(PART 94)


>>> "When you say [Jackie] would leave her dying husband, and only worry about her own safety, that is basically what you are saying [that Jackie was a "coward"]." <<<


Goodie. More stuff being mangled by a rabid conspiracist.

I never said that Jackie went to the trunk because she was worried
about "her own safety". Never once did I even HINT about such a thing.
In fact, that's just dumb. Because if she had been only concerned with
her own "safety" at that moment, she would have cowered to the bottom
of the limo's back seat, away from any more potential gunfire. But,
instead, she did exactly the opposite....making herself a bigger
target out on the trunk.

I said she probably went to the trunk to merely get out of the way of
the falling (bloody) body of her husband....which is almost certainly
the truth of the matter. She almost certainly did NOT have it in her
mind at that point in time (2 seconds after the fatal shot, mind you)
to go out on the trunk and get a hunk of JFK's head. That's just
idiotic, IMO.

>>> "She [Jackie] could have "jumped ship" when JFK brought his arms up and supposedly said, "I'm hit"." <<<

JFK never uttered a word. Only Kellerman made that claim. But the two
women (Jackie and Nellie), who were closer to JFK than Kellerman was,
testified that JFK said nothing at all after he was shot.

J. LEE RANKIN -- "Do you recall anyone saying anything else during the time of the shooting?"

JACQUELINE KENNEDY -- "No; there weren't any words. There was just Governor Connally's. And then I suppose Mrs. Connally was sort of crying and covering her husband. But I don't remember any words."

I wonder why you believe Kellerman, but won't believe Jackie (or Nellie)
in this regard?

But, anyway, this "I'm Hit" topic is just one more meaningless subject
that goes nowhere for CTers. Because even if JFK did say those
words...who cares? So what?

We can see via the Z-Film that Kennedy HAD, indeed, been "hit" by that
point in time (i.e., by the time he reached toward his throat and
mouth area, which is the point in time when Kellerman claimed the "I'm
hit" dialogue was being spoken). So it's a moot point anyway. It
solves nothing.

BTW, if JFK had really uttered those four words ("My God, I'm hit")
that Roy Kellerman claims were said by the President, why can't we see
JFK's lips moving and forming those words on the zoomed-in version of
the Zapruder Film?

We can certainly SEE John Connally making his "Oh, no, no, no"
statement on the Z-Film. But JFK's lips seem to be shut tight. Wonder
why...if he was actually saying something after being hit by a bullet?

>>> Do you realize how close JFK's and Jackie's heads were when he was hit with the fatal shot? Very close. That is further proof to me that only a professional could have made that shot in a moving vehicle (albeit a very slow moving vehicle) and NOT hurt Jackie at all." <<<

You believe that kind of stuff because you are a complete and utter
nutcase/kook. No reasonable person, when confronted with the "LHO Did
It" evidence on the table, would believe that ONLY a "professional"
would have had the capability to hit JFK but not wound the person
sitting next to him.

You're getting goofier by the minute.

>>> "Why did [Jackie] wait for the fatal shot before leaving?" <<<

Well...um...uh...maybe because she didn't have a bloody body FALLING
TOWARD HER IN THE CAR prior to Frame #313 of the Z-Film. (Could that
be it?)


>>> "You make her sound horrible. Like she said, "Oh well, he is dead, and I'm getting out of here"." <<<

Goodie. More garbage out of the mouth of the kook that I need to set

Your last statement is total bullshit and completely misrepresents
what I said about Jackie's post-shooting movements.

Jackie starts to move toward the trunk within TWO SECONDS of the fatal
head shot. Probably a little less than that even. Do you really think
that I think that Jackie was thinking "Oh well, he is dead, and I'm
getting out of here"?

If you do think that I think that, you're nuts. (Well, more nuts than you
were an hour ago, I should say.)

>>> "I knew you wouldn't even attempt to answer how the Harper fragment was 25 FEET back and to the left of the car at the time of the shot." <<<

Goodie! More chaff from a CTer, even though a barrel of wheat can be
accessed regarding the Harper Fragment:

"The 'Harper fragment' was discovered around 5:30 p.m. on November 23, 1963, by Billy A. Harper. .... Dr. [J. Lawrence] Angel...declared the Harper fragment to be 'clearly parietal bone' that had come from 'roughly the middle of the right parietal' area (i.e., above the right ear)." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 236-237 of the CD Endnotes in "Reclaiming History" (c.2007)


>>> "Why have people schooled in different disciplines then if a Vet and a Urologist can do forensic wound evaluations? Why spend and waste money on different programs at schools if one degree fits all, right? What a nut job." <<<

Yeah, you are.

Since Dr. John K. Lattimer was a urologist, it means you get to ignore
his definitive tests regarding human skulls and their reactions when hit
by Oswald-like rifle bullets....right?

Yeah...you sure are nuts.

>>> "It is still not the same, since the head attached to a body is different from a skull by itself." <<<

Yeah...which (IMO) make the tests performed by Dr. Olivier and Dr.
Lattimer even MORE effective (in a "JFK's Head Could Certainly Have
Reacted This Way Too"
kind of fashion), because an unattached skull
is more likely to be blown FORWARD (i.e., away from the shooter), not
BACKWARD (toward the gunman), because (duh!) it has NOT BEEN ATTACHED

And yet what happened virtually every time in those Olivier/Lattimer tests?

Answer -- The unattached skulls went BACKWARD toward the gunman

And yet, to CTers, this "Moved Toward The Gunman" fact is irrelevant.

~large shrug~

>>> "Furthermore, when a man who has no experience in an area uses more people with no experience in the area to assist, it goes downhill even quicker." <<<

Why don't you get a rifle, and a test skull from the graveyard that's
right next to your trailer park, and perform your own "Skull Test"
like Lattimer's? Let's see how your test skulls behave.

Oh, no, wait. That won't work. Because you're only a garbage man. So
that means that any skulls that you take a shot at with Oswald's exact
ammunition won't count. You need to have some kind of "degree" in
ballistics or forensics or something, in order for YOUR shots to count as
"valid" shots into test skulls using Lee Harvey Oswald's ammunition and a
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

Sorry, forget it. When you get your "I'M ALLOWED TO SHOOT A TEST SKULL"
degree, let me know.

>>> "I never mentioned ballistics, as that is not the point here. I said FORENSIC WOUND experience. You know what that is, don't you? It is what two-thirds of the doctors lacked during the autopsy of a man who was SHOT! It matters a lot." <<<

A "forensics" degree means zilch when you're simply performing a test
to see which direction a test skull will move after being struck by a
bullet. Why you think otherwise is the bigger mystery.

>>> "I guess you think a Proctologist could do open heart surgery too, right?" <<<

No. But that proctologist could certainly take a rifle and shoot at a
skull to see which way that skull will move after being shot by the
gun being held by that proctologist.

Why you think a "forensics" degree is required to pull that trigger is
yet another of the many mysteries that surrounds kooks like you.

>>> "It makes me wonder how [Dr. Lattimer] had them tethered down in the first place." <<<

He didn't. That was my whole point, idiot.

>>> "This is all a side issue though, as Lattimer could NOT duplicate the wounds seen in JFK." <<<

Goodie! The kook's gonna change the subject completely. Nice.

BTW, some of the test skulls that were shot by Lattimer did, indeed,
show a very similar pattern of wounds to those on JFK.

Of course, as Dr. Olivier explained to the WC (did you ignore him
completely, as usual?), the SCALP on a living human head will
certainly have an affect on the bullet wounds and their size.

But in the Lattimer and Olivier tests, obviously no such scalp was
present on the dead test skulls. But this difference was noted and
accounted for by Olivier.

Conspiracy kooks, naturally, won't be satisfied until a perfect JFK-like
duplication with living, breathing human beings is performed. Even
then, I'm sure the kooks would come up with some excuse to think that
a perfect duplication was "fake" too.

David Von Pein
December 2007