JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
JOHN CANAL SAID:
Baden said his straight line trajectory was right--Myers said it was wrong (must include a deflection). Who's right, Myers or Baden? Take a pick...you can't have both.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh, there's no question that Myers is right on this point and Baden was wrong. No doubt.
I never said I agree with Baden and the HSCA/FPP on every last thing connected to this case. Of course I disagree with some things the FPP said -- the most obvious error, of course, being the incredibly silly declaration by Baden's FPP that the exit wound in JFK's throat was located anatomically HIGHER on Kennedy's body than the entry wound in JFK's upper back (as depicted by the HSCA in the diagram shown below). [See 7 HSCA 100; also see 6 HSCA 43-48 and the HSCA testimony of Dr. Cyril Wecht at 1 HSCA 344.]
But just one look at these two pictures below (in tandem) debunks that crazy FPP determination for all time:
And for Baden, et al, to think that Oswald's Carcano bullet would have remained on a straight-line trajectory after entering JFK's head at full velocity is just a crazy determination too (IMO). And even Dr. Cyril Wecht of the HSCA's FPP seems to think it's a bit crazy too, given his testimony reprinted below (via
1 HSCA 342):
"The inescapable fact that unless a bullet--especially one fired from a high-speed weapon, reasonably high-speed, approximately 2,000 feet per second muzzle velocity--unless it strikes something of firm substance, such as bone or something else, that that bullet will travel in a straight line." -- Dr. Cyril H. Wecht
Wecht wasn't actually talking about JFK's head wounds when he made the above remarks to the HSCA in 1978. He was referring to the proposed SBT and his totally incorrect diagram that he utilized in front of the HSCA [JFK Exhibit F-320; pictured below]:
That chart/diagram is wrong in several different ways -- e.g., Wecht has the bullet entering JFK's back in a place that's way too far right of the true entry point....plus, the lateral (right-to-left) angle shown in the diagram is way, way off....and Wecht doesn't have Governor Connally turned to his right in his seat in the diagram. So, essentially, Wecht's F-320 diagram is worthless, because it isn't an accurate representation of what Bullet CE399 did on 11/22/63.
Sorry, I got sidetracked into talking about Wecht's strange anti-SBT theory and his nutty diagram. My apologies.
Back to John Canal's lunacy now......
The "EOP Entry" theory is kind of crazy and illogical from another point-of-view (purely a garden-variety, common-sense POV):
If the bullet entered JFK's head fairly LOW on his head (near the EOP), and if the bullet didn't change course after entering the head, then why wasn't the exit wound much LOWER on JFK's head than where the exit wound really was?
In other words, how can Oswald shoot the President from six floors above the street in the back of the head near the EOP and have the bullet exit JFK's head much HIGHER on his head IF THE BULLET DIDN'T CHANGE COURSE QUITE A BIT after entering the head?
We can see via this still picture of Zapruder frame 312.....
....that JFK wasn't leaning forward very much. His head certainly wasn't pitched forward far enough to support a theory that has the bullet entering the EOP but exiting VERY HIGH on the head in the RIGHT/FRONT/TOP areas of the head.
But per Dale Myers' website and computer images on this webpage, we can see that the cowlick entry site makes much more sense when ALL of the facts are put into the mix -- e.g., the position of JFK's head just prior to the point of impact (Z312), the angle of trajectory from the sixth-floor window of the TSBD, the known entry wound location (the real location, not the make-believe EOP location), and the exit location for Oswald's bullet.
Via the "cowlick" entry location, the bullet enters HIGH on the President's head and it exits HIGH on the President's head.
But via the make-believe "EOP" entry site, the bullet enters much LOWER on JFK's head, but is exiting HIGH on the head.
So, the cowlick entry site makes more sense from nearly every point-of-view anyone could think of.
David Von Pein
May 18, 2009
January 5, 2014
Posted By: David Von Pein