(PART 1020)


Current pathology, ballistic, and forensic research indicates there are five methods to determine the direction a bullet was traveling before striking the head. Those five methods can be applied to Kennedy.

It is not a matter of belief in a theory. It is an intellectual decision of deciding to apply those methods to what is known evidence, determine if the results from each method is consistent with the others, and accepting the unbiased results of scientific applications.


I agree Sherry, but does this mean the original medical information regarding the presidents wounds were wrong?


No, I believe the original information is accurate, but was interpreted with what is now outdated information.


That original information is quite conclusive of shots fired from the rear though.


It was conclusive at the time. However, research in forensic pathology and wound ballistics now indicates a different conclusion.


I absolutely believe there is evidence of a rear shot, but not for the head wound.


Without careful examination, misinterpretation of an entrance wound as an exit wound is possible in all types of entries. Based upon current forensic research, it appears beveling cannot provide conclusive evidence of projectile direction.

Incorrect assessment of direction can occur with tangential entries or exits, mistaken orientation, insufficient beveling, or the failure to recognize external beveling on entry wounds.


Allow me to quote Dr. James J. Humes, the primary doctor who performed the autopsy on President Kennedy's body in 1963:

[Quote On:]

"In 1963, we proved at the autopsy table that President Kennedy was struck from above and behind by the fatal shot. The pattern of the entrance and exit wounds in the skull proves it, and if we stayed here until hell freezes over, nothing will change this proof. It happens 100 times out of 100, and I will defend it until I die. This is the essence of our autopsy, and it is supreme ignorance to argue any other scenario. This is a law of physics and it is foolproof--absolutely, unequivocally, and without question. The conspiracy buffs have totally ignored this central scientific fact, and everything else is hogwash. There was no interference with our autopsy, and there was no conspiracy to suppress the findings." -- Dr. James J. Humes; Interview with JAMA editor George D. Lundberg; October 1991 [See “JFK’s Death: The Plain Truth From The MDs Who Did The Autopsy”, by Dennis L. Breo, Journal of the American Medical Association, Volume 267, No. 20, May 27, 1992, Page 2794]


All available information concerning the blood spatter pattern in the Zapruder film corresponds in every measurable manner with back spatter replicated in forensic laboratories and described in peer-reviewed publications since the late 1980s. Consequently, the only possible conclusion is the back spatter in the Zapruder film is genuine. Identifying the blood in the Zapruder film as back spatter signifies a shot from the front of President Kennedy.


Cecil Kirk and Dr. Charles Petty, who were both part of investigative panels for the HSCA in the late 1970s, disagree with Sherry Fiester's analysis:


Sherry, does this look like a wound of entry? ....


It does look like an entry wound since avulsions are located adjacent to entry wounds. The bullet fragmented. Some fragments likely struck the rear of the head and some were likely expelled.


I've shot lots of living things with a rifle, using various types of ammunition. I can't recall an entrance wound like that. The blood, tissue and skull can clearly be seen going forward of the president's head.


Correct, it is going forward, in addition to traveling rearward the greater majority is found behind the President.


Majority of what?


The greater majority of blood is found behind the President, traveled further and contained bone fragments.


The bullet fragments were found forward of the president's position. Of course lighter material such as blood will be found to the rear, the car was moving, wind would do that. Roy Kellerman and Bill Greer were splattered, they were in front, as were police outriders behind.


You do not have a clear understanding of how spatter is affected by wind, how it is projected and the measurable differences in back and forward spatter. Back spatter travels a limited distance, usually 3 to 4 feet maximum. Forward spatter travels up to 15 to 30 feet.

Bullet fragments forward of the President do not exclude a front shot.


I do believe in a rear back wound, but I am having difficulty aligning the evidence with a rear head wound.


Well, I guess it comes down to what we believe. For me, the evidence is too strong for a rear head wound not to have occurred.


If you have looked at the bullet fragments, fracturing, beveling, blood spatter and target movement and believe it demonstrates a rear wound, so be it.


I believe had the autopsy physicians known about the other not yet discovered methods of determining directionality, they may have reached a different conclusion.


Sherry Fiester broke it down for you. Read her book and take a forensics class. Better yet, take a Coke and shake it up before you open it. Tell me--where does the pressure go?


I don't have to take a forensics class. Numerous forensic pathologists before me, including the ones utilized by the Warren Commission, the HSCA, the Clark Panel, and the Rockefeller Commission, concluded the shot came from behind. I trust their judgement.

As far as I know, the only forensics expert who is on record as stating the shot came from the front (triple underpass or post office parking lot) is Sherry Fiester.


Why in 51 years has the conspiracy community not assembled experts in their respective medical and firearms ballistics fields, conducted any scientific tests to acertain the plausibility of frontal or side gunshots.

I'm sure Oliver Stone, with the help of other prominent conspiracists, have the resources to assemble the necessary experts, to conduct scientific tests of these alternative shot locations.


My $0.02....

17 pathologists (who have done tens of thousands of autopsies between them) ALL concluded that President Kennedy was shot in the head from behind. But Sherry Fiester thinks all 17 of those trained medical pathologists blew it. I find that impossible to fathom---particularly when we've got bullet fragments FROM LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S GUN in the car--to the FRONT of Kennedy--indicating a back-to-front trajectory.

Plus there's the additional fact that Oswald's gun was located to the REAR of JFK at the time of the head shot. So that fact is further evidence of the shot coming from behind, since no OTHER bullets were found that would indicate a frontal head shot.

And here's another thing to consider....

I'm just wondering what the ODDS are that ALL of the things we are seeing with respect to President Kennedy's head wounds (including the autopsy X-rays and photos and the Zapruder Film) could really be misleading us to the point that ALL of that stuff is really showing the EXACT OPPOSITE of what those things seem to be indicating.


1.) In the Zapruder Film, JFK's head moves forward for one frame at the moment the bullet is impacting his head, SEEMINGLY indicating a rear shot (but it's REALLY an indication of a FRONTAL shot, per Sherry Fiester)....

2.) All (or most) of the head spray is to the FRONT of the President's head, SEEMINGLY indicating a shot coming from behind (but it's REALLY an indicator of a shot coming from the front, according to Sherry Fiester)....

3.) The autopsy photographs and X-rays SEEMINGLY are indicating a shot entering JFK's skull from behind (without ANY doubt whatsoever, according to Dr. Humes, the leading physician at JFK's autopsy)....but, according to Sherry Fiester, those photos and X-rays have FOOLED every single one of the doctors who have examined them since 1963--including the three autopsy surgeons themselves!--and, per Sherry Fiester, those X-rays and pictures are actually proof that a bullet entered JFK's skull from the FRONT, which is just exactly the OPPOSITE of what the many pathologists have concluded over the years.

So I ask just the garden-variety question ---

What are the odds of FRONTAL ENTRY looking so much like REAR ENTRY in so many DIFFERENT pieces of evidence connected with the JFK assassination?

Would Sherry Fiester want to take those odds to the table in Vegas? I wonder.

Also in the "WHAT ARE THE ODDS?" category ---

What are the odds that in THIS case (the JFK assassination case) the VERY LARGE hole in the President's head turns out to be the ENTRY wound, and the VERY SMALL hole in the back of JFK's head turns out to be the EXIT wound? Is that what Sherry believes? If so, it's absolutely amazing that black could equal white and white equal black in so many areas concerning the President's head injuries.


I would take those odds anywhere, anytime. Having inside, in my case more updated and correct information, always make you a winner.


I believe the entry is at the front, adjacent to the bone avulsion documented in both physician statements, autopsy photographs, and the Zapruder film.

There is very likely a small wound at the back of he head...which is the wound that displayed bone beveling and suggested an entry wound to the initial investigators.

Unfortunately, I believe the autopsy physicians had confirmation bias along with a well documented mandate to prove the incident the actions of a single person. I do not believe these men intentionally misled, covered up, or otherwise distorted their findings. I do believe these same men, if faced with the information we have today, may have had different findings.

I also have seen first hand at autopsy, how misleading photos can be. For example, I have seen skull defects not reflected in the scalp because the scalp is more elastic than the skull. A defect in the skull can be hidden by pulling the scalp up and over a defect.

I believe the work at autopsy was—in comparison to the documentation of forensic pathologists today—considerably lacking. Not because the physicians were intentionally being deceptive or because they were inept. But simply because they felt they were doing what they needed to do at the time and 50 years later, we know more than they did then.

As a result, we are left with incomplete, possibly inadequate information that allows for discrepancies in interpretation. It is not a matter of being right, it is a matter of being informed.


Thank you for the detailed reply, Sherry. I appreciate it.

I, however, respectfully choose to disagree with your conclusion about a frontal entry wound in JFK's head.

To me, it seems as though we have overpowering physical evidence of the bullet entering from behind in the form of the bevelled inward entry hole at the back of JFK's head.

Plus, the two large bullet fragments in the front seat from Lee Harvey Oswald's very own gun, which was located to the REAR of President Kennedy during the shooting.

Everything, in its totality, indicates the high likelihood of ONE shooter firing three shots from behind using Oswald's Carcano rifle. And if that bevelled wound in the back of JFK's head—which, as you said, Sherry, suggested an entry wound to the autopsy doctors—was really something other than an entry hole for Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 mm. bullet, then the person who really did fire the head shot from the front is the person who should take up permanent residence at the gaming tables in Las Vegas, Nevada — because that guy was one lucky SOB on November 22, 1963 — because the bullet he fired into the President's skull from the FRONT somehow was able to (incredibly) fool every pathologist since 1963 into thinking that frontal shot was fired from behind JFK's limousine.

With that kind of luck on their side, perhaps conspiracy theorists should reconsider the notion of the "Magic Bullet" in this case. Because if Sherry Fiester is right about John F. Kennedy's head wounds, then the true "magic" missile in the JFK assassination is the one fired by that frontal gunman in Dealey Plaza.

David Von Pein
September 8, 2015