Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
Date: Thursday, 19 Nov 1992 02:17:38 CST
From: <U54778@uicvm.uic.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: PBS special
 <schuck.722153210@sfu.ca>

In article <schuck.722153210@sfu.ca>, schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan
Schuck) says:
>

As I have stated before in many posts, Sjoerd, I believe that Bruce
has this scenario down pat in great detail.  I wish to add some
comment and additions.

>sdevries@fys.ruu.nl (Sjoerd de Vries) writes:
>
>>In <17504@pitt.UUCP> geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks) writes:
>
>>>I caught the tail end of a PBS show on the assassination
>>>last night.  Conclusion: the Mafia had something to do with
>>>it.  That's the first time I've seen PBS air something supporting
>>>the conspiracy.  Sorry I missed the first part of it.
>
>>>Cyril Wecht spoke here yesterday on the medical evidence.
>>>Nothing new for me really, just more reinforcement on how
>>>totally impossible the single bullet theory is.
>
>>Lately, I have been reading "Mortal Error"  written by Bonar Menninger,
>>based on the theories of Donahue. This book
>>succeeds in making me feel the single bullet theory is not
>>as totally impossible as I originally thought.
>
>Actually, this was the weakest part of the Menninger book. They almost
>lost me there. It gets better.
>
>>What are the main arguments against the single bullet theory?
>
>>1. the time between Kennedy's and Connally's first reactions
>>   to their wounds, set by critics at before z225 and at z237
>>   resp. So at least 12 frames, that is 0.7 sec, but possible
>>   1.6 sec or more.
>>2. the zig zag track of the bullet
>>3. the fact that the bullet was nearly pristine after passing through
>>   two bodies and braking some bones
>
>>What are Donahue's answers to these arguments?
>
>>1. At z-225 Kennedy reacts to a ricochet shot, the one that missed
>>   the car. The debris of this shot hit bystander James Tague
>>   and  some landed in the car, and were found there later, free
>>   of blood and tissue.
>>   At z-236 both Kennedy and Conally are hit. So we don't have any
>>   timing problem.
>
>Two big problems with this explanation.
>a) Zapruder saw JFK react to his throat wound before JFK went behind
>the street sign. That means it happened before 210. There is a lot of

Of course, for brevity's sake, Bruce is leaving out 1) the Zfilm shows
JFK droping his hand down just before being occluded by the sign and
Connally turning his head to his right; 2) the audio tape puts it
here (arguably, of course); 3) reading  Josiah Thompson's compendium
of most of the witnesses testimony on when the first shot was heard;
4) there was testimony to the effect that there should be a 2 second
lead time to the reactions to when the shots actually were fired.
If this is true and we see JFK reacting as he comes from behind the
sign, then the first shot has to be long before 237.

>evidence that the shot actually occurred at 189. That leaves a *big*
>gap. The idea that JFK reacts to a shot starting at 225 is hard to
>believe because he only becomes visible at 225 and he's
>*already* moved his hands very close to his throat. I think he is
>still reacting to a shot at 190. Thats only two seconds, and he
>probably had spinal cord damage at the time, making a 2 second delay
>for grabbing at or near his throat realistic. To claim he reacted to a
>shot at 225 and got his hands near his throat *instantaneously* is not
>believable.
>
>b) Tague is almost 500 feet away from JFK at this time.
>The only direct path from the TSBD to Tague is 30 feet over JFK's
>head and 20 feet to his right. If a bullet hit the street behind JFK
>it would have had to leap a curb, curve to the right, and travel 500
>feet, and arc down to strike another curb, and bounce off that curb,
>up to Tague about 20 feet from the last curb. Many people don't
>realize that Tague wasn't even on Elm street. He was between Main and
>Commerce and almost under the Triple underpass. The FBI estimated that
>a straight line from the TSBD to Tague only happened at the equivalent
>of Zapruder frame 410, over 100 frames after JFK's head shot.
>There is *no* way a bullet could have hit the street behind JFK and
>then gone on to wound Tague.

And there is some evidence to show that the fragment that hit Tague
came from a bullet striking the curb only a few feet away from him.
This would destroy a scenario that only places one shooter at the
6th floor window.  The pro-WC arguments against this always avoids
this by trying to place the bullet strike further away.

>
>>2. In fact, there is no zig zag movement. Conally was seated on a
>>   jumpseat that was clearly to JFK's left (a photograph of the
>>   empty car in the book shows this very well). Donahue claims
>>   the displacement is about one feet (if I'm not mistaken, it may be
>>   more).
>>   At z-236 all wounds line up.
>
>It is possible for them to line up on the horizontal plane. However,
>it is impossible for them to line up on the vertical plane at that
>time. The angle down through Connally was almost 40 degrees, while the
>TSBD to JFK angle was only 21 degrees at frame 210 and 19 degrees at
>235 [WC Exhibit 884] Plus, the JFK back wound was actually lower than
>his throat wound. On the Nova special, the computer simulation had JFK
>leaning unrealisitically forward, and Connally leaning way back to
>account for the vertical angle difference. This positioning was nver
>seen by anybody, it certainly was not visible on the Z film at 237,
>and could only have occurred at 210-225, when they were behind the
>Stemmons Freeway Sign. However, it is impossible to believe they
>performed this maneuver in 15 frames, especially since it isn't
>visible on any any film taken that day.

Take note that the time behind the sign translates to .9 seconds.
Try this yourself.  JFK can just barely make this movement in that
time but note that the Zfilm shows him moving his arms up to his
upper chest and I discern a stiffining and straightening of his upper
torso at the same time.  These movements don't lend themselves to
believing that he had moved forward first and then back straight.
As for Connally, he certainly was rotated slightly to his right while
in the jump seat just before he is occluded by the sign but no where
near enough to be lined up if we are to pay close attention to the
NOVA graphic to get the right angle.  Compare this to his position
at 237 where he, his wife and his doctor all place the *second* shot.
It is damn near perfect alignment and all his subsequent reactions
fit.  Hair splayed, shoulder droppiing, mouth opening.  Also note,
his hand which has been holding his big Texan hat is now below sight,
probably near his left leg.  Can you believe all that claptrap about
his being able to still hold his hat after his wrist bone has been
shattered?  Have you ever seen the xray? Shattered is the word.
And I wouldn't be distracted by the pro-WC argument that he testified
that he wasn't aware of it til later the next day.  This unawareness
makes perfect sense if he distracted by the collapsed lung and
shattered rib.  It does not make sense if you are trying to place
all these things happening while he is sitting unperturbed before 237.
    And while I'm at it, I would not be distracted by the "delayed
reaction" WC argument.  Of course, people have tales to tell of when
they were hit by a bullet and didn't realize it.  But looking closer
at these tales, we can generally put them into two categories: 1)
those whose tension and awareness were so hightened by their situations
that their attention was focused away from their wound such as in war
or in a violent street scene; or 2) their wounds were so superficial
that they weren't immediately noticed; no collapsed lungs or
shattered bones in the bunch.  Neither of these conditions were
present in that presidential limo.

>
>>3. The bullet is not pristine; it is flattened at the base, with some
>>   lead extruding and it is bent. Donahue argues that only at high
>>   velocities the bullets will show the mushroom effect. Before the
>>   bullet hit Conally's rib it had slowed down considerably. I believe
>>   this is the same argument Mitchell used before. I haven't heard of
>>   a proof of the contrary.
>
>Well, there is a picture in the HSCA report that Cyril Wecht submitted
>to the HSCA. It shows the 'magic' bullet beside a 6.5mm
>Mannlicher-Carcano round that had been fired into cotton for test
>purposes. The cotton bullet is bent more and has more lead extruded
>from the base than the magic bullet. This proves to me, it was
>probably fired into something softer than cotton, probably a water
>tank.
>Don't forget, the 'magic' bullet also had no blood on it, and considering
>the number of wounds it caused, this is unrealistic.
>Also, the considered opinion of Connallys Surgeons is that the wrist
>wound was caused by a bullet that had completely mushroomed, which the
>'magic' bullet had not.
>One of the ballistics experts also testified that at 2000 feet per
>second, a bullet impact should leave an imprint of the material a
>bullet hits on the bullet. Copper isn't that hard. He was of the
>opinion, the weave of JFK's jacket, or Connally's should have been
>microscopically visible. It wasn't. There was no imprint of anything
>on the bullet. It probably never hit anything harder than water.
>

The pro-WC side always makes a bug fuss about this flattening, as if
we are talking about a mangled bullet.  The flattening when seen from
the side is very slight.  If you look at the bullet examples that hit
a comparable bone head on, the nose is greatly misshappen.  If 399
hit Connally's arm bone sideways, I would expect it to show much
more flattening than what we see.  And the argument that it was slowed
down by going through two bodies has to face up to the fact that it
still had enough power to traverse his body, break his rib, shatter
his wrist and go on to his leg bone.  This doesn't sound like a
bullet that has been appreciably slowed down.

>>
>>What's your opinion about this, guys?
>
>I think the fatal head shot is *much* better researched by Donahue in
>Mortal Error, and the chapter on the 'magic' bullet should be skipped.
>
I agree.  Although I will concede that bullets can do funny things,
none of the various explanations have been comprehensive enough to
convince me that some version of the official line is probable.  They
always begin to sound valid until you add the factors that they ignore
or avoid.  They then fall apart.
I must state that I don't feel that the factors presented in this
post are the weakest part of the case against the SBT.  It is the
determination of whether LHO could have fired fast enough to have
separately shot JFK and Connally with two separate shots that I find
has strong enough weight to it to merit further probing.
This factor comes to us mainly from Lattimer by way of Joel Grant's
keyboard but is mentioned from sources other than these two.
It is ironic that we can all (us anti-WC) discount so much of what
the FBI presented us and not question its findings that 2.3 seconds
was the absolute minimum firing time between shots as if it was
gospel.
I have been concentrating on this factor in my research of late. I
posted an item some months back which dealt with LHO's abillity
with a rifle.  I was immediately unsatisfied with it and have
pursued this area much further; foraging through the 26 volumes,
rereading the authors who touch upon this and even calling authors
on the phone for clarification.  I will begin to present this
material in forthcoming postings soon.
  As far as I'm concerned, the SBT is still garbage.  The real
question is whether LHO was a good enough marksman to hit the
victims separately with two shots.
ALAN ROGERS