If this case is reopened the SBT will not survive.

[Mike]

If this case is ever reopened the Single Bullet Theory will not survive.
It will be DOA.

The only hope that the WC crowd has it to make sure this case is never
reopened.

The shenanigans that you all can get away with here on the internet will
not be possible in a real court room.

There is absolutely no doubt that if this case is reopened the Single
Bullet Theory will be discredited and removed.

[cmikes]

Can you name one single piece of evidence from the conspiracy theorist
side that would be accepted in a court of law?

[Jason Burke]

Just like it was the last couplea times?

Oh, wait.

[claviger]

On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 9:19:13 PM UTC-5, Mike wrote:
> If this case is ever reopened the Single Bullet Theory will not survive.
> It will be DOA.

Only if the Laws of Physics have been repealed.

> The only hope that the WC crowd has it to make sure this case is never
> reopened.

The WCR has withstood 50 years of intense microscopic scrutiny.

> The shenanigans that you all can get away with here on the internet will
> not be possible in a real court room.

Such as?

> There is absolutely no doubt that if this case is reopened the Single
> Bullet Theory will be discredited and removed.

First you have to discredit and remove Newton's Laws first. The SBT obeys
those laws of Physics.

[Peter Makres]

On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

The single bullet FACT will survive, just as it has for 50 years. The FACT
won't be washed away just because you would like it to.

Peter

[bigdog]

On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

First of all, the case is not going to be reopened barring some earth
shaking new evidence being discovered. Nobody but a tiny niche of
conspiracy hobbyists is calling for that to happen.

For 50 years, conspiracy hobbyists have been calling the SBT ridiculous,
yet are unable to articulate why it is ridiculous or offer a viable
alternative. The SBT works. It's as simple as that.

[OSWALD SPENGLER]

On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

I suppose you could put together a Dream Team to defend Oswald. Johnny
Cochrane died of a brain tumor so he is out. Robert Kardashian died.
Dershowitz is not a trial lawyer so he is out. F Lee Bailey was disbarred
over misconduct so he is out.

[Mike]

The Zapruder film.

The Testimony of Dr. Ronald Coy Jones.

CE399

The acoustic evidence.

I could go on and on...

But it does not have to be accepted in a court of law. It just needs to
be accepted by the government review committee.

[Ralph Cinque]

The geometry between the Supposed Oswald, Kennedy, and Connally doesn't
even work for the SBT to have a chance.

http://oswaldinthedoorway.blogspot.com/2014/10/so-we-have-two-vectors-vector-from.html

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

Absolutely true. The prosectors at the autopsy determined that the
bullet that penetrated the upper back of JFK, did NOT exit the body, and
therefore the throat was an entry wound, meaning that there was a shooter
in front of JFK, and so we have a conspiracy of at least 2 shooters. We
now also have another shooter that shot Connally, since he wasn't hit by
any wacky 'single bullet'.

Testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent) was that the prosectors decided
(when researching the path of the back wound) that "There's no exit".
This was repeated by Finck, the bullet wound specialist, who also said
"There's no exit".

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left corner.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

The acoustical evidence. BBN's expertise was accepted in the Kent State
Massacre case. Guinn's NAA not so much.

[mainframetech]

Most of the evidence was put out of bounds by actions of the SS and
FBI. But there are many witnesses that could be let in with information.
Especially from the Bethesda scene.

Chris

[bigdog]

On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:43:54 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
>
> The Zapruder film.
>
> The Testimony of Dr. Ronald Coy Jones.
>
> CE399
>
> The acoustic evidence.
>
> I could go on and on...
>
> But it does not have to be accepted in a court of law. It just needs to
> be accepted by the government review committee.

Articulate as usual. <snicker>

[bigdog]

Way to go, Ralph. Keep ignoring the view from the SN at Z225 which is on
page 108 of the WCR. If you look at that, you will see the geometry works
perfectly. JFK and JBC are perfectly alligned for the single bullet. That
view is just a few frames after the bullet struck.

[mainframetech]

On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:43:54 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

You might want to add this info to your list:

Here's the sworn testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent) who was at the
autopsy and saw and heard the prosectors decide that the bullet from the
upper back had NO EXIT from the body of JFK.

Only the most courageous LN will spend the minute or 2 to look over the
testimony, the others will avoid it like the plague for deep fear that it
might be true, and their beliefs for years are wrong.

For the decision, go here:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111'.

Chris

[mainframetech]

Nope. And you shouldn't keep plastering that propaganda all over the
plaqce, since it's been proven wrong by the prosectors at the autopsy.
Here what I wrote in another post:

The SBT was doomed right after the autopsy, where the prosectors found
that the bullet that hit JFK in the upper back NEVER went through him and
so didn't go on to hit Connally.

[mainframetech]

[cmikes]

So you actually believe that a judge would accept a definitively disproved
piece of evidence? Evidence that was recorded after the shots and
probably not even in Dealy Plaza? OK.

And as I've said before, just because a form of evidence was accepted in
one case means nothing. Just because DNA evidence is accepted in many
cases, are you making the argument that it should be accepted in all
cases, even in cases where we know that it's been contaminated or
improperly analyzed?

[David Von Pein]

Quoting from the Clark Panel Report.....

[QUOTE ON:]

"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.

The possibility that the path of the bullet through the neck might have
been more satisfactorily explored by the insertion of a finger or probe
was considered. Obviously the cutaneous wound in the back was too small to
permit the insertion of a finger. The insertion of a metal probe would
have carried the risk of creating a false passage, in part because of the
changed relationship of muscles at the time of autopsy and in part because
of the existence of postmortem rigidity. Although the precise path of the
bullet could undoubtedly have been demonstrated by complete dissection of
the soft tissue between the two cutaneous wounds, there is no reason to
believe that the information disclosed thereby would alter significantly
the conclusions expressed in this report."

[END QUOTE.]

This part deserves a replay and added emphasid:

*** "There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds..." ***

The complete 1968 Clark Panel Report:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

[cmikes]

On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:43:54 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:

> On 10/8/2014 10:40 AM, cmikes wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
>
> >> If this case is ever reopened the Single Bullet Theory will not survive.
>
> >>
>
> >> It will be DOA.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> The only hope that the WC crowd has it to make sure this case is never
>
> >>
>
> >> reopened.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> The shenanigans that you all can get away with here on the internet will
>
> >>
>
> >> not be possible in a real court room.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> There is absolutely no doubt that if this case is reopened the Single
>
> >>
>
> >> Bullet Theory will be discredited and removed.
>
> >
>
> > Can you name one single piece of evidence from the conspiracy theorist
>
> > side that would be accepted in a court of law?
>
> >
>
>
>
> The Zapruder film.
>

Great, a piece of evidence that tends to show the single bullet strike is
accurate.

>
> The Testimony of Dr. Ronald Coy Jones.
>

OK, so what? It's been shown in a number of studies that ER doctors are
terrible at determining what direction the bullets that caused wounds are
coming from. In many cases, it's no better than a 50/50 coin flip. And
his testimony would certainly not outweigh the authenticated photos and
x-rays taken at the autopsy. So it may be admissible, but it doesn't go
anywhere as far as proving a conspiracy.

Although, thank you for pointing me towards his WC testimony. It's
another Parkland doctor who testified that they never turned JFK and
closely examined any wounds on his back.

>
> CE399
>

Again, great. The way it's bent in the middle with lead squeezed out of
the back end of the bullet demonstrates how it must have been tumbling
when it went through and caused Connally's wounds, as well the lack of
damage to the nose showing how much velocity it lost before striking him.
All tending to show that the bullet must have gone through JFK before
striking Connally. Again, not conspiracy evidence.


>
> The acoustic evidence.
>

Sure. The prosecution would introduce the NAS study and it would never be
admitted into evidence.

>
> I could go on and on...
>

I'm sure you could.

>
> But it does not have to be accepted in a court of law. It just needs to
>
> be accepted by the government review committee.

What do you call the Warren Commission? The HSCA? The Clark Panel? The
Rockefeller Commission? Even the investigation being run by a conspiracy
theorist, the HSCA, could only come up with a Hail Mary in the in form of
the quickly debunked acoustic evidence, and even if you ignore all the
times it's been shown to be wrong, you're still left with Lee Oswald
firing three shots, hitting with two and his mythical co-conspirator on
the grassy knoll firing one shot that left no evidence and hit no one and
nothing.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 10/9/2014 9:27 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:34:15 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>> On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
>>
>>> If this case is ever reopened the Single Bullet Theory will not survive.
>>
>>> It will be DOA.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> The only hope that the WC crowd has it to make sure this case is never
>>
>>> reopened.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> The shenanigans that you all can get away with here on the internet will
>>
>>> not be possible in a real court room.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> There is absolutely no doubt that if this case is reopened the Single
>>
>>> Bullet Theory will be discredited and removed.
>>
>>
>>
>> First of all, the case is not going to be reopened barring some earth
>>
>> shaking new evidence being discovered. Nobody but a tiny niche of
>>
>> conspiracy hobbyists is calling for that to happen.
>>
>>
>>
>> For 50 years, conspiracy hobbyists have been calling the SBT ridiculous,
>>
>> yet are unable to articulate why it is ridiculous or offer a viable
>>
>> alternative. The SBT works. It's as simple as that.
>
>
>
>
> Nope. And you shouldn't keep plastering that propaganda all over the
> plaqce, since it's been proven wrong by the prosectors at the autopsy.
> Here what I wrote in another post:
>
> The SBT was doomed right after the autopsy, where the prosectors found
> that the bullet that hit JFK in the upper back NEVER went through him and
> so didn't go on to hit Connally.
>

And you shouldn't keep repeating your false information in every
message. But that's what you think debate is about. Who can yell the
loudest and longest.

> Here's the sworn testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent) who was at the
> autopsy and saw and heard the prosectors decide that the bullet from the
> upper back had NO EXIT from the body of JFK.
>

No. I repeat, NO.

> Only the most courageous LN will spend the minute or 2 to look over the
> testimony, the others will avoid it like the plague for deep fear that it
> might be true, and their beliefs for years are wrong.
>

I've only posted it 40,000 times so they might have missed it the first
30,000 times.

[David Von Pein]

Clark Panel Addendum.....

Another interesting part of the 1968 Clark Panel Report is something that
I had never once noticed or paid any attention to at all prior to this
week --- it's the portion of the report in which the Clark Panel confirms,
via measurements, 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....

[QUOTE ON:]

"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."

[QUOTE OFF.]

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/jfk-back-wound-location.html

[Anthony Marsh]

No, it's not. You are misrepresenting the historical evidence to push a
political agenda.

The WC even ADMITTED the flaws in that mockup and yet you still defend it.

[tims...@gmail.com]

The acoustic evidence?!!

I think you'll find that that has been roundly debunked.

Corrective Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

[tims...@gmail.com]

That's RIGHT! And, if anything, successive studies have BUILT on the
original conclusion and found it to be plausible.

[bigdog]

On Thursday, October 9, 2014 9:27:20 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:34:15 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> > For 50 years, conspiracy hobbyists have been calling the SBT ridiculous,
> > yet are unable to articulate why it is ridiculous or offer a viable
> > alternative. The SBT works. It's as simple as that.
>
> Nope. And you shouldn't keep plastering that propaganda all over the
> plaqce, since it's been proven wrong by the prosectors at the autopsy.
> Here what I wrote in another post:
>

Oh goodie.

>
> The SBT was doomed right after the autopsy, where the prosectors found
> that the bullet that hit JFK in the upper back NEVER went through him and
> so didn't go on to hit Connally.
>

The only thing that proved is that people like yourself have a poor
understanding of human anatomy. The fact the probe would not go through is
not proof the bullet didn't. Qualified pathologists understand that. Its
only amateur sleuths such as yourself who think you know so much more
about every subject than people who spend their professional lives dealing
with these issues that believe silly things like that.

You can repeat this nonsense as often as you like and we will continue to
file it under blah-blah-blah.

[mainframetech]

amazing! You take a report from people who never saw the body, and saw
only photos that are proven to have be altered, and who weren't given the
proper records of the autopsy, in a case where there was an 'order of
silence' in effect for all military personnel throughout all of Bethesda,
and you think they made some kind of intelligent decision?

How about if I give you the opinion of forensic pathologists, one of
whom was a bullet specialist, and repeat for you their opinions? Will it
count for something?

Here's the sworn testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent) who saw and
heard the whole autopsy. He saw the prosectors examining the upper back
bullet wound, and they were unable to get a probe or a finger past a
certain point, and they said "There's NO EXIT", and then Finck, the bullet
specialist said "There's NO EXIT", meaning that the bullet had never left
the body of JFK, and therefore had never gone on to hit Connally.

[mainframetech]

Why are you goading Ralph when you know that the SBT was proven invalid?
Based on the decision of the prosectors that the back wound had MO EXIT,
the bullet therefore couldn't go further and hit Connally. So why try to
make trouble for someone when the whole SBT is moot and meaningless?

The proof is here:

[mainframetech]

Do you have any intelligent comments available?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

And yet the kooks are citing The Three Stooges as EXPERTS.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 10/10/2014 12:32 AM, cmikes wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 11:50:13 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 10/8/2014 11:40 AM, cmikes wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
>>
>>>> If this case is ever reopened the Single Bullet Theory will not survive.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> It will be DOA.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> The only hope that the WC crowd has it to make sure this case is never
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> reopened.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> The shenanigans that you all can get away with here on the internet will
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> not be possible in a real court room.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> There is absolutely no doubt that if this case is reopened the Single
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> Bullet Theory will be discredited and removed.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Can you name one single piece of evidence from the conspiracy theorist
>>
>>> side that would be accepted in a court of law?
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The acoustical evidence. BBN's expertise was accepted in the Kent State
>>
>> Massacre case. Guinn's NAA not so much.
>
> So you actually believe that a judge would accept a definitively disproved
> piece of evidence? Evidence that was recorded after the shots and
> probably not even in Dealy Plaza? OK.
>

It was not disproved. Judges often admit expert testimony and allow the
other side to dispute it. it is called the adversarial process.
The jury decides who is right. The HSCA decided and the American people
decided that the acoustical experts were right. The CIA always stands on
the opposite side of the truth.

> And as I've said before, just because a form of evidence was accepted in
> one case means nothing. Just because DNA evidence is accepted in many
> cases, are you making the argument that it should be accepted in all
> cases, even in cases where we know that it's been contaminated or
> improperly analyzed?
>

You asked for "a" case. I gave you "a" case. Even more of an apt analogy
because it was the same type of study done by the same experts.

[Mike]

You asked me what is admissible and I told you.

You are not the finder of fact.

The court or jury is the finder of fact.

Stop with all your speculation that is not supported by the evidence.

I know what the Warren Commission believes I do not need to hear it again.


Do you see John Connally's startle reaction to his LEFT in this video
clip?

That is all I want to know from you. It is a simple yes or no answer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB_H5spNq7o

Here it is in slow motion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HesB3lzbV0E

[mainframetech]

It's a complete laugh! Since the bullet that went in the upper back
never came back out as per the prosectors at the autopsy. They were
listened to and watched by the FBI agents who saw that the prosectors had
decided while looking over the back wound bullet, that "There's NO EXIT".
Even Finck, the bullet specialist said "There's NO EXIT".

Of Course, only LNs some courage will dare to look at the evidence and
see for themselves, because it could decimate many LNs based on their
beliefs being dashed into bits. Here's where to go:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

read 'page 111'.

Any takers, or is everyone just wimps?

Chris

[mainframetech]

You've got a lot of 'single bullet' stuff above. A shame it all has to
be invalidated. As it turns out, the prosectors at the autopsy found that
the bullet that hit the upper back of JFK never went all the way through
JFK, so it never came out through the throat to hit Connally.

The FBI Agent James Sibert, and his partner Frank O'Neill watched and
listened to the whole autopsy. And while watching them try to follow the
path of the bullet from the back wound, they found that "There was NO
EXIT" for that bullet!! Even Finck, the bullet specialist said "There's
NO EXIT". Of course, they couldn't report that because of their orders,
but that's what they found. If you've got the guts (it will take courage
for an LN) to look up the reference, you'll find that it's all true and in
sworn testimony and corroborated by Frank O'Neill in his ARRB testimony.

I'm surprised at the lack of courage so far in that NO LN has dared to
go check this out, and NO one dars to argue it, and try to turn it into
something they can stand. Of course, it decimates most people's beliefs,
but it isn't the only thing in the case that does that, it's just the most
obvious.

Any courageous takers? :)

Chris

[Sandy McCroskey]

How would you ever recognize one?

[David Von Pein]

CHRIS/MAINFRAME SAID:

James Sibert (FBI agent)...saw and heard the whole autopsy. He saw the

prosectors examining the upper back bullet wound, and they were unable to
get a probe or a finger past a certain point, and they said "There's NO

EXIT", and then Finck, the bullet specialist, said "There's NO EXIT",

meaning that the bullet had never left the body of JFK, and therefore had
never gone on to hit Connally.

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Chris/Mainframe,

Why are you constantly insisting that the autopsy surgeons (or
"prosectors") concluded that the bullet that struck JFK's back did not
exit his throat? You've repeated that falsehood numerous times now.

But, in fact, the autopsists concluded exactly the OPPOSITE. They
concluded, in no ambiguous terms on page 6 of the autopsy report (Warren
Report; Page 543)....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0284a.htm

On the above WCR page, the autopsy doctors (all THREE of them, including
Dr. Pierre A. Finck, whose signature is clearly visible on that page above
too, along with the signatures of Drs. Humes and Boswell) concluded in
crystal clear language that the bullet that struck the upper back of
President Kennedy -- QUOTE -- "made its exit through the anterior surface
of the neck." -- UNQUOTE.

After Dr. Humes spoke with Parkland's Dr. Perry on the phone the next
morning (November 23) and confirmed that Perry had cut right through a
bullet hole in JFK's throat, then everything fell into place for the
autopsy surgeons.

At that point, Humes (and also Finck and Boswell) knew that the bullet
must have exited at the site of Perry's tracheotomy. Hence, we find these
words printed on page 6 of the autopsy report....

"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck,
damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the
neck."

Now, Chris, tell us for the 44th time today that the prosectors concluded
that the bullet never exited John Fitzgerald Kennedy's body.

Do you think by stating such a blatant and outright falsehood over and
over again, it's going to become a fact? I've got news for you--it isn't.
And page #6 of the autopsy report provides the proof that you are wrong.

You're putting far too much faith in the Sibert/O'Neill FBI report. Those
men did hear the autopsy doctors make certain statements about the bullet
not going through JFK's body. But those were early statements, before the
doctors had all the facts.

After gathering those additional facts about the trach from Dr. Perry, it
was very clear to the Bethesda doctors what had happened -- the bullet
entered President Kennedy's back and came out his throat. Simple as that.
And that's just exactly what all three of the autopsy doctors concluded in
their SIGNED autopsy report.

And nothing you or any other conspiracy-hungry theorist can say will ever
change those conclusions that appear on page six of the
Humes/Boswell/Finck autopsy report.

[mainframetech]

Have you checked into the new information about the 'single bullet'
not going through JFK, so that it could NOT have hit Connally? The
prosectors found that to be true that there was NO EXIT from the body of
JFK for the bullet that hit the upper back!

Go here if you have the courage and see the conversation. This is the
testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent):

[mainframetech]

Wrong again! LOL! I knew you'd bite on that one! Here's the
statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from his interview:

"Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was
intact."

So we have corroboration that the bullet did NOT go through the body,
and as well, we have also the fact that Jenkins saw the probing from the
inside of the body cavity and it did NOT go all the way through the
'pleura' which surrounds and protects the lungs.

Take a note. The people that performed the autopsy were in my opinion
not competent to do an autopsy of this type, except maybe Finck. But they
are 'experts' in their field of pathology, and were "qualified
pathologists". When they say the bullet had "NO EXIT", it's because they
did the work properly of looking for the bullet and the path it followed.
When they find the end of that path, it's because they are 'experts' in
their chosen profession. Or are you now going to say that pathologists
lie, or are mistaken in this case?

Now I've heard your blah-blah-blah, but I'm, willing to listen. And
maybe you'll learn something along the way. You've certainly had to be
schooled often enough.

Chris

[Peter Makres]

On Friday, October 10, 2014 7:09:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:

That's correct. It is foolish to believe that the bullet would not have
transited Kennedy's throat. Demonstrations have shown (though one hardly
needs a demonstration) a 6.5mm Carcano bullet going straight through many
layers of wood blocks. Years ago I fired a .30-.30 round through some
picnic table 2 x 4 supporting beams and the round went through 4 or 5 2 x
4's before lodging into the next one. Okay so that isn't a 6.5mm round but
the same idea has been shown. This is also supported by the oblong entry
wound in Connally, caused by the tumbling bullet. So if anyone thinks that
round did not transit Kennedy, think again.

[Ralph Cinque]

Chris, the next day, when Humes found out from Perry that there was a
bullet hole in the throat and one he surmised to be a wound of entrance,
Humes should have insisted that he be allowed to go back in and slice and
dice Kennedy like a tuna in order to track it. And if they refused to let
him, he should have screamed bloody murder. But instead, he burned his
notes.

[tims...@gmail.com]

I'm surprised that you think openly available WC documents are "missing".

Concerned Regards,

[Peter Makres]

Excellent post, as per usual David.

Peter

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 1:20:50 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> CHRIS/MAINFRAME SAID:
>
>
>
> James Sibert (FBI agent)...saw and heard the whole autopsy. He saw the
>
> prosectors examining the upper back bullet wound, and they were unable to
>
> get a probe or a finger past a certain point, and they said "There's NO
>
> EXIT", and then Finck, the bullet specialist, said "There's NO EXIT",
>
> meaning that the bullet had never left the body of JFK, and therefore had
>
> never gone on to hit Connally.
>
>
>
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
>
>
> Chris/Mainframe,
>
>
>
> Why are you constantly insisting that the autopsy surgeons (or
>
> "prosectors") concluded that the bullet that struck JFK's back did not
>
> exit his throat? You've repeated that falsehood numerous times now.
>

ah! I see your problem, and why your trying to call me a liar.
Surprised that McAdams doesn't cut your comment out or throw out your
insult, but he's also an LN like you. S'OK. I'll explain your mistake
anyway.

You've apparently been busy reading the prosectors final reports. But
that's what they were ordered to produce, and the conclusions they were
told to come to were included in those reports, but along the way as they
did the job of autopsy of JFK, they found certain things and said so at
times, and the personnel nearby saw it and heard it. In this case, the
seeing was by 2 FBI agents, Sibert & O'Neill. It would appear for what
you had tried to say, that you did NOT read the actual witness sworn
testimony, and so you think it wasn't said, but I understand that it takes
guts to read something that throws you long held beliefs away. I suggest
the next time you attempt to call me a liar, you check the record first,
or ask me to give you the back up. I'm going to give you one more chance
to check on me, by screwing up your courage and going and looking at the
actual testimony of James Sibert. Here's the link:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

On the lower left is 'page 111', please reads it. There's not too much
there. You'll find that the prosectors said "There's NO EXIT" when
examining the upper back wound, and then Finck, the bullet specialist,
said "There's NO EXIT" also.

It's clear that no matter what they were told to say, they found that
the bullet never exited the body of JFK, and so I'm NOT a liar, and you
should apologize, though I've never seen you do it.

>
>
> But, in fact, the autopsists concluded exactly the OPPOSITE. They
>
> concluded, in no ambiguous terms on page 6 of the autopsy report (Warren
>
> Report; Page 543)....
>
>
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0284a.htm
>

As note earlier, the prosectors concluded in their final reports, exactly
what they were ordered to conclude. Why do you think it was so important
to steal the body to get it to a military hospital where they controlled
everything that happened there?

>
>
> On the above WCR page, the autopsy doctors (all THREE of them, including
>
> Dr. Pierre A. Finck, whose signature is clearly visible on that page above
>
> too, along with the signatures of Drs. Humes and Boswell) concluded in
>
> crystal clear language that the bullet that struck the upper back of
>
> President Kennedy -- QUOTE -- "made its exit through the anterior surface
>
> of the neck." -- UNQUOTE.
>

Welp, now we know what they put in their report. What does that have to
do with reality?

>
>
> After Dr. Humes spoke with Parkland's Dr. Perry on the phone the next
>
> morning (November 23) and confirmed that Perry had cut right through a
>
> bullet hole in JFK's throat, then everything fell into place for the
>
> autopsy surgeons.
>

Humes had a lot more phone calls with Perry and others all that evening,
so says other onlookers to the autopsy.

>
>
> At that point, Humes (and also Finck and Boswell) knew that the bullet
>
> must have exited at the site of Perry's tracheotomy. Hence, we find these
>
> words printed on page 6 of the autopsy report....
>
>
>
> "The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck,
>
> damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the
>
> neck."
>
>
>
> Now, Chris, tell us for the 44th time today that the prosectors concluded
>
> that the bullet never exited John Fitzgerald Kennedy's body.
>

Yup, you got it, but they had to follow orders and put the desired
findings in the final report, assuming that the 'order of silence' would
cover them as to the doings during the autopsy. Only that report was
expected to be made public. But the law was made to open up the whole
business, and when it was carried out by the ARRB, we were treated to all
the dirty little secrets that made much of the final reports look like
garbage.

>
>
> Do you think by stating such a blatant and outright falsehood over and
>
> over again, it's going to become a fact? I've got news for you--it isn't.
>
> And page #6 of the autopsy report provides the proof that you are wrong.
>

I think you better get a hold of your mouth and see if you have the
strength of a researcher that goes and checks on what's he's been told.
You'll find that you've made a terrible mistake calling me a liar. And
repeating it isn't going to endear yourself to anyone either. Do your
checking, and not just copying everything to your website for fun and
profit.

>
>
> You're putting far too much faith in the Sibert/O'Neill FBI report. Those
>
> men did hear the autopsy doctors make certain statements about the bullet
>
> not going through JFK's body. But those were early statements, before the
>
> doctors had all the facts.
>

Don't give me that claptrap. The area I want you to read is NOT their
report, but their testimony to the ARRB. Like many other reports, it was
sanitized before putting it out. But their testimony was after the law
was changed and it was open season on the truth. The 2 FBI agents also
had drqawn the 'large hole' in the BOH of JFK, but most folks didn't see
that. And most folks still didn't see the comments and findings of the
prosectors DURING the autopsy. They looked hard for the bullet EXIT and
were unable to find it, including the bullet specialist, Finck. As they
said "There's NO EXIT". Go check it.

>
>
> After gathering those additional facts about the trach from Dr. Perry, it
>
> was very clear to the Bethesda doctors what had happened -- the bullet
>
> entered President Kennedy's back and came out his throat. Simple as that.
>
> And that's just exactly what all three of the autopsy doctors concluded in
>
> their SIGNED autopsy report.
>

I don't give a damn what they were ordered to put in their final report. I've given you the information to stop calling me a liar, and I suggest
you obtain some wisdom and check your facts before you go around calling
someone a liar again.

>
>
> And nothing you or any other conspiracy-hungry theorist can say will ever
>
> change those conclusions that appear on page six of the
>
> Humes/Boswell/Finck autopsy report.

True, that no one will change the report, but there may well be new
reports correcting all that phony ordered stuff.

Check the information I gave you so as not to appear to be an ass.

Chris

[Mark Florio]

Great post. But I'm afraid facts do not reach the superficial, blithe
Planet Conspiracy he lives on. Mark Florio.

[bigdog]

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:01:58 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> Have you checked into the new information about the 'single bullet'
> not going through JFK, so that it could NOT have hit Connally? The
> prosectors found that to be true that there was NO EXIT from the body of
> JFK for the bullet that hit the upper back!
>

Chris thinks that 50 year old misinterpretations constitute "new
information". It has never been a secret that the prosectors did not pass
a probe through the bullet track which proved absolutely squat. DVP posted
a very thorough passage from the Clark Panel report explaining why this
fact is insignificant and also listed a number of factors which showed
conclusively that there was a bullet track from the back entrance to the
throat entrance. It also explains that if they had tried to force the
probe through the body, they could have created a false passage. But of
course Chris ignores everything extremely qualfied people have said on the
subject because his own amateurish analysis fits his bullshit beliefs much
better. Like a one trick pony, he looks at one factor, the probe not
passing through the body, and that's all he needs to know. That's all he
wants to know. If he learned any more, it would conflict with what he
desperately wants to believe.

>
> Go here if you have the courage and see the conversation. This is the
> testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent):
>
> https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509
>

A casual observation by an FBI agent about the autopsy procedures does not
trump a thorough review of the medical evidence by a number of review
panels comprised of extremely qualified medical examiners.

[bigdog]

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:09:19 PM UTC-4, Peter Makres wrote:

> That's correct. It is foolish to believe that the bullet would not have
> transited Kennedy's throat. Demonstrations have shown (though one hardly
> needs a demonstration) a 6.5mm Carcano bullet going straight through many
> layers of wood blocks. Years ago I fired a .30-.30 round through some
> picnic table 2 x 4 supporting beams and the round went through 4 or 5 2 x
> 4's before lodging into the next one. Okay so that isn't a 6.5mm round but
> the same idea has been shown. This is also supported by the oblong entry
> wound in Connally, caused by the tumbling bullet. So if anyone thinks that
> round did not transit Kennedy, think again.

Ah, but Chris read that the probe did not go through the bullet track so
he has the excuse he needs to completely ignore all the other available
evidence as well as reason and logic. In his mind that one piece of
information trumps everything else.

[bigdog]

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:03:04 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Friday, October 10, 2014 7:09:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> > You can repeat this nonsense as often as you like and we will continue to
> > file it under blah-blah-blah.
>
> Wrong again! LOL! I knew you'd bite on that one! Here's the
> statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from his interview:
>
> "Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
> thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
> finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
> the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
> the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was
> intact."

If this is James Jenkins statement, why is he speaking of Jim Jenkins in
the third person?

>
> So we have corroboration that the bullet did NOT go through the body,
> and as well, we have also the fact that Jenkins saw the probing from the
> inside of the body cavity and it did NOT go all the way through the
> 'pleura' which surrounds and protects the lungs.
>

Since you have miscited the source, we don't know who made the above
statement. In any case, being a technician does not qualiify one as a
medical examiner. Qualified medical examiners understand the
insignificance of the probe not passing through the bullet track for
numerous reasons. The primary one is that if the muscles were not alligned
in the exact position they were in when the bullet transited, the bullet
track would become blocked by the repositioning of the muscles. This is a
fact you continually ignore because it doesn't fit your bullshit story.
You focus on one factor, the probe not passing, and ignore all the other
available medical evidence which proves conclusively that the bullet
transited through JFK's body from back to front.

>
> Take a note. The people that performed the autopsy were in my opinion
> not competent to do an autopsy of this type, except maybe Finck. But they
> are 'experts' in their field of pathology, and were "qualified
> pathologists".

They were certainly more qualified than a technician.

> When they say the bullet had "NO EXIT", it's because they
> did the work properly of looking for the bullet and the path it followed.
> When they find the end of that path,

They didn't find the end of the path nor did they conclude they had. They
found the blockage of the path.

> it's because they are 'experts' in
> their chosen profession. Or are you now going to say that pathologists
> lie, or are mistaken in this case?
>

There is no question that forensic pathologists would have been a much
better choice to do the autopsy than the general pathologists at Bethesda.
However we can't undo that mistake so we have to do the best with what was
learned, which was more than enough to establish conclusively that JFK was
shot twice from behind and that the bullet that entered his back exited
from his throat.

>
> Now I've heard your blah-blah-blah, but I'm, willing to listen.

No you aren't. You're locked into a bullshit theory based on minimal
information, ignoring the body of evidence which paints a completely
different picture than the one you want to believe.

> And
> maybe you'll learn something along the way. You've certainly had to be
> schooled often enough.
>

There is zero chance I could ever learn anything from someone as
perpetually confused as you are.

[mainframetech]

Of course. But he was under orders to come up with certain findings,
which he did. He didn't want to spend his retirement in a federal prison.
And after lying all over the place at panels and commissions, he didn't
want to make himself look even worse by blatting out the truth.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:09:19 PM UTC-4, Peter Makres wrote:

Yep. Good recommendation. Think it through again. Bullets have been
known to have too little powder in them which makes them much less
powerful and they will stop after hitting anything, including just flesh.
If the bullets are very old the powder may degrade to a degree too.
Either way, you can have the situation that the prosectors explored
thoroughly. The bullet from the upper back had "NO EXIT". With the
prosectors was Piere Finck, an experienced bullet specialist. HE said
"There's NO EXIT", and the sworn testimony said they looked for the bullet
path. These are the 'expert's that some people think are needed to decide
anything.

But let's go one step further. I didn't mention it before, but there
was another witness to this search for the bullet track. and that was
James Jenkins (Bethesda technologist) who assisted at the autopsy. His
statement went like this:

"Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was intact.

Jenkins also recalled seeing a bruise at the top of the middle lobe of the
right lung (but not at the top, or apex of the right lung)".

So that is further corroboration to both of the FBI agents, but from
the other side of the body! They had lifted the torso up and found the
bullet wound in the back, but the insides had been removed at this time.
So Jenkins saw the probing they did on the back wound, from the inside
cavity. The probing did NOT go through.

Chris

[mainframetech]

What in the world are you talking about? Which documents?

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:09:19 PM UTC-4, Peter Makres wrote:

No demonstration is necessary. And they only show what is wanted to
show anyway. The reason it isn't necessary is that the prosectors found
during the autopsy that the bullet from the upper back never went past
JFK!

Check out the findings of the prosectors through the sworn testimony of
James Sibert (FBI agent) who watched and listened to ALL of the autopsy.
His testimony was corroborated by the other FBI agent, Frank O'Neill.


https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page.

Only the strongest willed LN will dare to read this proof of the
findings of the prosectors, including the bullet specialist, Pierre Finck.

Chris

[bigdog]

On Sunday, October 12, 2014 3:11:22 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> You've apparently been busy reading the prosectors final reports. But
> that's what they were ordered to produce, and the conclusions they were
> told to come to were included in those reports, but along the way as they
> did the job of autopsy of JFK, they found certain things and said so at
> times, and the personnel nearby saw it and heard it. In this case, the
> seeing was by 2 FBI agents, Sibert & O'Neill. It would appear for what
> you had tried to say, that you did NOT read the actual witness sworn
> testimony, and so you think it wasn't said, but I understand that it takes
> guts to read something that throws you long held beliefs away. I suggest
> the next time you attempt to call me a liar, you check the record first,
> or ask me to give you the back up. I'm going to give you one more chance
> to check on me, by screwing up your courage and going and looking at the
> actual testimony of James Sibert. Here's the link:
>
> https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509
>
> On the lower left is 'page 111', please reads it. There's not too much
> there. You'll find that the prosectors said "There's NO EXIT" when
> examining the upper back wound, and then Finck, the bullet specialist,
> said "There's NO EXIT" also.
>
> It's clear that no matter what they were told to say, they found that
> the bullet never exited the body of JFK, and so I'm NOT a liar, and you
> should apologize, though I've never seen you do it.
>

Apparently you believe there is something wrong with looking at a final
report instead of going by first impressions. In any investigative
process, one must gather ALL the available evidence and/or data before
reaching a conclusion. What you have done is fixate on a casual
observation made early on in the process and ignored everything else the
prosectors discovered later on. Contrary to what you are claiming, you are
not quoting Finck, you are quoting Sibert quoting Finck which may or may
not accurately reflect what Finck actually said. But let's give you the
benefit of the doubt and say Sibert's accurately quoted Finck. This only
establishes that with the initial probe, the prosectors could not find the
bullet track. This is terribly unimportant for reasons that have been
explained to you numerous times. There is no expectation that the probe
would easily pass through the bullet track. Finck's initial impression may
have been there was only a shallow entry, but they continued to explore
the body and discovered there was indeed a track passing through the upper
torso. Their investigation led Hume to suspect that the bullet did indeed
exit and the exit wound was obliterated by the tracheotomy. Humes
confirmed his suspiscions the following day in his conversation with Dr.
Perry.

There is zero evidence the autopsy team falsified their final report or
perjured themselves before the Warren Commision. Their work has been
reviewed by several panels of highly qualified forensic pathologists who
confirmed their finding that the bullet did indeed transit through JFK's
upper torso and exit form his neck. But of course, that isn't the
conclusion you want to reach, so instead you back track to an off handed
comment made early on in the data gathering process and completely ignore
everything else that was learned throughout the course of the evening.
This is SOP for conspiracy hobbyists. Cherry pick a few tidbits of
information that seem favorable to your pet theory and completely ignore
the body of evidence which indicates a completely opposite conclusion.

[Anthony Marsh]

He originally planned to slice and dice, but the Army General forbade
them. Humes never screamed bloody murder. Everyone just went along with
the cover-up for the good of the country. No one wanted to be the one to
push the button to start WWIII.

[Anthony Marsh]

Again, why would you even reach for personal anecdotes like that when we
have tests which shot the Oswald ammo 47 inches into Ponderosa Pine?
Do you really think your trivia trumps experts?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 10/11/2014 11:09 PM, Peter Makres wrote:

Not MY argument, but others can claim that a different bullet was used.
A .22 or .45 might stop in the body.

[Anthony Marsh]

> Humes/Boswell/Finck =utopsy report.
>

You are talking about what Humes thought days after the assassination.
Cinque is talking about what Humes thought on the night of the
assassination. We don't know what the original autopsy report said
because he burned it. That's why you love destruction of evidence.

[David Von Pein]

CHRIS / MAINFRAME SAID:

Yup, you got it, but they had to follow orders and put the desired

findings in the final report.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Now all you have to do, Chris, is to provide some PROOF (you know what
that words means...or do you?) that would show that Humes, Boswell, and
Finck "had to follow orders" when it comes to anything they wrote in the
autopsy report. Can you provide such "proof"? Of course you can't, because
your assertion that "they had to follow orders" is something that comes
from your own very fertile imagination--and nowhere else on Earth.

And every time you say this....

"The prosectors at the autopsy determined that the bullet that penetrated
the upper back of JFK did NOT exit the body."

....it will continue to be a bald-faced untruth. And that's because the
autopsy doctors (all three of them) did NOT ultimately conclude that the
bullet did not exit JFK's body.

As I proved via the actual autopsy report itself (which trumps any and all
earlier observations made by the autopsy surgeons on 11/22/63 prior to the
time they had ALL the facts concerning the President's throat wound), the
autopsists concluded just exactly the opposite of your silly "THERE'S NO
EXIT" rants.

As has already been explained to you -- Yes, the doctors initially were
baffled by the fact that no bullets were in the body and the fact they
could not find a definitive exit wound for the back-wound entry hole. But
both of those problems instantly solved themselves when Dr. Humes spoke
with Malcolm Perry on the 23rd of November.

And yes, Sibert and O'Neill put down in their FBI report the things they
heard Dr. Humes say during the autopsy. But the doctors' opinion changed
the next morning.

So maybe you should try your "THERE'S NO EXIT" schtick on somebody else.
Because repeating that same untruth a million times here isn't going to
get you very far. Because anyone with any ability to read Page 6 of JFK's
official autopsy report knows that the doctors DID conclude that the
bullet EXITED President Kennedy's throat.

But I anxiously await Chris' bombshell "proof" that will back up this
explosive allegation....

"They had to follow orders and put the desired findings in the final
report."

I fear, however, that we'll be waiting until hell goes into the deep
freeze before Chris provides such proof. Right, Mr. Mainframe

[bigdog]

On Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:35:29 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> Yep. Good recommendation. Think it through again. Bullets have been
> known to have too little powder in them which makes them much less
> powerful and they will stop after hitting anything, including just flesh.
> If the bullets are very old the powder may degrade to a degree too.
> Either way, you can have the situation that the prosectors explored
> thoroughly. The bullet from the upper back had "NO EXIT".

This is probably the most ridiculous part of your theory. A bullet would
have to be ridiculously underpowered to penetrate only a few inches into
soft flesh. By contrast, the bullet fired from Jack Ruby's .38 entered the
left side of Oswald's abdomen and bulged out of his right side without
breaking the skin. The bullet you are proposing could have been traveling
no more than a few hundred feet per second. Such a bullet would never have
hit the target from any distance because the bullet would drop too much
before reaching the target. The only way such a bullet could hit the
target would be if the shooter knew he had a very weak bullet and adjusted
his aim to allow for the drop. Why would a shooter use a bullet he knew
was that weak? As it is with all your arguments, this simply makes no
sense. With the

[mainframetech]

LOL! So now you've also taken on the mantle of lawyer for DVP...:) Is
he incapable of defending himself and his nasty comments to others? Is
there any job you can't do? Or are you reminded of your own comments that
you make on various people that disagree with you? :)

People can look at anything they want in reaching information and then
possibly conclusions. When you've seen the overview and it points clearly
to conspiracy, then you need to be careful what you read by factors in the
case. Final conclusions will always carry the ordered or demanded
results, and so are suspect.

During the process some people might let out some truth, especially if
they think that nothing of what was said will ever reach the public, and
that's the case here. The prosectors were not trained for all this
skullduggery and trying to do things at the spur of the moment besides,
just made it all the more difficult for them.

And so during their search for bullets and fragments (which was of
utmost importance to them) they spoke truly at a point of bafflement.
They couldn't find a bullet that they KNEW had to be in the body, but
wasn't. They commented that "There's NO EXIT" without thinking that the
public and everyone else would know what they had decided. They knew
there would be a final report that would be looked at, and weren't worried
along the way what would be made of their decision.

>
>
> There is zero evidence the autopsy team falsified their final report or
>
> perjured themselves before the Warren Commision. Their work has been
>
> reviewed by several panels of highly qualified forensic pathologists who
>
> confirmed their finding that the bullet did indeed transit through JFK's
>
> upper torso and exit form his neck. But of course, that isn't the
>
> conclusion you want to reach, so instead you back track to an off handed
>
> comment made early on in the data gathering process and completely ignore
>
> everything else that was learned throughout the course of the evening.
>
> This is SOP for conspiracy hobbyists. Cherry pick a few tidbits of
>
> information that seem favorable to your pet theory and completely ignore
>
> the body of evidence which indicates a completely opposite conclusion.

Nope, won't do. Try as you may, you won't get far with that line. In
reality Humes was already caught changing his testimony from one panel to
another. They were told to lie and convince everyone that the falsehood
was the facts of the body. Once the body was in the ground, NO ONE was
going to disprove their words. No panel would EVER be able to see the
body, no panel would ever be able to dissect a bullet path, no panel would
be able to section the brain to determine path and direction of bullets,
and no panel EVER got to see all the related material to do with the
'order of silence' and the difference between the body at Parkland and at
Bethesda after Humes and Boswell got at it.

Chris

[mainframetech]

Still trying desperately to find some kind of cover for the bad news?
I think you need to read the statements of James Jenkins which have been
explained to you. He corroborated what the prosectors said about "There's
NO EXIT". He was the Bethesda technologist assisting in the autopsy.

Here's what came from an interview with Jenkins:

"Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was intact.
Jenkins also recalled seeing a bruise at the top of the middle lobe of the
right lung (but not at the top, or apex of the right lung)."

From: http://insidethearrb.livejournal.com/10811.html

When we have 3 people corroborating each other, and reporting what 3
prosectors said about the wound and the bullet, we are closer to truth
than we have ever been. That bullet did NOT leave JFK, but either fell
out during CPR work on the body, or was removed by Humes and Boswell at
their unauthorized search and damaging of the body BEFORE the 'official'
autopsy.

Thank you bd...:)

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:27:33 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:01:58 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Have you checked into the new information about the 'single bullet'
>
> > not going through JFK, so that it could NOT have hit Connally? The
>
> > prosectors found that to be true that there was NO EXIT from the body of
>
> > JFK for the bullet that hit the upper back!
>
> >
>
>
>
> Chris thinks that 50 year old misinterpretations constitute "new
>
> information". It has never been a secret that the prosectors did not pass
>
> a probe through the bullet track which proved absolutely squat. DVP posted
>
> a very thorough passage from the Clark Panel report explaining why this
>
> fact is insignificant and also listed a number of factors which showed
>
> conclusively that there was a bullet track from the back entrance to the
>
> throat entrance. It also explains that if they had tried to force the
>
> probe through the body, they could have created a false passage. But of
>
> course Chris ignores everything extremely qualfied people have said on the
>
> subject because his own amateurish analysis fits his bullshit beliefs much
>
> better. Like a one trick pony, he looks at one factor, the probe not
>
> passing through the body, and that's all he needs to know. That's all he
>
> wants to know. If he learned any more, it would conflict with what he
>
> desperately wants to believe.
>

The desperation is in your writing that baloney above. No panel saw the
body and could not possibly have dissected the bullet path from the upper
back to the throat, since it was found to stop an inch or two in from the
skin. Try not to forget that James Jenkins saw (from the inside body
cavity) the finger probing from the outside wound, to reach the pleura
inside, and could NOT GO PAST IT. He saw them reach the end of the track
FROM THE INSIDE. So ANY baloney published by anyone after that was simply
to cover up for the finding in the event the testimony would surface and
become public, which it did when the law was changed.

And after the findings of the prosectors DURING the autopsy, no matter
what they were forced to put in final reports, we have the record of what
they found, and it makes far more sense than the stupid theories put
forward by the WC lawyers.

Given the job you volunteered for, to convince folks that the facts of
the murder prove it was a 'lone nut' killing, I rather expected you to go
overboard after reading the truth in the Sworn testimony. And here you
are going overboard. I have to assume that you finally read the decision
the prosectors came to (unofficially, of course).

So now (sez you) it turns out that all this time someone official KNEW
that they could not get a probe through the back wound. And yet no one in
all that time pointed out that it meant that the throat wound was an
entry, and NOT an exit, and that Connally was hit by a separate bullet,
Suuure bd, sure thing...:)

And you even implicated DVP in this fantasy of yours. Does he know you
took his name in vain? How does HE explain that James Jenkins SAW the
probing from the outside, while he was looking on from the inside of the
body? Did they know that so long ago? He saw the probing going up
against the pleura and not getting past, proving that the path did indeed
stop at that point, and that no bullet went past and out of the body.
Would you now smear the reputation of Pierre Finck, who was the only
pathologist there who had experience with bullet wounds? Are you saying
that he could not find his butt with both hands and a rear view mirror?
And that he didn't have the intelligence to search out a bullet track and
make a decision that could be counted on? He said "THERE'S NO EXIT".
And YOU are the one that demands that we listen to 'experts'. Well,
there's the decision of your expert! "There's NO EXIT".

>
>
> >
>
> > Go here if you have the courage and see the conversation. This is the
>
> > testimony of James Sibert (FBI agent):
>
> >
>
> > https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page.

>
> >
>
>
>

> A casual observation by an FBI agent about the autopsy procedures does not
>
> trump a thorough review of the medical evidence by a number of review
>
> panels comprised of extremely qualified medical examiners.

Get off it! the word 'casual' was NOT in the sworn testimony. 2 FBI
agents charged with following the body through thick and thin were just
CASUALLY watching and listening to the autopsy of the PRESIDENT? Are you
out of your mind?

And they corroborated each other, but also James Jenkins, the Bethesda
technologist, agreed with what was seen and heard and even added more
information proving that the bullet path stopped at the body of JFK.
Give it up! Face it and deal with it. Find a more interesting excuse
than that people who never got near the body and never had any opportunity
to dissect the bullet path, and never had the opportunity to see what
Jenkins saw, and never got all the information they should have, came to a
sensible conclusion of ANY kind.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:29:22 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:03:04 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > On Friday, October 10, 2014 7:09:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > You can repeat this nonsense as often as you like and we will continue to
>
> > > file it under blah-blah-blah.
>
> >
>
> > Wrong again! LOL! I knew you'd bite on that one! Here's the
>
> > statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from his interview:
>
> >
>
> > "Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
>
> > thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
>
> > finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
>
> > the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
>
> > the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was
>
> > intact."
>
>
>
> If this is James Jenkins statement, why is he speaking of Jim Jenkins in
>
> the third person?
>

Hmm. Someone's having a hard time with this new information...:)

OK, listen carefully. Just before the information from Jenkins and
before your question, look above that and see where I said "Here's the
statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from his interview". If
that isn't clear, he did an interview in which he expressed his
experiences, and they were recorded, and then I read them and copied them
here so you could appreciate the 'new' information...:) All the answers
seem to be in the ARRB files.

>
>
> >
>
> > So we have corroboration that the bullet did NOT go through the body,
>
> > and as well, we have also the fact that Jenkins saw the probing from the
>
> > inside of the body cavity and it did NOT go all the way through the
>
> > 'pleura' which surrounds and protects the lungs.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Since you have miscited the source, we don't know who made the above
>
> statement. In any case, being a technician does not qualiify one as a
>
> medical examiner. Qualified medical examiners understand the
>
> insignificance of the probe not passing through the bullet track for
>
> numerous reasons. The primary one is that if the muscles were not alligned
>
> in the exact position they were in when the bullet transited, the bullet
>
> track would become blocked by the repositioning of the muscles. This is a
>
> fact you continually ignore because it doesn't fit your bullshit story.
>
> You focus on one factor, the probe not passing, and ignore all the other
>
> available medical evidence which proves conclusively that the bullet
>
> transited through JFK's body from back to front.
>

LOL! The old 'we don't know nothin' until we gets us a 'expert'
ploy...:) Get away with that! The citation is correct, and if you go
there you will find the copied text shown here. The person that made the
statement, conducted the interview and is noted at the top of the page!
How lazy are you when you don't really want to learn something that will
change many parts of the JFK case?

Don't be so desperate and think of it as something new to argue about,
since you sound tired of all this stuff you have to endure day after
day...:)

>
>
> >
>
> > Take a note. The people that performed the autopsy were in my opinion
>
> > not competent to do an autopsy of this type, except maybe Finck. But they
>
> > are 'experts' in their field of pathology, and were "qualified
>
> > pathologists".
>
>
>
> They were certainly more qualified than a technician.
>

They call Jenkins a 'technologist', he assisted in the autopsy, so he
couldn't be a rank amateur. But either way, he knew what he was seeing
and was able to describe it. We don't need us any o' them 'experts'...:)

>
>
> > When they say the bullet had "NO EXIT", it's because they
>
> > did the work properly of looking for the bullet and the path it followed.
>
> > When they find the end of that path,
>
>
>
> They didn't find the end of the path nor did they conclude they had. They
>
> found the blockage of the path.
>

The blockage of the path WAS the end of the path. Jenkins' experience
looking from INSIDE of the body told us that the probing had indeed
reached the end. There was NO hole or tear in the pleura, which was
stopping the probing from going any further. Trying desperately to find a
way past this would go easier on you by accepting the obvious, that was
always obvious to many people.

>
>
> > it's because they are 'experts' in
>
> > their chosen profession. Or are you now going to say that pathologists
>
> > lie, or are mistaken in this case?
>
> >
>
>
>
> There is no question that forensic pathologists would have been a much
>
> better choice to do the autopsy than the general pathologists at Bethesda.
>
> However we can't undo that mistake so we have to do the best with what was
>
> learned, which was more than enough to establish conclusively that JFK was
>
> shot twice from behind and that the bullet that entered his back exited
>
> from his throat.
>

Please don't brush past Pierre Finck. He had experience with bullet
wounds and was called by Humes for that reason. Now that you've declared
the prosectors as incompetent to do this kind of autopsy, please consider
Finck separately. You (I don't doubt) don't have a bit of information
about Finck, and yet you're ready to bury him with Humes and Boswell.
Suddenly the 'experts' aren't supporting your wacky WC theories, and they
are now 'incompetent'. Finck as the bullet wound specialist of the crew,
knew how to find a bullet in a body. All the posectors (no doubt) had a
class in it in school. In any event, they spent time trying to find that
bullet. It was important to them because if they left it in the body and
it was discovered in front of the gallery of people, they could not hide
it or get rid of it, and it MAY prove that there was another shooter at
Dealey Plaza that day.

>
>
> >
>
> > Now I've heard your blah-blah-blah, but I'm, willing to listen.
>
>
>
> No you aren't. You're locked into a bullshit theory based on minimal
>
> information, ignoring the body of evidence which paints a completely
>
> different picture than the one you want to believe.
>

Nope, won't do. You keep trying desperately to convince OTHER readers
that I'm working with a theory, when I'm really dealing with reality and
what witnesses have said about it. The only thing that "locks me into"
something is truth. I'm not going to do like you and avoid truth and go
with the wacky theories of the WC lawyers.

>
>
> > And
>
> > maybe you'll learn something along the way. You've certainly had to be
>
> > schooled often enough.
>
> >
>
>
>
> There is zero chance I could ever learn anything from someone as
>
> perpetually confused as you are.

LOL! As it goes, I'm not particularly bothered by the comment. It
points up that I've made some inroads in the case, that's when you take
shots at me.

Chris

[Peter Makres]

No, just pointing that which is common sense, not rocket science at all.
And of course, not everyone knows about every specific test that has been
done, as you so obviously do, Kemosabe.

[cmikes]

Burkley was an Admiral, not a General. McHugh was not an Army General, he
was an Air Force General. And it had nothing to do with WWIII, they were
following the family's wishes.

Other than that, you are almost accurate.

[mainframetech]

On Monday, October 13, 2014 5:59:54 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> CHRIS / MAINFRAME SAID:
>
>
>
> Yup, you got it, but they had to follow orders and put the desired
>
> findings in the final report.
>
>
>
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
>
>
> Now all you have to do, Chris, is to provide some PROOF (you know what
>
> that words means...or do you?) that would show that Humes, Boswell, and
>
> Finck "had to follow orders" when it comes to anything they wrote in the
>
> autopsy report. Can you provide such "proof"? Of course you can't, because
>
> your assertion that "they had to follow orders" is something that comes
>
> from your own very fertile imagination--and nowhere else on Earth.
>
>
>
> And every time you say this....
>
>
>
> "The prosectors at the autopsy determined that the bullet that penetrated
>
> the upper back of JFK did NOT exit the body."
>
>
>
> ....it will continue to be a bald-faced untruth. And that's because the
>
> autopsy doctors (all three of them) did NOT ultimately conclude that the
>
> bullet did not exit JFK's body.
>

You have absolutely NO PROOF that the autopsy prosectors did NOT find
that the bullet went nowhere. They found it, and were seen and heard to
find it. And it included the experienced prosector Pierre Finck who had
worked bullet wounds before. But I have the proof that they did and said
exactly what I said they did. They were seen and it was corroborated by 2
FBI agents, and others.

It's true only that I said that they were following orders, but there
is no other solution to them finding that the bullet didn't go on to
Connally and their final report that doesn't mention it. Try as you
might, you WILL NOT CHANGE history here. You can try it on your website,
but not here, because I'm here and will makes sure the truth gets out.


To help you out, the prosectors spent time trying to find where the
bullet path kept on going, and couldn't find it, but James Jenkins stated
that he saw (from the inside of the body) the efforts of probing from the
outside, and that that the probing came up against the pleura that
surrounds and protects the lungs. The pleura was NOT torn or broken in
any way, though Jenkins saw bruising on the lung earlier. There is NO way
that they probe from the outside and at the same time another person sees
the probing from the inside and that it is stopped by the pleura, that
there is any other way through. The bullet stopped where the probe
stopped. That cannot be changed try though you might.

>
>
> As I proved via the actual autopsy report itself (which trumps any and all
>
> earlier observations made by the autopsy surgeons on 11/22/63 prior to the
>
> time they had ALL the facts concerning the President's throat wound), the
>
> autopsists concluded just exactly the opposite of your silly "THERE'S NO
>
> EXIT" rants.
>

Nope. Won't do. It's not MY rant, it came from the mouths of the
prosectors. Didn't you have the guts to go look for yourself? But then
most LNs can't face the facts. Too chicken. No matter what they said in
any final report, along the way they discovered that the bullet went no
further. And you can't change that fact, no matter what you do. The
record is there and will remain there for any who go and read it.

Let me make it clear...you have proved nothing. You have merely pointed
at some report and said 'that's the truth', and I've pointed at the
actually place in testimony where they investigated the bullet path for
the upper back, and made their discovery, so I've presented the truth as
it happened. You will not be allowed to wipe out the discovery of the
prosectors by claiming that the final report erases all other statements
and discoveries. It's only you who says that is the case, and your
authority is non-existent at this point. The final report does NOT wipe
out previous discoveries, saimply is used for other purposes, to report
what the results were of the autopsy. It's obvious to anyone with an
ounce that the final report is the one they thought would be carried on to
the WC. They also were obviously unaware that their words of discovery
would be seen by everyone.

>
>
> As has already been explained to you -- Yes, the doctors initially were
>
> baffled by the fact that no bullets were in the body and the fact they
>
> could not find a definitive exit wound for the back-wound entry hole. But
>
> both of those problems instantly solved themselves when Dr. Humes spoke
>
> with Malcolm Perry on the 23rd of November.
>

Humes spoke with many people that night based on report from others in
the rom. Not just in the morning. And he received many orders from the
'back of the room'. He wasn't really in charge.

While it's true that the prosectors were baffled for a while as to
where the bullet exited, they finally came to the conclusion that "There's
NO EXIT". And those EXACT words were said by them. Pierre Finck, the
experienced person, said it himself..."There's NO EXIT". As well, the
Bethesda technologist, James Jenkins also agreed with that conclusion,
since he was looking on from inside the body and saw where they on the
outside were probing the wound and hitting the pleura, a tough material
that surrounds the lungs. He saw from the inside that the probing was
stopped and that there was NO EXIT for that bullet.

>
>
> And yes, Sibert and O'Neill put down in their FBI report the things they
>
> heard Dr. Humes say during the autopsy. But the doctors' opinion changed
>
> the next morning.
>

Nope. The FBI agents didn't put it in their report. It went into
their sworn testimony for the ARRB. So you seem not to know too much
about this case, yet you have the gall to call me a liar! And the doctors
opinion didn't change the next morning either. That's something that
you've tried to use to save yourself from the error you made calling me a
liar. The agents told what they saw and heard, and the same for James
Jenkins, who corroborate their information, and even added some more.

>
>
> So maybe you should try your "THERE'S NO EXIT" schtick on somebody else.
>
> Because repeating that same untruth a million times here isn't going to
>
> get you very far. Because anyone with any ability to read Page 6 of JFK's
>
> official autopsy report knows that the doctors DID conclude that the
>
> bullet EXITED President Kennedy's throat.
>

So far, you 've failed miserably to prove your case. But keep going,
I'll be here to correct you every time you make another mistake. And you
will, I'm sure. The phrase "There's NO EXIT" was said by the prosectors,
and separately by Pierre Finck, and I've proved that. What have you
proved? That they tried not to say it in final reports? That's about it.

I've proven that the prosectors said what I quoted them as saying.
You continue to pretend that they didn't say it. So the only proof of
whether they said it or not is to go to the place where they were quoted
as saying it, and looking and seeing if indeed they said it. I've given
the link to the place where they discovered it, and you need to go there
so that you don't keep on being insulting. Or are you a vindictive
fellow? Some one that can' take being wrong, and had to retaliate any way
you can, and calling me names is it?

>
>
> But I anxiously await Chris' bombshell "proof" that will back up this
>
> explosive allegation....
>

> "They had to follow orders and put the desired findings in the final
>
> report."
>

That comment was obviously MY comment. And if you know that this is
the story of a conspiracy, then it makes perfect sense. More sense than a
bunch of wacky theories of the WC lawyers. There is little proof that the
statement is anything other than my own deduction from information about
the case, and you'll indeed wait till the case is finally completely
solved to get any proof of the statement.

>
>
> I fear, however, that we'll be waiting until hell goes into the deep
>
> freeze before Chris provides such proof. Right, Mr. Mainframe

Right. I am the author of the statement form my knowledge of the case.
So don't bother to wait for the proof of the statement, since I'm the
author and the end of the case will bear me out.

HOWEVER, we have another item on the table that DVP wants to escape
from. The proof of my quote of the prosectors. THAT statement is waiting
for the more courageous of the LNs to find and my PROOF will be satisfied.
It looks to me that DVP has failed to check his research and look at the
statement in sworn testimony that was made by the 2 FBI agents for the
ARRB. I will provide that information again and we'll se if DVP runs away
from it, or gets up his nerve and looks at it. He will probably never
admit that he looked at it, but I'll give him a chance anyway. Here's the
link:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page.

Now here is the statement of James Jenkins from an interview:

"Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was intact.

Jenkins also recalled seeing a bruise at the top of the middle lobe of the
right lung (but not at the top, or apex of the right lung)."

From: http://insidethearrb.livejournal.com/10811.html

You can see by reading this why I feel that the final report of the
prosectors was missing this little tidbit...:)

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Right. Not everyone else is a researcher.

[Anthony Marsh]

Finck was in the Army. You'd think he'd know what a 4-star Army General
looks like.

[tims...@gmail.com]

You don't recall posting the words "implying they are missing" (or words
to that effect) regarding certain Warren Commission items on this VERY
board rather recently?

Concerned Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

[bigdog]

On Monday, October 13, 2014 9:00:36 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> LOL! So now you've also taken on the mantle of lawyer for DVP...:) Is
> he incapable of defending himself and his nasty comments to others? Is
> there any job you can't do? Or are you reminded of your own comments that
> you make on various people that disagree with you? :)

DVP needs no help from me especially when he is dealing with the likes of
you. I do this for amusement only and didn't want to let him have all the
fun.

>
> People can look at anything they want in reaching information and then
> possibly conclusions.

As you have demonstrated on countless occasions.

> When you've seen the overview and it points clearly
> to conspiracy,

They'll be throwing snowballs in hell before that happens.

> then you need to be careful what you read by factors in the
> case.

It isn't that you need to be careful what you read. You need to be careful
about what you buy into. You seem to have thrown caution to the wind in
that regard.

> Final conclusions will always carry the ordered or demanded
> results, and so are suspect.
>

Conspiracy hobbyists have been demanding conclusions that somebody other
than Oswald did it. That conclusion is more than suspect. It is downright
wacky.

>
> During the process some people might let out some truth, especially if
> they think that nothing of what was said will ever reach the public, and
> that's the case here. The prosectors were not trained for all this
> skullduggery and trying to do things at the spur of the moment besides,
> just made it all the more difficult for them.
>

You started with the assumption that they were part of the cover up. A
ridiculous idea with zero evidence to support it. Somebody got an idea
early on in the process, an idea that was later discarded as more
information was obtained. In typical conspiracy hobbyist fashion, you
latched on to that erroneous idea and tried to set it in stone. The idea
that a bullet only made a shallow entry is just plain wrong but you just
won't let it go no matter how much information there is to the contrary.
You used it as a starting point for imagining all kinds of sinister
activity at the autopsy for which you have no evidence.

>
> And so during their search for bullets and fragments (which was of
> utmost importance to them) they spoke truly at a point of bafflement.

No, they floated ideas that were later determined not to be true. That is
the normal part of any fact finding process. Ideas are developed and are
either validated or invalidated. The shallow penetrating bullet idea was
invalidated by what was learned later on in the process but for some silly
reason, you want to cling to an idea that was invalidated because a guy
named Horne told you to believe that.

>
> They couldn't find a bullet that they KNEW had to be in the body, but
> wasn't. They commented that "There's NO EXIT" without thinking that the
> public and everyone else would know what they had decided. They knew
> there would be a final report that would be looked at, and weren't worried
> along the way what would be made of their decision.
>

They couldn't find a bullet they though was in the body. Either the bullet
exited or it should still be in the body. When they disected the body and
saw the track of the bullet which pointed to the tracheotomy incision,
they began to suspect the bullet had exited from the throat where the
incision had been made. That was confirmed the following day. For some
silly reason, people like you and Horne won't let got of an idea that was
later proved to be false. Horne may very well know it is false but why
kill the goose that is laying golden eggs for him.

>
> > There is zero evidence the autopsy team falsified their final report or
> > perjured themselves before the Warren Commision. Their work has been
> > reviewed by several panels of highly qualified forensic pathologists who
> > confirmed their finding that the bullet did indeed transit through JFK's
> > upper torso and exit form his neck. But of course, that isn't the
> > conclusion you want to reach, so instead you back track to an off handed
> > comment made early on in the data gathering process and completely ignore
> > everything else that was learned throughout the course of the evening.
> > This is SOP for conspiracy hobbyists. Cherry pick a few tidbits of
> > information that seem favorable to your pet theory and completely ignore
> > the body of evidence which indicates a completely opposite conclusion.
>
> Nope, won't do. Try as you may, you won't get far with that line. In
> reality Humes was already caught changing his testimony from one panel to
> another. They were told to lie and convince everyone that the falsehood
> was the facts of the body.

Really? Who told them to do that? What is your evidence that they were
told to do that?

> Once the body was in the ground, NO ONE was
> going to disprove their words. No panel would EVER be able to see the
> body, no panel would ever be able to dissect a bullet path, no panel would
> be able to section the brain to determine path and direction of bullets,
> and no panel EVER got to see all the related material to do with the
> 'order of silence' and the difference between the body at Parkland and at
> Bethesda after Humes and Boswell got at it.

No panel would need to see the body. There were ample photographs and
x-rays taken that showed them the damage to the body. Those panels could
see with their own eyes the bullet track and the damage that transiting
bullet had done. If they didn't have that clear evidence, why would they
confirm the report of the original autopsy team. Do you think those panels
were part of the cover up too?

>
>
>
> Chris

[bigdog]

On Monday, October 13, 2014 9:06:26 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Sunday, October 12, 2014 9:29:22 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, October 11, 2014 11:03:04 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > > On Friday, October 10, 2014 7:09:56 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> > > > You can repeat this nonsense as often as you like and we will continue to
> > > > file it under blah-blah-blah.
>
> > > Wrong again! LOL! I knew you'd bite on that one! Here's the
> > > statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from his interview:
>
> > > "Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
> > > thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
> > > finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
> > > the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
> > > the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was
> > > intact."
>
> > If this is James Jenkins statement, why is he speaking of Jim Jenkins in
> > the third person?
>
> Hmm. Someone's having a hard time with this new information...:)
>
> OK, listen carefully. Just before the information from Jenkins and
> before your question, look above that and see where I said "Here's the
> statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from his interview". If
> that isn't clear, he did an interview in which he expressed his
> experiences, and they were recorded, and then I read them and copied them
> here so you could appreciate the 'new' information...:) All the answers
> seem to be in the ARRB files.

You said "Here's the statement of James Jenkins (navy technologist) from
his interview" and then put the statement in quotes. It is obviously not
the statement of James Jenkins. It is the statement by somebody else about
what Jim Jenkins had said and you didn't even tell us who that somebody
was. Don't blame me because you don't know how to cite a source.

>
> > > So we have corroboration that the bullet did NOT go through the body,
> > > and as well, we have also the fact that Jenkins saw the probing from the
> > > inside of the body cavity and it did NOT go all the way through the
> > > 'pleura' which surrounds and protects the lungs.
>
> > Since you have miscited the source, we don't know who made the above
> > statement. In any case, being a technician does not qualiify one as a
> > medical examiner. Qualified medical examiners understand the
> > insignificance of the probe not passing through the bullet track for
> > numerous reasons. The primary one is that if the muscles were not alligned
> > in the exact position they were in when the bullet transited, the bullet
> > track would become blocked by the repositioning of the muscles. This is a
> > fact you continually ignore because it doesn't fit your bullshit story.
> > You focus on one factor, the probe not passing, and ignore all the other
> > available medical evidence which proves conclusively that the bullet
> > transited through JFK's body from back to front.
>
> LOL! The old 'we don't know nothin' until we gets us a 'expert'
> ploy...:) Get away with that!

Apparently you think anybody is qualified to do a medico-legal autopsy,
even yourself. You think the panels of qualified experts couldn't figure
out what happened because they didn't have the body but you think you can
figure out what happened because of a few offhanded comments during fact
finding process. I don't suppose you have any idea how silly that is.

> The citation is correct, and if you go
> there you will find the copied text shown here. The person that made the
> statement, conducted the interview and is noted at the top of the page!
> How lazy are you when you don't really want to learn something that will
> change many parts of the JFK case?
>

Hmmmmm. I can go by what several panels of the best medical examiners
available have concluded or I can go by what a technician had to say about
it. Let me think about that......I've thought about it. I'm going with the
experts.

>
> Don't be so desperate and think of it as something new to argue about,
> since you sound tired of all this stuff you have to endure day after
> day...:)
>

You've been telling us this is all new information. At least you seem to
understand it is stale old crap. Maybe we are making progress.

[mainframetech]

On Monday, October 13, 2014 5:59:54 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:

> CHRIS / MAINFRAME SAID:
>
>
>
> Yup, you got it, but they had to follow orders and put the desired
>
> findings in the final report.
>
>

Interesting. You KNOW that I've answered that question elsewhere,
which I'll do again, but really, what you're trying to do is change the
subject from the real proof that I've shown you and you're unable to admit
happened just as I said.

Once again, you know as well as anyone that that comment was made by
ME, not the prosectors. The prosectors said "There's NO EXIT" when
speaking of the bullet that went into the upper back of JFK.

>
>
>
> DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
>
>
>
> Now all you have to do, Chris, is to provide some PROOF (you know what
>
> that words means...or do you?) that would show that Humes, Boswell, and
>
> Finck "had to follow orders" when it comes to anything they wrote in the
>
> autopsy report. Can you provide such "proof"? Of course you can't, because
>
> your assertion that "they had to follow orders" is something that comes
>
> from your own very fertile imagination--and nowhere else on Earth.
>

Still trying to change the subject? You know as well as anyone that
reads my statements that I made that statement, as my own deduction.
However, what about the statement that I've proved was made by the
prosectors, you keep running away from that.

>
>
> And every time you say this....
>
>
>
> "The prosectors at the autopsy determined that the bullet that penetrated
>
> the upper back of JFK did NOT exit the body."
>
>
>
> ....it will continue to be a bald-faced untruth. And that's because the
>
> autopsy doctors (all three of them) did NOT ultimately conclude that the
>
> bullet did not exit JFK's body.
>

Once again you called me a liar. I have shown you exactly where that
phrase was said by the prosectors, and heard by the FBI agents and
Jenkins. Are you going to run away again, with a quick insult and no
response to the main subject?

>
>
> As I proved via the actual autopsy report itself (which trumps any and all
>
> earlier observations made by the autopsy surgeons on 11/22/63 prior to the
>
> time they had ALL the facts concerning the President's throat wound), the
>
> autopsists concluded just exactly the opposite of your silly "THERE'S NO
>
> EXIT" rants.
>

You've proved NOTHING. The prosectors made the statement in the course
of their examination, and it stands and won't go away no mater what you
try. This business of trying to discredit me won't wash either, because I
have the proof on my side. I can show that the prosectors were seen and
heard to say "There's NO EXIT" for the bullet from the upper back.

>
>
> As has already been explained to you -- Yes, the doctors initially were
>
> baffled by the fact that no bullets were in the body and the fact they
>
> could not find a definitive exit wound for the back-wound entry hole. But
>
> both of those problems instantly solved themselves when Dr. Humes spoke
>
> with Malcolm Perry on the 23rd of November.
>
>
>
> And yes, Sibert and O'Neill put down in their FBI report the things they
>
> heard Dr. Humes say during the autopsy. But the doctors' opinion changed
>
> the next morning.
>

Nope, you screwed up again. The information did NOT come from the FBI
report, it came from the FBI agents when they were sworn in for the ARRB.
Apparently you don't know the case as well as you thought. Did you even
check out the proof I showed you? It sounds like you neglected to do what
a good researcher would do. Go and check it out.

>
>
> So maybe you should try your "THERE'S NO EXIT" schtick on somebody else.
>
> Because repeating that same untruth a million times here isn't going to
>
> get you very far. Because anyone with any ability to read Page 6 of JFK's
>
> official autopsy report knows that the doctors DID conclude that the
>
> bullet EXITED President Kennedy's throat.
>

So you STILL refuse to look where I pointed you. I'm not interested in
any final report, only what they found during their investigation.
Because IF [note the caps] they were given orders as to what they'd find,
it would be in the final report. The discovery is far more important to
researchers than your final report. So you've proved nothing.

>
>
> But I anxiously await Chris' bombshell "proof" that will back up this
>
> explosive allegation....
>
>
>
> "They had to follow orders and put the desired findings in the final
>
> report."
>
>
>
> I fear, however, that we'll be waiting until hell goes into the deep
>
> freeze before Chris provides such proof. Right, Mr. Mainframe

Still trying to change the subject to get the heat off yourself? I've
shown the link for anyone (including you) to look if they have the guts,
at the proof of what the prosectors discovered as they were investigating
the wound of the upper back of JFK. But of course, it will take courage
to look at the proof.

Go here:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page.

Here's some more corroborating statements from an interview of James
Jenkins, Bethesda technologist:

"Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was intact.

Jenkins also recalled seeing a bruise at the top of the middle lobe of the
right lung (but not at the top, or apex of the right lung)."

From: http://insidethearrb.livejournal.com/10811.html

So we know that it is definite that the wound was probed properly
because Jenkins saw the probing from the other side.

Chris

[mainframetech]

You seem to be missing the point today. I'm not talking about a THEORY,
I'm talking about an actual event that was seen and heard by 2 FBI agents,
and many people during the autopsy. Where have you been?

I didn't "propose" any bullet, a bullet hit JFK and did NOT go past an
inch or two, which was discovered by the prosectors, and they said so as
they were working. Their exact words were "There's NO EXIT", and even
Pierre Finck said "There's NO EXIT". James Jenkins was on the other side
of the wound and he saw the probing from the other side and saw that the
probing was blocked just as the bullet had to be blocked too.

Here's the link, because it sounds like you've been afraid to actually
read the proof for what you will find:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page.

Chris

[bigdog]

On Tuesday, October 14, 2014 9:15:14 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> Here's the link, because it sounds like you've been afraid to actually
> read the proof for what you will find:
>
> https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509
>

We don't need the link for the umpteenth time. What this boils down to is
that you think a first impression based on a minimal amount of evidence is
more reliable than a conclusion based on all of the evidence gathered at
the autopsy. Why would someone who claims to be interested in the truth
ignore all the evidence that was developed after that initial observation?

[mainframetech]

Actually, no. Care to remind me?

Chris

[mainframetech]

LOL! Desperately grasping at straws I see! If you had looked and not
gone off half cocked, you would have seen the words "from his interview"
at the top, and he was spoken of in the third person to give you another
clue. But you could also have gone to the link it came from and assure
yourself of all the information you needed. It would have been one click!
You were just too lazy!

>
>
> >
>
> > > > So we have corroboration that the bullet did NOT go through the body,
>
> > > > and as well, we have also the fact that Jenkins saw the probing from the
>
> > > > inside of the body cavity and it did NOT go all the way through the
>
> > > > 'pleura' which surrounds and protects the lungs.
>
> >
>
> > > Since you have miscited the source, we don't know who made the above
>
> > > statement. In any case, being a technician does not qualiify one as a
>
> > > medical examiner. Qualified medical examiners understand the
>
> > > insignificance of the probe not passing through the bullet track for
>
> > > numerous reasons. The primary one is that if the muscles were not alligned
>
> > > in the exact position they were in when the bullet transited, the bullet
>
> > > track would become blocked by the repositioning of the muscles. This is a
>
> > > fact you continually ignore because it doesn't fit your bullshit story.
>
> > > You focus on one factor, the probe not passing, and ignore all the other
>
> > > available medical evidence which proves conclusively that the bullet
>
> > > transited through JFK's body from back to front.
>
> >
>
> > LOL! The old 'we don't know nothin' until we gets us a 'expert'
>
> > ploy...:) Get away with that!
>
>
>
> Apparently you think anybody is qualified to do a medico-legal autopsy,
>
> even yourself. You think the panels of qualified experts couldn't figure
>
> out what happened because they didn't have the body but you think you can
>
> figure out what happened because of a few offhanded comments during fact
>
> finding process. I don't suppose you have any idea how silly that is.
>

Nope, won't do. The silliness is coming from you again! The whole
segment of the autopsy is there in testimony for all to see. The problem
has been that only people like Doug Horne had known most of the
information, and many others were simply too lazy to go through it. I see
now you're attempting to pretend that the prosectors were not working to
find answers, they were just making a "few offhanded comments"...LOL!
You'll say anything to try and get away with pulling the wool down over
the eyes of the readers!

You know that even prosectors with training in their profession use
tools like common sense and logic, and when they probed the upper back
wound and were stopped by a blockage, they realized that they had a 'weak'
bullet that had been stopped and they said "There's NO EXIT" for that
bullet. They did that after spending time trying to find the path, and
were not incompetent in doing that. Remember they had an experienced
person with bullet wounds with them.

>
>
> > The citation is correct, and if you go
>
> > there you will find the copied text shown here. The person that made the
>
> > statement, conducted the interview and is noted at the top of the page!
>
> > How lazy are you when you don't really want to learn something that will
>
> > change many parts of the JFK case?
>
> >
>
>
>
> Hmmmmm. I can go by what several panels of the best medical examiners
>
> available have concluded or I can go by what a technician had to say about
>
> it. Let me think about that......I've thought about it. I'm going with the
>
> experts.
>

Ah, the 'experts' that saw no body, dissected no bullet path, saw NO
photos of the bullet path, and were fed no real information about the
surrounding problems, like the difference of the wounds form Parkland to
Bethesda...:)

and to top it off, they had to read the autopsy report, which I've
copied a few sentences here for your edification...:)

"The missile path through
the fascia and musculature cannot be easily proved"

What you're seeing first above, is the wording of how they couldn't
find the bullet path for the upper back bullet!! When they said it
couldn't be easily proved, they didn't go into ANY further effort to
follow the path, or to describe it, except at the end, where they
suggested it came out the throat...:)

Next:

"The third point of reference in connecting these two wounds
is in the apex (supra-clavicular portion) of the right pleural cavity. In
this region there is contusion of the parietal pleura and of the extreme
apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung. In both instances
the diameter of contusion and ecchymosis at the point of maximal
involvement measures 5 cm. Both the visceral and parietal pleura are
intact overlying these areas of trauma."

'Contusion is just another word for 'bruise'. So they found bruises on
the pleura and the lung, exactly what James Jenkins said he saw. But they
DID NOT find any HOLES in the pleura, and they said so!!! They said
"BOTH...are intact"!!

So now we see that much of the formal autopsy report backs up what they found during the autopsy, but they had to put in a connection with the throat wound, while not being able to describe how the path got to the throat!!

It's funny, they point out that there the pleura was intact, yet for
the wound to be connected with the throat, it HAD to break through the
pleura!! The wound and the bruise on the lung was to the middle lobe, not
the top of the lung, so a break through was necessary for the bullet if ot
wee to actually reach the throat! It's right there in black & while in
the autopsy report! Talk about back up!

>
>
> >
>
> > Don't be so desperate and think of it as something new to argue about,
>
> > since you sound tired of all this stuff you have to endure day after
>
> > day...:)
>
> >
>
>
>
> You've been telling us this is all new information. At least you seem to
>
> understand it is stale old crap. Maybe we are making progress.

You wish it was old crap. But you won't find it becoming an issue back
in the past, until Lifton, and then Horne got onto this stuff from the
ARRB. Keep trying to puill the wool over folk's eyes, I'll be here to get
you straightened out. Just during this post I've come across new
information, that the formal autopsy report halfway backs up the
prosector's findings that for the upper back bullet, There's NO EXIT".

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, October 14, 2014 9:08:47 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Monday, October 13, 2014 9:00:36 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > LOL! So now you've also taken on the mantle of lawyer for DVP...:) Is
>
> > he incapable of defending himself and his nasty comments to others? Is
>
> > there any job you can't do? Or are you reminded of your own comments that
>
> > you make on various people that disagree with you? :)
>
>
>
> DVP needs no help from me especially when he is dealing with the likes of
>
> you. I do this for amusement only and didn't want to let him have all the
>
> fun.
>

When he is proven wrong, like you often are, he'll be just as
embarrassed as you are when it keeps happening to you.

>
>
> >
>
> > People can look at anything they want in reaching information and then
>
> > possibly conclusions.
>
>
>
> As you have demonstrated on countless occasions.
>

You know what the comment meant, so don't bother trying to twist it into
your propaganda.

>
>
> > When you've seen the overview and it points clearly
>
> > to conspiracy,
>
>
>
> They'll be throwing snowballs in hell before that happens.
>

Nope. Won't do. Many, many people have found that this was a
conspiracy, myself among them after looking into it.

>
>
> > then you need to be careful what you read by factors in the
>
> > case.
>
>
>
> It isn't that you need to be careful what you read. You need to be careful
>
> about what you buy into. You seem to have thrown caution to the wind in
>
> that regard.
>

Nope, won't do. I think more carefully about what I read than you do.
After all, you read the WC story and believe it still!

>
>
> > Final conclusions will always carry the ordered or demanded
>
> > results, and so are suspect.
>
> >
>
>
>
> Conspiracy hobbyists have been demanding conclusions that somebody other
>
> than Oswald did it. That conclusion is more than suspect. It is downright
>
> wacky.
>

You know again what was said, but your fear of getting into real debate
or discussion on parts of the case keeps you playing your old song of
insult and ad hominem attacks. All in an effort to avoid the questions or
points being discussed at the moment. One of your many stalls to keep
from being seen running away from many of the discussions and proofs that
have been given to you.

>
>
> >
>
> > During the process some people might let out some truth, especially if
>
> > they think that nothing of what was said will ever reach the public, and
>
> > that's the case here. The prosectors were not trained for all this
>
> > skullduggery and trying to do things at the spur of the moment besides,
>
> > just made it all the more difficult for them.
>
> >
>
>
>
> You started with the assumption that they were part of the cover up. A
>
> ridiculous idea with zero evidence to support it. Somebody got an idea
>
> early on in the process, an idea that was later discarded as more
>
> information was obtained. In typical conspiracy hobbyist fashion, you
>
> latched on to that erroneous idea and tried to set it in stone. The idea
>
> that a bullet only made a shallow entry is just plain wrong but you just
>
> won't let it go no matter how much information there is to the contrary.
>
> You used it as a starting point for imagining all kinds of sinister
>
> activity at the autopsy for which you have no evidence.
>

Wrong yet again! I started with the notion that this case was one of
conspiracy, and then reviewed each person's ability to be a witness. Or
to be used by the conspirators. When I put together the extreme
importance exhibited by Kellerman of the SS, and the stealing of the body
and limousine from Dallas, the legal venue they should have remained in,
it became a consideration as to why would all that effort and illegality
be done publicly to get the body and the limo.

From there it was an easy move to the fact that Bethesda was military
and under complete control of the administration. That military leaders
could be easily threatened with following orders or being imprisoned.
Careers and reputations could be threatened, but imprisonment could be
worse for military physicians and pathologists.

Another wrong of yours (that keeps happening) was that I "assumed they
were part of the cover up." That was patently false! You have a way of
going off half cocked and falling into a trap every time. There were many
people that were of help during the cover up stage of the conspiracy, and
they had to have been given a story they could believe so that they could
be enlisted in the work of the cover up. The threat of WW3 was used by
LBJ on occasion, though he knew that was foolish, but it wasn't to many
others. Then there was 'national security' and 'rioting in the streets',
and any number of other excuses for making someone help doing things
necessary. No doubt many of the FBI agents that lied, intimidated
witnesses, changed witness stories, and flat threats to shut up to others
were told some story to make them operate in that fashion.

>
>
> >
>
> > And so during their search for bullets and fragments (which was of
>
> > utmost importance to them) they spoke truly at a point of bafflement.
>
>
>
> No, they floated ideas that were later determined not to be true. That is
>
> the normal part of any fact finding process. Ideas are developed and are
>
> either validated or invalidated. The shallow penetrating bullet idea was
>
> invalidated by what was learned later on in the process but for some silly
>
> reason, you want to cling to an idea that was invalidated because a guy
>
> named Horne told you to believe that.
>

Bull! Give up the phony attempts to fool everyone! The prosectors
were trying to find the path of the bullet legitimately, and when they
discovered that the track stopped, they said what they learned, that
"There's NO EXIT" for that bullet from the body of JFK. You're going to
wiggle on that hook for a long time, but it won't do you a bit of good.
You'll probably take poor DVP with you. They WEREN'T "floating an idea",
they were stating a finding! What a to of nerve to try that ploy!
Anything to run away from serious discussion! Fortunately, anyone can
read the story of the situation abnd see that it was not the "floating of
ideas" that was going on, there was talk of what was being discovered!

Now let's show up that baloney. There was also a Bethesda technologist
named James Jenkins who was assisting at the autopsy. When they raised
the body up into more of a sitting position, he could see inside of the
body cavity, and he saw the probing that was being done from the outside
of the wound, and he saw that it was blocked by the pleura, a protective
tissue around the lungs. Earlier he also saw a bruise on the lung from
being hit by bullet (but NOT penetrated). So we know why the probing was
not able to go past a certain point. It was seen from the other side!
Not just the outside where the prosectors were probing.

So you knew that from before, but seemed to have conveniently forgotten
it.

>
>
> >
>
> > They couldn't find a bullet that they KNEW had to be in the body, but
>
> > wasn't. They commented that "There's NO EXIT" without thinking that the
>
> > public and everyone else would know what they had decided. They knew
>
> > there would be a final report that would be looked at, and weren't worried
>
> > along the way what would be made of their decision.
>
> >
>
>
>
> They couldn't find a bullet they though was in the body. Either the bullet
>
> exited or it should still be in the body. When they disected the body and
>
> saw the track of the bullet which pointed to the tracheotomy incision,
>
> they began to suspect the bullet had exited from the throat where the
>
> incision had been made. That was confirmed the following day. For some
>
> silly reason, people like you and Horne won't let got of an idea that was
>
> later proved to be false. Horne may very well know it is false but why
>
> kill the goose that is laying golden eggs for him.
>

False yet again! Now you're trying to read the minds of long gone
prosectors as they were doing their work! You'll say just anything to
make your story look legitimate! Your talk of dissection is at the wrong
place in the events. There wasn't enough of the path to bother with
dissection of the track, since the track was only an inch or two long
before it hit the pleura. And IT WAS SEEN TO BE STOPPED AT THE PLEURA.
They knew there was no need to look further, since Jenkins saw the other
side of the probing and knew what had stopped that probe.

>
>
> >
>
> > > There is zero evidence the autopsy team falsified their final report or
>
> > > perjured themselves before the Warren Commision. Their work has been
>
> > > reviewed by several panels of highly qualified forensic pathologists who
>
> > > confirmed their finding that the bullet did indeed transit through JFK's
>
> > > upper torso and exit form his neck. But of course, that isn't the
>
> > > conclusion you want to reach, so instead you back track to an off handed
>
> > > comment made early on in the data gathering process and completely ignore
>
> > > everything else that was learned throughout the course of the evening.
>
> > > This is SOP for conspiracy hobbyists. Cherry pick a few tidbits of
>
> > > information that seem favorable to your pet theory and completely ignore
>
> > > the body of evidence which indicates a completely opposite conclusion.
>
> >
>
> > Nope, won't do. Try as you may, you won't get far with that line. In
>
> > reality Humes was already caught changing his testimony from one panel to
>
> > another. They were told to lie and convince everyone that the falsehood
>
> > was the facts of the body.
>
>
>
> Really? Who told them to do that? What is your evidence that they were
>
> told to do that?
>

That is my own decision given the circumstances. The evidence for it
is: Since they had found that the bullet did NOT EXIT, yet said it did in
a report, there is only 2 possibilities; One, that they all made a
mistake of the same exact kind, and two, that they lied, and there is only
one reason I can think of for them to lie and get away with it, and that's
because they were told to. Knowing much of the case, and that it was
indeed a conspiracy, it is obvious to me that they had to lie about that
finding. We don't know what was in the report or notes that Humes burned
up in his fireplace, but it would be nice to know at this time.

>
>
> > Once the body was in the ground, NO ONE was
>
> > going to disprove their words. No panel would EVER be able to see the
>
> > body, no panel would ever be able to dissect a bullet path, no panel would
>
> > be able to section the brain to determine path and direction of bullets,
>
> > and no panel EVER got to see all the related material to do with the
>
> > 'order of silence' and the difference between the body at Parkland and at
>
> > Bethesda after Humes and Boswell got at it.
>
>
>
> No panel would need to see the body. There were ample photographs and
>
> x-rays taken that showed them the damage to the body. Those panels could
>
> see with their own eyes the bullet track and the damage that transiting
>
> bullet had done. If they didn't have that clear evidence, why would they
>
> confirm the report of the original autopsy team. Do you think those panels
>
> were part of the cover up too?
>

There was NOT ample photos and X-rays. Many were missing, and some of
those were important to the case. It's already been proven that some
photos and X-rays were altered, so who knows what the panels were shown.
No decision could be made under those circumstances. Show me the photos
of the "the bullet track and the damage that transiting bullet had done",
though I believe that's just more made up fantasy you need to try and get
away with the wild stories you're telling here.

The original autopsy 'team' (in my opinion) reported what they were
supposed to, which was that the bullet came out the throat even though
Perry and some others said it looked like an entrance. The panels, with
the altered photos and lack of full information, went along with that.
It changes nothing, except what the panels thought. What WE KNOW is that
they found that the bullet had NOT gone further and they said "There's NO
EXIT", and even Pierre Finck, the experienced person of the group, said
"There's NO EXIT".


I hope DVP is happy with his lawyer, because you have led a merry chase
through fantasy on the road to Wonderland. You've tried inventing more
here than ever, so I have to assume this is an important finding of the
prosectors, since you're so adamant in defending DVP and yourself and
saying "it ain't so...:)

Chris

[mainframetech]

Don't bother to speak for "we", because you don't always speak for any
crowd. And you'll get the link as often as I want to put it out there.
You're also not the only person that might screw up their courage and use
a link like this.

And the information (if you had gone to look at it) is obviously NOT
any first impression, which you're trying to get away with conning folks
into believing. It's clear from the context that the prosectors are going
through the body a point at a time, and this is when they addressed the
upper back wound and the fact that they were unable to find the bullet
from it.

Also, the finding they made for the upper back wound that "There's NO
EXIT" was made for the first and only time during the whole autopsy, so
there isn't some 'collecting' of information and assessing it before
making the final report.

Note too, that I checked the final autopsy report, and it halfway
admits that the findings for the upper back wound were indeed correct.
The report says "The missile path through the fascia and musculature
cannot be easily proved". And leaves it there. Later they say it
connected to the throat wound, but they were unable to say how or through
what tissues it went to get there...:)

Then the report also said "The wound presumably of exit was that
described by Dr. Malcolm Perry of Dallas in the low anterior cervical
region."

LOL! "presumably"!! They couldn't put down what they had discovered
during the autopsy, that "There's NO EXIT", but they used a word that
really means they were guessing....where's all that being sure after
collecting all the findings? Huh? Huh?

Note too that they ended up by saying something that takes away from
all their guessing as to whether the bullet came out the throat wound, by
saying:

"Both the visceral and parietal pleura are intact overlying these areas
of trauma."

The one pleura covers the lungs, and the other covers the digestive
system, and NEITHER was broken or torn in any way. They found only
contusions on the right lung (bruises) which is what James Jenkins said.
And he said the bruises were on the middle portion of the lung, so what
that means is that no bullet broke through the pleura, and therefore
didn't go to the throat, because they would have HAD to go through the
pleura to get there. So they found a way in the report to say the same
thing as they said during the autopsy, that "There's NO EXIT" for that
bullet. And the SBT is dead...:)

Here is the link for those that haven't the guts to look it up so far:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page.

And here's the report of the interview with James Jenkins:

"Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound in JFK's upper posterior
thorax, that did not transit the body. He recalled Dr. Humes sticking his
finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes' finger making an indentation in
the intact pleura as he viewed Humes' probing from the other side, where
the right lung would have been before its removal. The pleura was intact.

Jenkins also recalled seeing a bruise at the top of the middle lobe of the
right lung (but not at the top, or apex of the right lung)."

Note the similarity between the FBI agents testimonies and Jenkins, as
well as the autopsy report.

[bigdog]

On Thursday, October 16, 2014 2:07:02 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:

> Wrong yet again! I started with the notion that this case was one of
> conspiracy, and then reviewed each person's ability to be a witness.

This statement says it all. Chris started with the assumption that it was
a conspiracy than chose the witnesses that would support his assumption.
Of course this is the problem of all conspiracy hobbyists. Usually they
won't admit it but sometimes they inadvertently let the truth out.

[Mark Florio]

Would you take a moment to reread the above, especially your last
paragraph. This a prime example of why you people are not taken
seriously. So many factoids and theys taken from conspiracy books. No
recognition of how many people would have to have been involved in your
conspiracy. The Marines on Okinawa had the bravery to run towards
Japanese machine guns, but not one of your military or civilian
conspirators had the guts to drop a dime on anyone. I see. Makes great
sense. Mark Florio.

[Anthony Marsh]

Wrong. The bullet bruised the TOP of the lung.

[mainframetech]

Wow Mark! Have I got news for you! The above information comes from
various witnesses that have complained of the FBI changing their
statements or telling them to shut upm, not from 'conspiracy books'. You
were sold a bill of goods that I get information from those books all the
time, and it just wasn't true. Here's an example of intimidation of a
witness:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaCCd0hzLsY

I've come across many complaints like that over the years of reading
witness statements.

As to the information that I recently have been passing around about
the bullet from the upper back wound not going past JFK, and never going
into Connally, that comes from sworn testimony. Wanna give it a try?
Most LNs shrink from looking over sworn testimony like this, but if you
screw up your courage, you can bear it. Here's the link:

https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=68509

Read 'page 111' lower left of page. It's only about 10 lines of text.

Good luck,

Chris

[mainframetech]

Wrong again! It's amazing how many things you can get wrong in one
sitting! You're losing all your abilities...:)

As it turns out, I was a dyed in the wool LN from the beginning. I
couldn't understand all the noise about a simple 'lone nut' killing. But
over time, I kept hearing things and it didn't go away. I looked into it,
and sure enough, it WAS a conspiracy. Plain as the nose of your face!
And the more I looked into it, the more it proved itself. You just
haven't reached that point yet, but you will.

The "inadvertent" truth that was let out was that the prosectors
dwetermined that the upper back bullet never exited the body. In their
words "There's NO EXIT". Even their Final Autopsy Report says basically
the same thing with only a sort of 'add-on' that they popped in of the
bullet somehow connection with throat wound. They couldn't explain how in
the report though...:)

Chris

[Sandy McCroskey]

I imagine Chris is scratching his head now, trying to figure out where
you see a problem.

You could try explaining it to him...

Good luck with that!

[Anthony Marsh]

You are being silly again. You can find SWORN testimony that UFOs exist.
That does not make it a fact.

[tims...@gmail.com]

You don't remember posting this?:

QUOTE ON:

Poor fellow! Here they are if you really need them...not that you do much
research...:)

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/wcexhibits.htm
Those that don't have a blue number, don't have a link to the item,
suggesting that it is missing.

QUOTE OFF

Astounded Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

[bigdog]

You wrote this: "I started with the notion that this case was one of
conspiracy,". It's on the record. Conspiracy hobbyists like to pretend
otherwise but occassionally, a rare bit of honesty slips out.

[Peter Makres]

You can find plenty of people who believe that there was a conspiracy to
kill JFK, but that does not make it a fact.

[THOMAS THISTLEWOOD]

On Friday, October 17, 2014 9:49:33 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:

UFOs do exist. They exist as unidentified flying objects not alien or
illegal alien spacecraft.

[mainframetech]

Wrong again! You just can't keep from trying to brainwash everyone!.
I've never started looking at the JFK case as a conspiracy first. I
started out as an LN who wasn't much into conspiracies. Over time I heard
more and more and soon when I looked into it, I found it WAS a conspiracy!

However, I may have used that phrase when approaching a portion of the
case, like the autopsy. Once I had made the decision that it was a
conspiracy, when I went into any part of the case I went in with "the
notion that this case was one of conspiracy". It was helpful for seeing
truth in each part of the case.

Show the context of the statement and it'll become evident what the
intent was...:)

Chris

[mainframetech]

Ah yes! I do remember. The list I was using had the problem, not some
other lists that were more complete. And I certainly apologize for
misleading anyone.

In the JFK case I will still state that there are things missing though.
Like some of the autopsy photos and X-rays, for instance.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

OTOH, you can find a handful of people who still believe in the WC, But

that does not make it a fact.

BTW, the HSCA said conspiracy, but also had it's own SBT. That does not
make it fact either.

[mainframetech]

There's plenty of evidence in the record. The evidence just above
proves that the wacky 'single bullet' theory of the WC lawyers was phony
from the get-go. Since the bullet from the upper back wound never went
through JFK, Connally was never hit by it, and therefore we have a
conspiracy, since no one siting on the 6th floor could have fired that
many bullets in the time allowed. Connally was hit by a different
shooter.

Chris

[bigdog]

On Saturday, October 18, 2014 9:39:48 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> Wrong again! You just can't keep from trying to brainwash everyone!.
> I've never started looking at the JFK case as a conspiracy first. I
> started out as an LN who wasn't much into conspiracies. Over time I heard
> more and more and soon when I looked into it, I found it WAS a conspiracy!
>
> However, I may have used that phrase when approaching a portion of the
> case, like the autopsy. Once I had made the decision that it was a
> conspiracy, when I went into any part of the case I went in with "the
> notion that this case was one of conspiracy". It was helpful for seeing
> truth in each part of the case.
>
> Show the context of the statement and it'll become evident what the
> intent was...:)
>

The context does nothing for your statement. It speaks for itself.

By the way, are you ever going to get around to telling us how a bullet
that was so underpowered that it only penetrated a few inches into soft
flesh could have had enough velocity to maintain its trajectory enough to
reach the intended target or are you going to continue to ignore that
inconvenient question?

[mainframetech]

Are you so foolish as to question that, when you can find the answer
on the 'net? In a case like this, there is a correct angle for any rifle
(or pistol) to use to hit the back and go in a short distance. We don't
know which shooter fired that bullet, or where they were hiding, so the
angle and the type of weapon would be needed. The fact is that there is a
set of criteria for any rifle or pistol anywhere in or around Dealey Plaza
that will product the same exact results. Ask anyone familiar with
weaponry. Your friend Marsh might help you out there...:)



Now here's a question for YOU. How did the shipping casket with the
body of JFK get to Bethesda 42 minutes before the Bronze casket that
everyone saw being taken off the plane? Given that they both started at
approximately the same time from the airport. The Bronze casket was in a
motorcade with the Kennedys and the FBI and SS agents and a string of
cars. Let me know if your man enough for the challenge. Many LNs have
been asked, but only one tried to answer...:)

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

The get-go was late in the invesitgation, May 1964.

> through JFK, Connally was never hit by it, and therefore we have a
> conspiracy, since no one siting on the 6th floor could have fired that
> many bullets in the time allowed. Connally was hit by a different
> shooter.
>

Who allotted the time?

> Chris
>

[bigdog]

On Sunday, October 19, 2014 10:07:44 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
> On Sunday, October 19, 2014 1:52:05 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> > On Saturday, October 18, 2014 9:39:48 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Wrong again! You just can't keep from trying to brainwash everyone!.
>
> >
>
> > > I've never started looking at the JFK case as a conspiracy first. I
>
> >
>
> > > started out as an LN who wasn't much into conspiracies. Over time I heard
>
> >
>
> > > more and more and soon when I looked into it, I found it WAS a conspiracy!
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > However, I may have used that phrase when approaching a portion of the
>
> >
>
> > > case, like the autopsy. Once I had made the decision that it was a
>
> >
>
> > > conspiracy, when I went into any part of the case I went in with "the
>
> >
>
> > > notion that this case was one of conspiracy". It was helpful for seeing
>
> >
>
> > > truth in each part of the case.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > Show the context of the statement and it'll become evident what the
>
> >
>
> > > intent was...:)
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > The context does nothing for your statement. It speaks for itself.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > By the way, are you ever going to get around to telling us how a bullet
> > that was so underpowered that it only penetrated a few inches into soft
> > flesh could have had enough velocity to maintain its trajectory enough to
> > reach the intended target or are you going to continue to ignore that
> > inconvenient question?
>
> Are you so foolish as to question that, when you can find the answer
> on the 'net?

Is this your version of Tony Marsh's "learn to google"?

> In a case like this, there is a correct angle for any rifle
> (or pistol) to use to hit the back and go in a short distance. We don't
> know which shooter fired that bullet, or where they were hiding, so the
> angle and the type of weapon would be needed. The fact is that there is a
> set of criteria for any rifle or pistol anywhere in or around Dealey Plaza
> that will product the same exact results. Ask anyone familiar with
> weaponry. Your friend Marsh might help you out there...:)

Yes, if one knows he is firing a weak round with a low velocity, one can
adjust the aiming point. The obvious question is why would an assassin
knowingly use such a round? If you are trying to kill someone, why would
you use such a round that would be unlikely to produce a kill shot an
would also require a significant compensation to allow for the drop of the
bullet. It's silly but most conspiracy theories are.

>
> Now here's a question for YOU. How did the shipping casket with the
> body of JFK get to Bethesda 42 minutes before the Bronze casket that
> everyone saw being taken off the plane?

It didn't. FACTOID!!!

> Given that they both started at
> approximately the same time from the airport. The Bronze casket was in a
> motorcade with the Kennedys and the FBI and SS agents and a string of
> cars. Let me know if your man enough for the challenge. Many LNs have
> been asked, but only one tried to answer...:)
>

You ask a question with a false pretense and you expect an answer?

Aren't you a little old to be believing in fairy tales?

[tims...@gmail.com]

TOP POST

CHRIS QUOTE ON:

The list I was using had the problem, not some other lists that were more
complete.

CHRIS QUOTE OFF

Chris, we are talking about the BASIC list of WC exhibits, starting from
Exhibit # 1!

This is simply BASIC JFK research stuff!

You are now blaming the website you used for YOUR own mistake?!!

Brings to mind the saying about the poor workman blaming his tools.

You are certainly in NO position to be lecturing others about their
alleged research shortcomings, Chris.

Or coming to some of the WILD conclusions about the JFK assassination that
you are reaching.

You simply DON'T KNOW what you're talking about.

Astounded Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

On Sunday, 19 October 2014 12:41:43 UTC+11, mainframetech wrote:
> On Friday, October 17, 2014 9:58:27 PM UTC-4, tims...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, 16 October 2014 13:59:48 UTC+11, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Tuesday, October 14, 2014 7:38:23 PM UTC-4, tims...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > On Monday, 13 October 2014 13:22:56 UTC+11, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > On Sunday, October 12, 2014 2:59:05 PM UTC-4, tims...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > On Sunday, 12 October 2014 01:51:12 UTC+11, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > On Friday, October 10, 2014 3:06:01 PM UTC-4, cmikes wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 10:43:54 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > On 10/8/2014 10:40 AM, cmikes wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:19:13 PM UTC-4, Mike wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> If this case is ever reopened the Single Bullet Theory will not survive.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> It will be DOA.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> The only hope that the WC crowd has it to make sure this case is never
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> reopened.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> The shenanigans that you all can get away with here on the internet will
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> not be possible in a real court room.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> There is absolutely no doubt that if this case is reopened the Single
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >>
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >> Bullet Theory will be discredited and removed.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > > > > Can you name one single piece of evidence from the conspiracy theorist
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > > > >
>
> >
>

> >...

[mainframetech]

On Monday, October 20, 2014 7:36:26 PM UTC-4, tims...@gmail.com wrote:
> TOP POST
>
>
>
> CHRIS QUOTE ON:
>
>
>
> The list I was using had the problem, not some other lists that were more
>
> complete.
>
>
>
> CHRIS QUOTE OFF
>
>
>
> Chris, we are talking about the BASIC list of WC exhibits, starting from
>
> Exhibit # 1!
>
>
>
> This is simply BASIC JFK research stuff!
>
>
>
> You are now blaming the website you used for YOUR own mistake?!!
>
>
>
> Brings to mind the saying about the poor workman blaming his tools.
>
>
>
> You are certainly in NO position to be lecturing others about their
>
> alleged research shortcomings, Chris.
>

Looks like it's time to lecture YOU on things. Trying to dump on me
won't get you anywhere. I can show you the list which works just fine for
many of the 'exhibits' from the WC, and that I sued back then. Then the
issue was raised that what I was talking about was missing items, shows in
that list, and your welcome to try it out yourself. However, my gain was
that the point was made and now I use other lists. There is NOT a single
"basic list" and you need to get a grip on that information. This is
simple basic logic, and I'm sure if you try, you can get a hold on it, and
it won't slip away.


Here's the list I used back then:

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/wcexhibits.htm

>
>
> Or coming to some of the WILD conclusions about the JFK assassination that
>
> you are reaching.
>
>
>
> You simply DON'T KNOW what you're talking about.
>

Sadly, you seem not to know how to make a point without being insulting,
but that's OK. I know many people have their personal quirks and I can
deal with them. But you really need to hone your debating or arguing
skills a bit.

Now, if your going to say I'm making "WILD conclusions", then you need
to note what they are, since I've said various things. And if you mean
everything I've said, then pick an example. That allows me to look up
what you're talking about and make a sensible response. The method you
actually used doesn't allow for any debate at all, and is more often used
by those that are afraid of a response, so they do what they can to avoid
one.

Oratorial regards,

Chris

[mainframetech]

On Monday, October 20, 2014 7:31:11 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
> On Sunday, October 19, 2014 10:07:44 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > On Sunday, October 19, 2014 1:52:05 PM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Saturday, October 18, 2014 9:39:48 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Wrong again! You just can't keep from trying to brainwash everyone!.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > I've never started looking at the JFK case as a conspiracy first. I
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > started out as an LN who wasn't much into conspiracies. Over time I heard
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > more and more and soon when I looked into it, I found it WAS a conspiracy!
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > However, I may have used that phrase when approaching a portion of the
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > case, like the autopsy. Once I had made the decision that it was a
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > conspiracy, when I went into any part of the case I went in with "the
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > notion that this case was one of conspiracy". It was helpful for seeing
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > truth in each part of the case.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > Show the context of the statement and it'll become evident what the
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > intent was...:)
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > The context does nothing for your statement. It speaks for itself.
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > By the way, are you ever going to get around to telling us how a bullet
>
> > > that was so underpowered that it only penetrated a few inches into soft
>
> > > flesh could have had enough velocity to maintain its trajectory enough to
>
> > > reach the intended target or are you going to continue to ignore that
>
> > > inconvenient question?
>
> >
>
> > Are you so foolish as to question that, when you can find the answer
>
> > on the 'net?
>
>
>
> Is this your version of Tony Marsh's "learn to google"?
>

No useful information. Ignored.

>
>
> > In a case like this, there is a correct angle for any rifle
>
> > (or pistol) to use to hit the back and go in a short distance. We don't
>
> > know which shooter fired that bullet, or where they were hiding, so the
>
> > angle and the type of weapon would be needed. The fact is that there is a
>
> > set of criteria for any rifle or pistol anywhere in or around Dealey Plaza
>
> > that will product the same exact results. Ask anyone familiar with
>
> > weaponry. Your friend Marsh might help you out there...:)
>
>
>
> Yes, if one knows he is firing a weak round with a low velocity, one can
>
> adjust the aiming point. The obvious question is why would an assassin
>
> knowingly use such a round? If you are trying to kill someone, why would
>
> you use such a round that would be unlikely to produce a kill shot an
>
> would also require a significant compensation to allow for the drop of the
>
> bullet. It's silly but most conspiracy theories are.
>

Nope, wrong again! No one said anything about someone knowing they
were firing a "weak round". A bullet doesn't have to aimed and planned
for just to make sure that a weak round will get to the target. It's
possible for a bullet to be fired at a target, and although it misses the
target, it gets close and then is slowed and stopped by flesh because it's
weak. It had just enough velocity to carry it to the back of JFK, but not
much further. But of course, we have the proof that not only did the
prosectors find that the bullet did NOT go further and that the track
stopped an inch or two into the body, but James Jenkins saw it from the
inside and KNEW that the bullet track ended at the pleura. After that
information, there's no other explanation worth beans. Simple.

>
>
> >
>
> > Now here's a question for YOU. How did the shipping casket with the
>
> > body of JFK get to Bethesda 42 minutes before the Bronze casket that
>
> > everyone saw being taken off the plane?
>
>
>
> It didn't. FACTOID!!!
>

Now don't you feel awful silly? Since the body of JFK was seen to come
out of the shipping casket, and the times were recorded by various people
of the arrival of the 2 caskets, we have good documentation that the
shipping casket arrived at the morgue 42 minutes BEFORE the Bronze casket.
Easy to say it didn't, but then you need to explain how the shipping
casket with the body got there so soon...:) I'm waiting...

>
>
> > Given that they both started at
>
> > approximately the same time from the airport. The Bronze casket was in a
>
> > motorcade with the Kennedys and the FBI and SS agents and a string of
>
> > cars. Let me know if your man enough for the challenge. Many LNs have
>
> > been asked, but only one tried to answer...:)
>
> >
>
>
>
> You ask a question with a false pretense and you expect an answer?
>
>
>
> Aren't you a little old to be believing in fairy tales?

Why not explain yourself? You've ignored evidence which states the
times and the contents of the caskets, and then run away with a fast
comment. Not too cool, eh? I would suggest that you have NO ANSWER, and
so running away is your only escape from the pending question.

Sergeant Roger Boyajian gave the time of arrival of the shipping casket
as 6:35pm in his after action report. The FBI gave the time of the
arrival of the Bronze casket at the morgue back door as 7:17pm. That's 42
minutes, and Edward Reed and others saw JFK's body come out of the
shipping casket at 6:35pm. Why not explain your comment that "it didn't"?

Or should we believe that you have serious denial issues?

Chris

[bigdog]

On Tuesday, October 21, 2014 7:19:52 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> Nope, wrong again! No one said anything about someone knowing they
> were firing a "weak round". A bullet doesn't have to aimed and planned
> for just to make sure that a weak round will get to the target. It's
> possible for a bullet to be fired at a target, and although it misses the
> target, it gets close and then is slowed and stopped by flesh because it's
> weak. It had just enough velocity to carry it to the back of JFK, but not
> much further.

Do you have any idea how slowly that bullet would have to be traveling in
order for it to only penetrate a few inches into soft flesh? You can have
a bullet that reaches the target or you can have bullet so slow it would
only penetrate a few inches into soft flesh, but you can't have both in
the same bullet unless the shooter knows it is grossly underpowered and
adjusts his aim accordingly.

> But of course, we have the proof that not only did the
> prosectors find that the bullet did NOT go further and that the track
> stopped an inch or two into the body, but James Jenkins saw it from the
> inside and KNEW that the bullet track ended at the pleura. After that
> information, there's no other explanation worth beans. Simple.
>

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

> > > Now here's a question for YOU. How did the shipping casket with the
> > > body of JFK get to Bethesda 42 minutes before the Bronze casket that
> > > everyone saw being taken off the plane?
>
> > It didn't. FACTOID!!!
>
> Now don't you feel awful silly? Since the body of JFK was seen to come
> out of the shipping casket, and the times were recorded by various people
> of the arrival of the 2 caskets, we have good documentation that the
> shipping casket arrived at the morgue 42 minutes BEFORE the Bronze casket.
> Easy to say it didn't, but then you need to explain how the shipping
> casket with the body got there so soon...:) I'm waiting...
>

Repeating a factoid doesn't make it a fact and therefore requires no
explaination for something that didn't happen.

> > > Given that they both started at
> > > approximately the same time from the airport. The Bronze casket was in a
> > > motorcade with the Kennedys and the FBI and SS agents and a string of
> > > cars. Let me know if your man enough for the challenge. Many LNs have
> > > been asked, but only one tried to answer...:)
>
> > You ask a question with a false pretense and you expect an answer?
>
> > Aren't you a little old to be believing in fairy tales?
>
>
>
>
> Why not explain yourself? You've ignored evidence which states the
> times and the contents of the caskets, and then run away with a fast
> comment. Not too cool, eh? I would suggest that you have NO ANSWER, and
> so running away is your only escape from the pending question.
>
> Sergeant Roger Boyajian gave the time of arrival of the shipping casket
> as 6:35pm in his after action report. The FBI gave the time of the
> arrival of the Bronze casket at the morgue back door as 7:17pm. That's 42
> minutes, and Edward Reed and others saw JFK's body come out of the
> shipping casket at 6:35pm. Why not explain your comment that "it didn't"?
>

JFK wasn't in the shipping casket. That was somebody else. Some people who
knew JFK's body was being delivered assumed it was in the shipping casket,
but it arrived later in the bronze casket with the broken handles. But
keep believing in your fairy tales. That why you never have to worry about
learning the truth which would really bum you out.