to Gallagher exhibit 1 and see this:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0011b.gif
…During the course of the spectrographic examinations previously conducted on the fabric surrounding the hole in the front of the shirt, including the tie, NO COPPER WAS FOUND in excess of that present elsewhere in undamaged areas of the shirt and tie. Therefore, NO COPPER WAS FOUND WHICH COULD BE ATTRIBUTED TO PROJECTILE FRAGMENTS. (Gallagher Exhibit 1, p. 2)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0011b.htm
Quote off
This CONCLUSIVELY SHOWS us NO bullet of a copper nature (i.e. alleged 6.5 mm type) went out through the President’s throat. So again, how and why did the WC claim one did? We know the throat wound was NOT allowed to be tracked at all, so no connection between the back wound and it has ever been made.
We also have this comment from the FBI’s report of December 9, 1963, to consider.
Quote on
Medical examination of the President’s body revealed that one of the bullets had entered just BELOW his shoulder to the RIGHT of the spinal column at an angle of 45 to 60 degrees DOWNWARD, that there was no point of exit, and that the bullet was NOT in the body. (Emphasis mine) (Commission Document I, Vol. I, p. 18)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Quote off
Here we see in the official FBI Report, and in most regards the foundation for the WC Report, that the back wound was BELOW his shoulder and to the RIGHT of the spinal column—NOT in his neck area.
Can any WC defender explain what happened to change the New York Times story (or what evidence does this) from December 18, 1963, to the SBT? Or why the FBI Report does NOT agree with the basis of the SBT?
cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/iCYgqesYdjfUrEwyutLRWU-1200-80.jpg
image5.slideserve.com/9555371/single-bullet-theory-magic-bullet-l.jpg
The Single Bullet Theory (SBT) can be viewed from many angles this and is one of them. This one is from the angle of BEFORE there was a SBT!
********************************
On December 18, 1963, the The New York Times published the following in their newspaper.
Quote on
The first bullet made what was described as a small, neat wound in the back and penetrated two or three inches…The second bullet to strike Mr. Kennedy , the source said, entered the back of the skull and tore open his forehead…The pathologists at Bethesda, the source said, concluded that the throat wound was caused by the emergence of a metal fragment or piece of bone resulting from the fatal shot in the head. (New York Times, December 18, 1963, p. 27, cols. 4-6.)
Quote on
Some of these statements are inaccurate based on the known details. First of all, we know John F. Kennedy’s (JFK) forehead was NOT “torn open” as we can see it intact in the autopsy photographs that have come out. Secondly, who can show that a metal fragment or a piece of bone caused the THROAT wound? Isn’t this indicative of a desperate attempt to show the wound was caused by something from the INSIDE of JFK rather than dealing with the more likely (based on the comments of the doctors at Parkland Hospital (PH)) scenario of an ENTRY wound in the throat area? Finally, who was this “source” anyway?
What made the Warren Commission (WC) alter this scenario? Injured bystander James Tague would have NOTHING to do with a metal fragment or piece of bone causing the throat wound so that can’t be it. IF this scenario was IGNORED by the WC, and it seems it was, how can we put any faith in the SBT since that is just another theory with NO evidence behind it? We can’t of course.
Let’s look at what the WC’s lead counsel, Lee J. Rankin, said about this topic.
Quote on
We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent now, since we have the PICTURE of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered BELOW THE SHOULDER BLADE TO THE RIGHT OF THE BACKBONE, which is below the place where the PICTURE shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy DIDN'T STRIKE ANY BONE AT ALL.. (Emphasis mine) (Weisberg 1975, p.307) (taken from WC Executive session 1/27/64)
Quote off
We see his comment about the bullet coming out of the neckband, he does NOT mention a fragment or a piece of bone. Sadly for him, the WC and its current day defenders, John Gallagher showed NO 6.5 mm bullet CAME OUT OF THE PRESIDENT’S THROAT. Go to Gallagher exhibit 1 and see this:
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0011b.gif
…During the course of the spectrographic examinations previously conducted on the fabric surrounding the hole in the front of the shirt, including the tie, NO COPPER WAS FOUND in excess of that present elsewhere in undamaged areas of the shirt and tie. Therefore, NO COPPER WAS FOUND WHICH COULD BE ATTRIBUTED TO PROJECTILE FRAGMENTS. (Gallagher Exhibit 1, p. 2)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0011b.htm
Quote off
This CONCLUSIVELY SHOWS us NO bullet of a copper nature (i.e. alleged 6.5 mm type) went out through the President’s throat. So again, how and why did the WC claim one did? We know the throat wound was NOT allowed to be tracked at all, so no connection between the back wound and it has ever been made.
We also have this comment from the FBI’s report of December 9, 1963, to consider.
Quote on
Medical examination of the President’s body revealed that one of the bullets had entered just BELOW his shoulder to the RIGHT of the spinal column at an angle of 45 to 60 degrees DOWNWARD, that there was no point of exit, and that the bullet was NOT in the body. (Emphasis mine) (Commission Document I, Vol. I, p. 18)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=25
Quote off
Here we see in the official FBI Report, and in most regards the foundation for the WC Report, that the back wound was BELOW his shoulder and to the RIGHT of the spinal column—NOT in his neck area.
Can any WC defender explain what happened to change the New York Times story (or what evidence does this) from December 18, 1963, to the SBT? Or why the FBI Report does NOT agree with the basis of the SBT?