WHERE WAS THE BULLET HOLE LOCATED?
IN THE "NECK"?
IN THE "BACK"?
IN THE "BACK OF THE NECK"?
WHERE?
------------------------------------------------------------------
I think everyone would probably agree that part of the problem that
exists with respect to lining up President Kennedy's upper-back wound
and his throat wound is the fact that there is no specific autopsy
photograph in existence that can readily illustrate the relationship
between those two key wounds at the same time.
But I think that the autopsy photo shown below of President Kennedy,
which has been turned sideways for proper orientation, does a pretty
good job of accomplishing that task (although, of course, we still can't
physically see the hole in JFK's upper back here):
Via the above photo, it's very easy to illustrate the fact that the wound
in President Kennedy's upper back was certainly well ABOVE the wound
in the front of the neck/throat. Because if a line is drawn straight across
from the throat wound toward JFK's back in the above photograph (even
allowing for the limitations of such crude line-drawing on a two-dimensional
photograph, which really cannot be done and expect complete accuracy
regarding specific measurements), where would that place a wound on
the "back" portion of John Kennedy's body? Certainly not anywhere near
the "neck". And also nowhere near where we find the actual upper-back
wound via the autopsy photo of Kennedy's back.
And if you want to buy the HSCA junk about the back wound being
anatomically LOWER than the throat wound, there's even a bigger
differential, which would place the back wound practically in the
MIDDLE portion of JFK's back...which is just silly.
Just compare it to this picture:
The "crimp" in JFK's neck is a good guide to use in both of the above
autopsy photographs. The "crimp" appears to me to be located
approximately three inches above the wound. So we need to estimate
about three inches below the "neck crimp" in this photo:
Where would the wound be located based on that crimp estimate?
Certainly not anywhere NEAR the very BOTTOM of that picture (which
is where the wound would have to be located in order for it to be at
"throat wound level").
This isn't exactly rocket science.
Here's a side-by-side comparison of the two autopsy photographs:
The Single-Bullet Theory works. Period.
Related Article -- The SBT Perfection Of Commission Exhibit No. 903.
David Von Pein
January 2007
July 2010
RELATED DISCUSSIONS....
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, Pat, like you said, it does feel weird to be at odds so strongly with something the HSCA determined to be a fact. But that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it based on the two comparison autopsy photos (pictured below) that are clearly telling me (even without photogrammetry being applied) that the back wound was above the throat wound.
And I'm not using the "hump" on JFK's back in my comparison at all. I'm using the CRIMPS in JFK's neck as the main guide. Try doing that yourself, Pat. Utilize those crimps in the neck and then envision (in just a "ballpark" fashion if nothing else) where you think that bullet hole would be located in the photo on the left....
Even when accounting for some distortion and inexactness due to the distance from the camera or whatever other limitations you can think of....do you really think that bullet hole could have been BELOW the trach/throat wound (as the HSCA said)?
In other words, can there really be THAT much distortion of reality when comparing these two photographs? Even if you're right about the shoulders of JFK being "hunched up" in the photo on the right, can there possibly be ENOUGH "shoulder hunching distortion" in the right-hand picture to enable that wound to actually, in "reality", be located all the way to the BOTTOM (or even LOWER, per the HSCA!) of the left-hand photo? I just can't envision THAT much distortion.
Plus, how do you go about determining just exactly HOW MUCH Kennedy's shoulders are "hunched up" in the photo on the right? Just how do you KNOW the shoulders are "hunched", Pat? How is that determined?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
BTW....
Dr. James J. Humes, the chief surgeon at President Kennedy's autopsy, made the following statement concerning JFK's wounds in his 1964 Warren Commission testimony [at 2 H 368]:
"The wound in the anterior [front] portion of the lower neck is physically lower than the point of entrance posteriorly."
PAT SPEER SAID ALL THIS. (Last post on page.)
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh brother! Cry me a river, Pat!
Your complaint about how Arlen Specter "changed the wound" totally ignores the fact that the original wording that was going to appear in the Warren Commission's Final Report made no sense at all---and would have been, in fact, just flat-out WRONG (not to mention stupid). As Jean Davison put it in 2014:
"[Gerald] Ford didn't need to move the back wound up. And in fact he didn't, since the phrase he revised put the wound on "his back at a point slightly above the shoulder." It can't be above the shoulder and still be in the back. (Except maybe in conspiracyland where apparently anything is possible.) .... I doubt that Ford, for one, knew the exact location of the back/neck wound. I think he recognized that the sentence as written couldn't possibly be right since there's nothing "in the back slightly above the shoulders." By definition, above the shoulders is "neck." Ford tried to correct it and made matters worse. One thing I feel certain of is that there was no rational motive for anyone to "raise" the back wound. Moving it to the neck doesn't support the SBT, no matter what suspicion may tell you. An entry in the neck would destroy the SBT trajectory." -- Jean Davison
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/Gerald Ford And The SBT
----------------
And to verify--IN PHOTOGRAPHIC FORM--that what Jean said back in 2014 is the absolute truth (i.e.: "An entry in the neck would destroy the SBT trajectory"), there's my favorite WC exhibit, No. 903, which Pat and I have hashed and re-hashed the merits of many times over the years, which demonstrates for all time that the Warren Commission most certainly DID NOT "raise" the back wound up into the "neck" of John Kennedy. The wound in CE903 is exactly where it should be and exactly where the autopsy photo shows it to be---in the UPPER BACK.
And furthermore, CE903 also demonstrates that the back wound WAS, indeed, anatomically HIGHER than the trach/neck wound, because this JFK stand-in is in the same position in the limo that JFK was in on 11/22. He's not leaning forward, nor was JFK on 11/22. So, of course, any bullet coming downward at an angle of approx. 17 degrees (like CE399 was) is going to result in a back wound that has no choice but to be anatomically higher than the exit wound for that missile....
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
I think the following comments I made in 2018 deserve a replay in this discussion too:
"It doesn't really matter what the awful Rydberg drawings depict, and it doesn't really matter whether Arlen Specter said "neck" 3000 times in his lifetime, because the Rydberg drawings are trumped (and always will be) by the "live action" scene demonstrated in CE903 that you hate so much, which PROVES that Specter & Company did NOT raise the back wound into JFK's "neck".
And I don't see how anyone can say the photo we see in Commission Exhibit 903 is rigged or "phony" in some fashion. It shows the angle that leads back to the 6th floor (17d 43m 30s), and it shows the bullet exiting exactly where everyone agrees a bullet wound was located on JFK's body (the tie knot/trach wound area), and it shows the rod being placed into the known bullet hole in John Connally's jacket.
Pat, don't those THREE things lining up perfectly in an "SBT" fashion (forgetting for the moment the precise "back wound" location seen in CE903) strike you as being rather amazing and incredible IF, as you assert, the Single-Bullet Theory is a pure fairy tale INVENTION of the Warren Commission?
How did Specter manage that amazing SBT-like trickery and how did he manage to manipulate his metal rod (which has no "zig-zag" attachment on it that I can see) so that it could be placed in a 17.72-degree downward angle and have it go straight from Kennedy's throat wound directly into Connally's bullet hole in his jacket?
You must admit that those THREE "SBT"-like things I just talked about are impressively duplicated in CE903. Wouldn't you agree, Pat?"
-- DVP; July 1, 2018
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID ALL THIS.
David Von Pein
July 26-27, 2022
July 26, 2022
ADDENDUM....
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
There is also this conclusion reached by the Clark Panel in 1968....
"The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." -- From Clark Panel Report
Replay (for emphasis)....
"There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds..."
Another interesting part of the 1968 Clark Panel Report is the portion of the report in which the Clark Panel concludes that the bullet hole in President Kennedy's throat was located 3.5 centimeters LOWER (anatomically) than the bullet wound in the President's upper back....
"There is an elliptical penetrating wound of the skin of the back located approximately 15 cm. medial to the right acromial process, 5 cm. lateral to the mid-dorsal line and 14 cm. below the right mastoid process. This wound lies approximately 5.5 cm. below a transverse fold in the skin of the neck. This fold can also be seen in a lateral view of the neck which shows an anterior tracheotomy wound. This view makes it possible to compare the levels of these two wounds in relation to that of the horizontal plane of the body. .... The center of the circular wound [in the front of the neck] is situated approximately 9 cm. below the transverse fold in the skin of the neck described in a preceding paragraph. This indicates that the bullet which produced the two wounds followed a course downward and to the left in its passage through the body." -- From Clark Panel Report
"Perhaps the clearest visual evidence of the fact that the entrance wound in the [President's] back was definitely above the exit wound in the throat appears in one of [the autopsy] photos taken of the left side of the president's head as he is lying on his back, his head on a metal headrest. Only the wound to the throat is visible, not the wound to his upper right back. However, it couldn't be clearer from this photo that the wound to the back was definitely above the exit wound in the throat." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 424 of "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy" (2007)
