CORY SANTOS SAID:
This photo in your blog has a questionable value UNLESS the angle is adjusted clearly for the fact that Elm slopes.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The CE903 photo taken in the Dallas garage is adjusted to account for the 3.15-degree downward slope of Elm Street, making the angle through JFK's body equal to 17.72 degrees downward (as opposed to just over 20 degrees if the car had been photographed out on Elm Street).
And Gerald Ford's "move" wasn't really a physical "move" of the wound at all. It was merely semantics. It was Ford realizing that the original language couldn't possibly be accurate --- "entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder". Ford knew that if the bullet had really entered ABOVE the shoulder, it must have entered the "neck", not the "back". Hence the change. And it made things worse, because, as we can see via the autopsy photo, the bullet did not enter the "neck". It entered the "back" (pretty much right AT the level of the shoulders).
Hence, the CTers have now been given a perfect reason to shout "Cover-up" at the top of their lungs as they get to accuse Gerald Ford of playing fast and loose with the evidence, when all he really was doing was trying to make things more accurate. But since Ford never saw the actual back-wound photo, he was really just guessing. The real "culprit" is whoever wrote that first draft of the wound location. That person had it wrong and Ford was merely trying to correct it.
JOHN BUTLER SAID:
Does the photo showing Arlen Specter and his bullet angle mean that Kennedy was shot twice in the back?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
No, John. It's just that the Rydberg drawings suck. (Yes, even an LNer like myself can admit that fact.)
But fortunately, Arlen Specter didn't actually rely at all (quite obviously) on the awful Rydberg drawings when he put that metal rod up against JFK's stand-in, because the wound is placed in the BACK, not in the NECK, in Commission Exhibit No. 903.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
It's hard to believe how much baloney that DVP can get into one post.
The Warren Commission did have the autopsy materials. In one of the executive sessions, McCloy asks about this point. Rankin replies that they have them for the Commission only in a room off the hall. This point is also acknowledged in the McKnight book. (This is the kind of research that this guy does.)
All of this makes this lie even worse.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Jim,
The bottom line is....
The Warren Commission got it right in CE903.
You'll never admit that fact, though, of course (even though you can see it in the photo published as Commission Exhibit No. 903).
There was no wound depicted as being in the back of the "neck" in CE903. It's in the UPPER BACK, just like the autopsy photo shows.
Period.
No "baloney". Just facts---in ILLUSTRATED form, via this photo....
CORY SANTOS SAID:
Was this the same limo JFK was in?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
No, it's the Secret Service follow-up car (the "Queen Mary"), which is a Cadillac, not a Lincoln.
But the inner seat configuration is very similar to JFK's SS-100-X limo.
CORY SANTOS SAID:
I thought so. That is cause for debate, as experiments need to be exact. Thanks for confirming that.
ADAM JOHNSON SAID:
And the sixth floor TSBD window is over Arlen Spector's [sic] outstretched left hand, I take it. LOL LOL
Go put the limo at Z220 on Elm Street and tell me if you stood beside JFK and placed this rod over his right shoulder, it would be pointing at the TSBD 6th floor.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, it definitely would have pointed back to the sixth floor. The "17-43-30" angle was determined while the car was out on Elm Street (prior to being taken to the enclosed garage for the CE903 photo). That fact was confirmed in the testimony of the FBI's Lyndal Shaneyfelt....
LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- The average angle, allowing for the 3'9" street grade, results in an average angle between frame 210 and frame 225 of 17 degrees, 43 minutes, 30 seconds.
ARLEN SPECTER -- And that is the average angle from the muzzle to President Kennedy as he sat in the car or President Kennedy's stand-in as he sat in the car?
MR. SHANEYFELT -- That is correct. To the wound entrance.
MR. SPECTER -- Is the average angle of 17-43-30 measured from the muzzle to the President's body as the President would be seated in the car?
MR. SHANEYFELT -- That is out on the street in those frame positions, yes. It is measured to the point of the wound on the back of the President.
CORY SANTOS SAID:
But it's not the same limo. You cannot recreate an accident of a Mercedes driving a BMW because they are similar.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The seating layouts of the JFK limo and the Secret Service car were very similar. And any differences were taken into account (as confirmed, again, by Shaneyfelt's testimony)....
MR. SPECTER -- Was there any difference between the position of President Kennedy's stand-in and the position of President Kennedy on the day of the assassination by virtue of any difference in the automobiles in which each rode?
MR. SHANEYFELT -- Yes; because of the difference in the automobiles there was a variation of 10 inches, a vertical distance of 10 inches that had to be considered. The stand-in for President Kennedy was sitting 10 inches higher and the stand-in for Governor Connally was sitting 10 inches higher than the President and Governor Connally were sitting--and we took this into account in our calculations.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
This is so silly. But that is Davey. Any fool, or zealot, can handle a pointer. (But note Davey never shows the reverse angle.)
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Totally untrue, and you know it. I've posted it (and discussed it) on my site numerous times ----> Click Here.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
False. You did not post it here [at The Education Forum]. .... One of the reasons he will not show the reverse angle here is because on that angle it's actually shown that they placed the back wound too far down for the shot of Specter to be matched up with it. As you can see from just the photo above, Lying Arlen has the rod on top of the guy's shoulder. The top of one's shoulder is at the base of the neck.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Why don't you just post it here yourself? Haven't you learned how to post a picture yet?
Come to think of it, have you EVER posted any photos here? I'm not being critical of you in this regard, it's just that I can't think of any posts where you've added any pictures, which seems kind of curious, since this crime is one that has so many "photographic" aspects to it.
But since you seem to refuse to post those "opposite angle" pictures for yourself, I'll do it for you....
Also See:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/CE903/Angles
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
There is also this point: this picture also demonstrates the lie that the WC did not have the autopsy photos. They had to have them to get that dotted location.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Totally untrue. Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission could have very easily determined the location of the back wound from the autopsy report ("14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process"). And that's no doubt what they did. Even if they did look at the autopsy photo, they wouldn't have relied ONLY on that photo. They would have utilized the best measurement for the back wound---which was in the autopsy report.
Oddly, Thomas J. Kelley of the Secret Service testified that the chalk mark was determined by just looking at the crappy Rydberg drawing and the coat of JFK --- which is ridiculous, because if only those two things were the source of the chalk mark, the mark would certainly not be in the location where we find it in CE903. Therefore, it's logical to conclude that the WC would have certainly gone to the best place for determining where on Kennedy's body the wound was located---and that's the autopsy report.
And, in fact, we find this info on Page 107 of the Warren Report, confirming what I just said above about the Warren Commission relying on the autopsy report itself....
"The wounds of entry and exit on the President were approximated based on information gained from the autopsy reports and photographs."
The above sentence could give the appearance that the Warren Commission was admitting that they had, in fact, looked at the autopsy photos. But when the WC used the word "photographs" on Page 107 of its Report, they appear (via the source note provided on Page 107) to only be referring to the crappy Rydberg drawings (see Thomas Kelley's testimony at 5 H 133-134).
But I think it's fairly obvious that Arlen Specter and the WC were definitely relying on more than just JFK's jacket and the awful Rydberg drawing (seen in Commission Exhibit No. 386). They had easy access, of course, to Page 3 of JFK's autopsy report, which clearly indicates the precise location of where a bullet had entered President Kennedy's upper back.
So it is utterly ridiculous, in my opinion, to believe that the Commission would NOT have utilized Page 3 of that autopsy report when it came time to place that chalk mark on the back of the JFK stand-in during the Warren Commission's assassination reconstruction effort in Dallas, Texas, on Sunday, May 24, 1964.
CORY SANTOS SAID:
Was this photo before or after Ford moved the location? Lol.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Doesn't really matter. Because, as I just outlined above, the WC didn't really rely on the crappy Rydberg drawing at all. Because if they had relied on it, we wouldn't find the wound where it is in Commission Exhibit 903 and in all of those "opposite angle" photographs.
CORY SANTOS SAID:
The car is flat [when it was in the Dallas garage on 5/24/64], not on a downslope. You have to understand how bad this shows it's not a scientific recreation.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
They subtracted the 3-degree, 9-minute slope of Elm when they went to the garage. Out on the street, the angle is 21+ degrees from the sixth-floor window to the inshoot wound on JFK's back. When the slope of Elm is taken off, the angle becomes 17.72 degrees (based, of course, on the "average" angle between Zapruder frames 210 and 225, which is the "range" of frames the Warren Commission was using for the SBT hit).
And so, as we can easily see, some slack must be given to the Warren Commission's tests....because their re-creation is being based on just an AVERAGE ANGLE between Z210 and 225 in the first place. So unless JFK was hit at exactly Z217.5 (which is quite unlikely), then the angles and measurements are going to be slightly off.
But conspiracy theorists can't permit any "slack" or "leeway" to be given to Mr. Specter & Company, can they? For a CTer, if it's not 100% exact to the millimeter, then we must toss the re-enactments in the trash can. Right? Come on! That's a ridiculously rigid mindset to have. Don't you agree?
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
FYI, the mastoid process is part of the ear! Why anyone would use that to locate a back wound is DVP's secret. Because it's baloney.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
MY secret?? You're too funny, Jim.
Anyway, don't blame me. I didn't do the autopsy. Go blame Humes for measuring from the mastoid.
(Oh, wait, you DO blame Humes, right? And he's nothing but a liar, to boot. So he's both incompetent AND a liar, correct?)
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
We don't know who wrote the report we have today.
Because as Humes admitted to the ARRB, he not only deep sixed his notes, but also his original report. (McKnight, p. 165)
McKnight goes on to add that this likely happened right after the murder of Oswald in Galloway's office. (ibid, p. 163)
It's your secret since you do not divulge this information when you make your silly assertions.
INSTANT REPLAY....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
We don't know who wrote the report we have today.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The above ridiculous sentence was written by a person who, just three sentences later, accused me of making "silly assertions".
Jim never gets tired of providing his readers with a non-stop flow of Pot/Kettle irony.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Have you ever admitted on your site that Humes told the ARRB and Jeremy Gunn that he not only incinerated his notes but his original autopsy report also?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh, sure. I certainly have. The topic of Dr. Humes burning the first draft of the autopsy report and his blood-stained notes has come up many times in the discussions I have archived at my site. For some examples, CLICK HERE.
And, BTW, Humes first testified about the burning of the first draft of the autopsy report in his 1964 Warren Commission testimony. That subject didn't first come up in the 1990s with the ARRB. Humes said this to Arlen Specter on Page 373 of WC Volume 2....
"In privacy of my own home, early in the morning of Sunday, November 24th, I made a draft of this report which I later revised, and of which this represents the revision. That draft I personally burned in the fireplace of my recreation room."
And Humes also testified in 1964 that he had "destroyed certain preliminary draft notes" (also at 2 H 373). The specific reason for the burning of the notes (the blood stains) was not mentioned by Humes in his Warren Commission testimony, however. But, as we can see, Humes admitted to having "burned" and "destroyed" both the first draft of the autopsy report and some draft notes during his WC testimony in 1964.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Have you ever indicated on you site that his original BS story about not having the blood of the president on [the] report as a souvenir was a pile of BS since he wrote the report in the confines of his home?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Dr. Humes never said the burned first draft of the autopsy report had any blood on it. The blood was only on the notes, not the "report".
David Von Pein
December 18, 2018—January 15, 2019
