From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: HSCA vs. Lattimer, part one
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 05:43:02 GMT

grant_jo@ripple.enet.dec.com (Joel Grant) writes:

>From Donahue, pp. 328-330

>(2)  the back-neck case

>(142) According to the autopsy photographs, the first bullet to 
>strike Kennedy entered his back slightly about [?] his shoulder blade
>and slightly to the right of his backbone.

I'm glad you put in the ? Joel. I wonder exactly what the HSCA meant
by 'slightly about his shoulder blade'. That sure narrows it down. :)

>  (See fig. II-13) This
>bullet passed through soft tissue hitting no bone, and exited at
>the front of his neck. (47)  Independent determinations by the
>Photographic Evidence Panel showed the entrance wound to be from 
>4 to 5 centimeters from Kennedy's center plane and the exit wound to be 
>on the center plane or as much at 0.5 centimeters to its left.

I don't understand why they use 4-5 cm? The hole in JFK's shirt was
only 2.9cm to the right of the midline. I don't know why they use .5cm
to JFK's left on the throat wound. The exit slits [so-called] are on
the right [if anything] of JFK's shirt. I think the HSCA were just
fudging in order to make the trajectory line up with the TSBD.

>When seen in the autopsy position, the outshoot wound was described
>as being at about the same height (or slighly higher) relative to the
>inshoot wound.  The distance between the wounds was determined to
>be 14 centimeters.

14cm? Isn't that a little thin for someones upper chest thickness,
especially someone with the 'extra' flesh the HSCA claims is on JFK's
upper back? Especially considering the horizontal angle would result
in JFK's upper chest being less than 14cm [6.4in]

>(143) Based on the acoustics results (48), the camera blur study
>(49) and the visual observations made by the Photographic Evidence
>Panel (50) it was determined that Kennedy was struck by this 
>bullet at a time corresponding approximately to Zapruder fame
>190.  [Lattimer believes it to be closer to Z-film 220 - jg]
>Accordingly, to determine Kennedy's orientation at that point,
>frame 190 and adjoining frames were closely scurtinized. (51)
>(See JFK exhibits JFK F-225-227)

I agree there was a shot at 190, but the HSCA also claims that the
first shot was at 161-164. That means there is only 26-29 frames
between two shots. Since Zapruders camera ran at 18.3 frames
per second, that means Oswald only had 1.5 seconds to reload and fire
his bolt action rifle. Nobody could do it in less than 2.3  seconds
when Donahue did his test firing for CBS in 1967.

Also, that means the HSCA thinks the shot at 161-164 was the missed
shot that hit a curb near Jame Tague. Not likely.
Tague was 500 feet from the TSBD. If a shot missed the limo at 161, it
would have to have missed by 30 feet horizontally and over 80 feet
vertically to hit the curb. Even the FBI said the TSBD and the curb
only line up at frame 410. 

Also, by claiming the magic bullet wounded JFK and Connally at 190, 
the HSCA would have us believe that Connally waited 46 frames 
[2.5 seconds] to react to a bullet that pulverized 10cm of his 5th rib. Ha!

>(144) The best record of Kennedy's posture, torso inclination,
>and shoulder "hunching" is a photograph taken by Robert Croft
>at about the time of Zapruder frame 161. (See fig. II-14, JFK
>exhibit F-135).  This correlation was established by the
>Photographic Evidence Panel by examining features in the Croft
>photograph and studying Croft's movements as recorded in the
>Zapruder film.

>(145) In Croft's picture, Kennedy and other persons in the 
>limousine are seen from a perspective that permits a reasonable
>determination of their posture and orientation.  Kennedy's 
>upper torso/neck region was inferred from this photograph
>to have been inclined forward at an approximate angle of
>11 degrees to 18 degrees relative to a line drawn upward from and
>perpendicular to the road surface.  The range of this angle is
>well within a much larger range derived from studies of many 
>other photographs taken during the motorcade.  Although the
>Croft photograph corresponds to Zapruder frame 161, there is
>no indication in the Zapruder movie that Kennedy changed his
>inclination substantially before he was hit in the back.  (53)
>(See JFK exhibits F-226-242)

Let's see. At 190, the angle to JFK vertically was 23 degrees minus 3
degrees for the slope....so that makes it 20 degrees. Since the HSCA
'abrasion collar' analysis puts the bullet entering JFK upwards, an
11 - 18 degree incline of JFK's back is still too little.

>(146)  The Croft photograph also shows Kennedy's torso facing
>nearly straight forward.  At Zapruder frame 190, however, he
>is seen to turn his head about 60 degrees to his right (See
>JFK exhibit F-226), and it is reasonable to expect that he also
>would have rotated his shoulders a small amount in the same
>direction.  Most probably, this rotation was only 5 degrees
>or less, as judged by the absence of obvious large shifts in
>body position in the Zapruder movie.  Thus, it was assumed
>that, except for turning his head by about 60 degrees and his
>torso perhaps by 5 degrees, Kennedy made no major changes in
>posture after frame 161.

Funnily enough, when I turn my head 60 degrees to the right, the
centreline of my windpipe also moves to the right. In my case almost 1
inch [although in smaller people that may differ] It's too bad the
HSCA didn't take that into account. It also moves farther to the right
by a little more because of the 5 degree torso turn. I find it
impossible to believe that a bullet from the TSBD at an angle of 18
degrees horizontally [a conservative estimate] and entering 2.9cm to the
right of the midline is going to exit from the midline if the midline
has moved at least 2 cm to the right because of JFK's 60 degree turn
to the right. 

That bizarre claim results in drawings of the magic bullet trajectory
having a right turn, because thats what it would have to do to end up
leaving JFK's throat where the HSCA says it does.

[...]

>(147)  the Panel then had to adjust slightly the wound locations
>that had been provided based on the autopsy photographs and
>X-rays because of their difference in body position from that
>at the time of the shooting.

I suspect the wound locations were adjusted [ie fudged] in order to
allow the trajectory analysis to point vaguely towards the 6th floor
of the TSBD.

>  During the autopsy, Kennedy was
>in an anatomical position with his face tilted as if looking
>upward about 35 degrees, a posture and conformation significantly
>different from those at the time of the assassination.  

It's too bad that the HSCA never measured the angle from the TSBD to
the limo. They always were measuring from the wounds to the TSBD.
Of course, JFK's body position was hard to pin down, so that makes it
a lot easier to fudge their positions.





-- 
===============================================================================
        "We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin -- Split Second

schuck@sfu.ca                                           Vote No on October 26th
===============================================================================
Xref: sparky alt.conspiracy.jfk:3393 alt.conspiracy:10908 sci.skeptic:17350 talk.rumors:1059