|
Post by turbonium on Jul 14, 2005 19:29:36 GMT -4
I can't find any test in your link with a moving target, first of all. Unless I've missed noticing it, that alone would negate the tests. I saw a test reenacted on television using a moving target. The shooter made the head shot every time. He said it was actually the easiest shot of the three. Haven't seen or heard of this test - if you can, please provide information, as I have yet to see a test that has duplicated Oswald's supposed feat with a moving target. It's curious to me that if Oswald's shooting in Dealey Plaza was no amazing feat, that there is such extreme difficulty in duplicating it. Even the Warren Commission tests didn't use a moving target. And they were used as proof for the Oswald "lone shooter" conclusion anyway!! If it ever was duplicated, the "pro-Oswald" camp would spare nothing publicizing the tests to show how "easy" it was for even a mediocre shooter to do it.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 14, 2005 19:33:39 GMT -4
Craig Roberts, a former Marine sniper in Vietnam, likewise argues that the right-frontal explosion is indicative of the IMPACT of a frangible bullet...But from which direction? We can rule out from behind, unless you want to go for a "ricochet" theory. The Zapruder film shows the right-frontal impact as JFK's head is faced forward.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 14, 2005 19:53:48 GMT -4
I saw a test reenacted on television using a moving target. The shooter made the head shot every time. He said it was actually the easiest shot of the three. Haven't seen or heard of this test - if you can, please provide information, as I have yet to see a test that has duplicated Oswald's supposed feat with a moving target. I think it may have been on the Discovery Channel, perhaps a year or two ago. If I can find something more I'll post about it. We can rule out from behind, unless you want to go for a "ricochet" theory. The Zapruder film shows the right-frontal impact as JFK's head is faced forward. Actually, I think that video is some of the best evidence I've seen yet for a rear impact. All the splatter is going forward, which is exactly what I would expect if he was hit from behind.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jul 14, 2005 20:21:00 GMT -4
I think it may have been on the Discovery Channel, perhaps a year or two ago. If I can find something more I'll post about it. Are you thinking of the program hosted by Peter Jennings in 2003? It used very detailed computer animations to reconstruct the assassination.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 14, 2005 22:06:10 GMT -4
Are you thinking of the program hosted by Peter Jennings in 2003? It used very detailed computer animations to reconstruct the assassination. I've seen the program with Peter Jennings and I remember all the computer animations very clearly. However, I don't recall if that was the same program with the shooting reenactment. There was another JFK program that aired about the same time that may have included the reenactment. If the Jennings program was on Discovery, then the other one was probably on The History Channel. I remember the demonstration being set up with everything carefully measured to the exact dimensions of Dealey Plaza and the Texas School Book Depository. The sniper's nest was set up on the top of a scaffold. It might have been the Jennings program because they may have gotten all the dimensional information from the computer animation. The shooter was definitely firing at a moving target and the reenactment was performed several times. As I recall, the shooter said the first shoot was the most difficult and the last was the easiest.
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 14, 2005 22:10:47 GMT -4
Below is a more detailed account from Ayoob and Craig Roberts, among others, who are positive that the shot hit JFK from the front.... -The Right-Frontal Explosion in the Zapruder Film-----
Although the right-frontal explosion seen in frames 313-320 of the Zapruder film appears to have been enhanced somewhat, the explosion and the resulting spray seem to indicate that the bullet was fired from the front. Ballistic experts, criminalists, and a former sniper who have studied the film believe the right-frontal explosion indicates the shot came from the front.
Sherry Gutierrez, for example, a certified crime scene analyst and a consultant in the field of bloodstain pattern analysis, studied the blood splatter in the head-shot sequence and has concluded, "I am convinced the head injury to President Kennedy was the result" of a shot fired "from the right front of the President." Gutierrez observes that the spray of blood and brain that spews out from the right temple in the Z film is back spatter forcefully expressed from an entry wound back toward the source of the energy.
After carefully studying the Z film, a former Marine sniper Craig Roberts is certain the shot was fired from the front. Roberts says the right-frontal explosion and forward effusion are characteristic of the impact of a high-velocity missile on a human skull.
Yet another expert who has reached this conclusion is Massad Ayoob, a police trainer and firearms journalist who has taught courses on the effects of bullet on human bodies in police instructor schools and medical institutions. Ayoob believes the head-shot sequence in the Z film is NOT very consistent with a shot from behind, but rather that it is "far more consistent with an explosive wound of entry with a small-bore, hypervelocity rifle bullet traveling between 3,000 and 4,000 fps."
Ballistics expert Dr. Roger McCarthy of Failure Analysis, Inc., testified at the 1992 ABA mock Oswald trial that the head-shot sequence was indicative of a shot from the right front.
-----President Kennedy's Skull X-Rays-----
Dr. Randy Robertson, a highly qualified radiologist, was allowed to study the original autopsy x-rays at the National Archives. After doing so, Dr. Robertson came away convinced that the x-rays showed evidence that two bullets had struck the skull, and that one of them entered from the right front.
Dr. Robertson is by no means alone in finding evidence in the President's skull x-rays of a shot from the front. For example, Dr. Joseph Riley, an expert in neuroanatomy, says the skull x-rays, along with other autopsy evidence, demonstrate "conclusively that John Kennedy was struck in the head by two bullets, one from the rear and one from the front." Among other things, doctors and radiologists have keyed on TWO separate fragment trails in the x-rays. Many researchers believe the rear entry wound was "relocated" by such a huge distance in an attempt to bring the supposed lone entry point at least somewhat into line with the higher trail of fragments seen in the x-rays. But that leaves the lower trail of fragments unexplained, unless, of course, one posits another shot to the head.
Dr. David Mantik, a radiation oncologist and physicist, is another doctor who has had the opportunity to study the original autopsy x-rays at the National Archives, and who has likewise concluded they show that two bullets struck the President in the skull, one from the front. Dr. Mantik notes that there is a "notch" in the right frontal bone, over the lateral orbit. "Such missing bone," says Dr. Mantik, "fits very well with a frontal entry at exactly this site." In addition, Dr. Mantik, in agreement with other experts, has observed that the two trails of fragments seen in the x-rays prove that two missiles must have struck the skull.
The autopsy x-rays contain additional evidence of a frontal shot. Wound ballistics expert Dr. Larry Sturdivan told the HSCA that if an exploding or frangible bullet had struck the skull, it "DEFINITELY" would have left a cloud of metal fragments close to the point of entrance:
Mr. MATHEWS. Mr. Sturdivan, taking a look at JFK exhibit F-53, which is an X-ray of President Kennedy's skull, can you give us your opinion as to whether the President may have been hit with an exploding bullet?
Mr. STURDIVAN. . . . In those cases, you would definitely have seen a cloud of metallic fragments very near the entrance wound. (1 HSCA 401)
Dr. Sturdivan was seemingly unaware of the fact that on the unenhanced autopsy x-rays, a cloud of fragments is visible in the right frontal region, which would indicate that a frangible bullet struck in that area. Apparently Dr. Sturdivan only examined the enhanced x-rays and not the original x-rays. Historian Dr. Michael Kurtz comments on Dr. Sturdivan's testimony:
Sturvidan also stated that Kennedy was not struck in the front of the head by an exploding bullet fired from the grassy knoll. The reason, Sturdivan declared, was that the computer-enhanced x-rays of Kennedy's skull do not depict "a cloud of metallic fragments very near the entrance wound." In cases where exploding bullets impact, he asserted that "you would definitely have seen" such a cloud of fragments in the x-ray. Sturdivan's remarks betrayed both his own ignorance of the medical evidence and the committee's careful manipulation of that evidence. Sturdivan saw only the computer-enhanced x-ray of the skull, not the original, unretouched x-rays. Had he seen the originals, he would have observed a cloud of metallic fragments clustered in the right front portion of the head. Furthermore, the close-up photograph of the margins of the large wound in the head shows numerous small fragments. The Forensic Pathology Panel itself noted the presence of "missile dust" near the wound in the front of the head. One of the expert radiologists who examined the x-rays noticed "a linear alignment of tiny metallic fragments" located in the "posterior aspect of the right frontal bone." The chief autopsy pathologist, Dr. James J. Humes, remarked about the numerous metallic fragments like grains of sand scattered near the front head wound. The medical evidence, then, definitely proves the existence of a cloud of fragments in the right front portion of Kennedy's head, convincing evidence, according to Sturdivan, that an exploding bullet actually did strike the president there.ourworld-top.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id89.htmI appreciate you trying to find info on the TV special, by the way.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 14, 2005 22:59:54 GMT -4
I appreciate you trying to find info on the TV special, by the way Here is the Amazon listing for the Peter Jennings program: The Kennedy Assassination - Beyond ConspiracyI've been doing some reading at this site and others about the program but no where have I found anything mentioned about the shooting recreation. I'm afraid that was probably from a different program. If I have any luck finding information on it I'll let you know, but don't get your hopes up. I really don't remember enough about it to know where to start looking.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 14, 2005 23:17:46 GMT -4
Bob, I am pretty sure Discovery did the shooting recreation you were thinking of and it was not the Jennings special. I don't get cable, so I don't know for sure, but I know guys involved in both specials.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Durnavich on Jul 14, 2005 23:19:33 GMT -4
You might want to check the Discovery site too. I thought it was available on DVD.
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Jul 14, 2005 23:23:00 GMT -4
I think the Jennings program was on ABC. I don't remember if there was a live recreation of the shooting, but there may have been one.
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 15, 2005 0:46:42 GMT -4
Now that I've thought about it some more, I'm also certain the Jennings program did not have the shooting recreation. I'm also pretty sure the two programs were on different networks and that one of the networks was Discovery. If the Jennings show was on ABC, then the other was likely on Discovery as Joe said.
I'm also starting to remember more about the second show. In addition to the shooting they performed other reenactments to see if it were possible to do certain things the conspiracists claim were impossible. Such as, could Oswald go from the sniper's nest to the lunchroom in the allotted time and not appear winded as reported by witnesses.
|
|
|
Post by snakeriverrufus on Jul 15, 2005 15:21:35 GMT -4
Bob, are you sure that the program wasn't 'NOVA'?
|
|
Bob B.
Bob the Excel Guru?
Posts: 3,072
|
Post by Bob B. on Jul 15, 2005 15:49:34 GMT -4
Bob, are you sure that the program wasn't 'NOVA'? The Discovery Channel feels right to me, but I honestly don't remember what network it was on. It could have been Nova. Why, have you seen the program I'm talking about?
|
|
|
Post by snakeriverrufus on Jul 15, 2005 17:41:04 GMT -4
well as least one similar to it. I'm sure there was one with the computer generated scenerio on NOVA
|
|
|
Post by turbonium on Jul 16, 2005 2:52:22 GMT -4
The term "pristine" actually originated with the Warren Commission. In fact, the only area not pristine is the base! (I have yet to see a bullet after impact with an unscathed nose and main body, with just a slightly flattened base!) Try and duplicate the above result hitting ANY object! (The tip area nick was where a sample was taken for analysis) Warren Commission Conclusion
The Governor had been hit by a bullet which entered at the extreme right side of his back at a point below his right armpit. The bullet traveled through his chest in a downward and forward direction, exited below his right nipple, passed through his right wrist which had been in his lap, and then caused a wound to his left thigh....all the evidence indicated that the bullet found on the Governor's stretcher could have caused all his wounds
Testimony from the Warren Commission[
Mr. SPECTER. Now looking at that bullet, Exhibit 399, Doctor Humes, could that bullet have gone through or been any part of the fragment passing through President Kennedy's head in Exhibit No. 388?
Commander HUMES. I do not believe so, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. And could that missile have made the wound on Governor Connally's right wrist?
Commander HUMES. I think that that is most unlikely ... The reason I believe it most unlikely that this missile could have inflicted either of these wounds is that this missile is basically intact; its jacket appears to me to be intact, and I do not understand how it could possibly have left fragments in either of these locations.
Mr. SPECTER. Dr. Humes, under your opinion which you have just given us, what effect, if any, would that have on whether this bullet, 399, could have been the one to lodge in Governor Connally's thigh?
Commander HUMES. I think that extremely unlikely. The reports, again Exhibit 392 from Parkland, tell of an entrance wound on the lower midthigh of the Governor, and X-rays taken there are described as showing metallic fragments in the bone, which apparently by this report were not removed and are still present in Governor Connally's thigh. I can't conceive of where they came from this missile.
Representative FORD. The missile identified as Exhibit 399.
Commander HUMES. 399, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. In your opinion, based on the tests which you have performed, was the damage inflicted on Governor Connally's wrist caused by a pristine bullet, a bullet fired from the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle 6.5 missile which did not hit anything before it struck the Governor's wrist?
Dr. OLIVIER. I don't believe so. I don't believe his wrist was struck by a pristine bullet.
Testimony from the House Select Committee on Assassinations
Dr. WECHT: Commission exhibit 399...a side view...shows the copper jacket to be completely intact, unscathed with no deformity, mutilation or markings. The small defect at the tip is where a piece of metal was properly taken by the FBI for spectographic analysis. The nose, the penetrating portion of the missile which is completely unmarked and without any scathing at all. The base of the bullet which is the only area of deformity, what I would refer to as some flattening with indentation of the metallic rim and focal extrusion of the inner lead core. That is the only deformity. I don't think you need to be an 'expert' to know that the 'magic bullet" with the 'pristine' nose did not , to quote the Warren Commission, "entered at the extreme right side of his back at a point below his right armpit... traveled through his chest in a downward and forward direction, exited below his right nipple, passed through his right wrist which had been in his lap, and then caused a wound to his left thigh" !![
|
|