THE HEAD-SHOT BULLET FRAGMENTS (CE567 & CE569)
David Von Pein
www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8836d2a6ed78cee5
>>> "It is not necessary to link them [CE567 & CE569] to the head wound to prove that they were fired from Oswald's rifle. They were ballistically matched to Oswald's rifle. They could have come from a different shot. Maybe Mark Furhman thinks that they came from the bullet which exited Kennedy's throat and hit the chrome topping. I think they came from the bullet which hit Connally's wrist." <<<
You're both wrong.
The front-seat fragments had NO CHOICE but to have come from the
bullet that struck JFK in the head. There is no other alternative
given the ballistics evidence in this case (coupled with common sense
and a grip on reality):
1.) John Connally was hit by just ONE bullet.
2.) The bullet that hit Connally was CE399 (beyond all reasonable
doubt).
3.) Since #1 and #2 are certainly true, it means that the front-seat
bullet fragments (CE567 and CE569) never touched the body of John B.
Connally Jr.
4.) The bullet that split into fragments 567 & 569 hit something FIRST
before ending up in the front seat of the limo (this is unquestionably
true, because if Oswald's bullet had hit the windshield or chrome
strip at full velocity, that bullet would have gone clear through the
windshield glass and/or the chrome strip -- per Robert Frazier of the
FBI).
5.) The limousine was completely undamaged, except for the crack in
the windshield and the dent in the chrome strip.
6.) No limo occupants other than JFK and John Connally were hit by
bullets during the shooting in Dealey Plaza.
7.) There were no obstructions (e.g., trees) between the muzzle of Lee
Harvey Oswald's rifle and the back of John F. Kennedy's head at the
time when JFK was struck in the back of his head by the fatal bullet
at Zapruder Frame #313.
8.) Since #3 through #7 above are true, then the only possible source
for the fragmentation of the bullet from Rifle #C2766 that produced
fragments #567 and #569 was the head of President Kennedy.
~~Mark VII~~
Perry, your witness.
(You have no case, Perry, but that never stops a conspiracy-happy kook
from trying, does it now?)
>>> "The two large fragments did not have to go through Kennedy's head in order to have been fired from Oswald's rifle." <<<
Yes, they most certainly did. And I just succinctly proved that fact
(via logic and common sense) in my eight-step chronology above.
>>> "How do you get an intact bullet leaving Kennedy's head on a DOWNWARD trajectory to fall into the front seat?" <<<
Why on Earth would you think the bullet would have to be "intact"
after having just passed through and destroyed a nice-sized chunk of
John Kennedy's skull?
And: Why on Earth would you think such a bullet, after having smashed
through a human skull, necessarily had to stay on the exact same 17.43-
degree downward course that it was on when it left Oswald's gun an
instant earlier?
(Geesh. Tony's making this easier than usual today.)
>>> "Are you Houdini?" <<<
A better question to ask Tony The Kook at this point would be --- Are
you kidding??!!
>>> "Answer this question. The base fragment was only the jacket. The lead core was missing. Where did that lead core go? Prove it. Show it to me." <<<
And if I can't "show it" to you, then you (being the conspiracy-giddy
clown that we all know you are) get to believe in a bunch of stupid,
off-the-wall shit.
Right, Anthony?
Thought so.
robcap...@netscape.com
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8836d2a6ed78cee5
>
> >>> "It is not necessary to link them [CE567 & CE569] to the head wound to prove that they were fired from Oswald's rifle. They were ballistically matched to Oswald's rifle. They could have come from a different shot. Maybe Mark Furhman thinks that they came from the bullet which exited Kennedy's throat and hit the chrome topping. I think they came from the bullet which hit Connally's wrist." <<<
>
> You're both wrong.
Correction - You are ALL wrong! First off, there is NO proof these
fragments were part of the shooting sequence on 11/22/63, let alone
part of the bullets that hit JFK in the head. There is NO chain of
custody for them, and they lack any evidence of being connected to
either victim.
> The front-seat fragments had NO CHOICE but to have come from the
> bullet that struck JFK in the head. There is no other alternative
> given the ballistics evidence in this case (coupled with common sense
> and a grip on reality):
EXACTLY!! Finally Dave is being honest. It is ironic he refers to the
ballistic evidence since the WC ignored it constantly. There are many
other, more realistic, options as we all know the lone gunman theory
is bunk. JFK was hit with two separate bullets in the head and
neither one was from a 6.5mm weapon. I ask you to PROVE these two
fragments came from one bullet Dave! The WC couldn't so it is on you
to do so.
> 1.) John Connally was hit by just ONE bullet.
NOT according to him and he should know! Now prove this assertion of
yours.
> 2.) The bullet that hit Connally was CE399 (beyond all reasonable
> doubt).
Really? Then why was there more fragment in his wrist (in terms of
weight) than what was missing from the magic bullet? Please shed
light on this for us.
> 3.) Since #1 and #2 are certainly true, it means that the front-seat
> bullet fragments (CE567 and CE569) never touched the body of John B.
> Connally Jr.
You have provided NO PROOF that #1 and #2 are correct, yet you are
assuming they are. Why? Is this how a court of law works? I don't
think so. I don't think they tounched the body of anyone, but if you
want to insist they did, you need to PROVE it.
> 4.) The bullet that split into fragments 567 & 569 hit something FIRST
> before ending up in the front seat of the limo (this is unquestionably
> true, because if Oswald's bullet had hit the windshield or chrome
> strip at full velocity, that bullet would have gone clear through the
> windshield glass and/or the chrome strip -- per Robert Frazier of the
> FBI).
Totally false, but I do agree with you in terms of them hitting
something first, it was whatever the conspirators fired it into.
Probably a pice of wood, concrete or something similar.
> 5.) The limousine was completely undamaged, except for the crack in
> the windshield and the dent in the chrome strip.
NOT true, there are many mentions of damage to the BACK seat (note:
NOT the front seats) by witnesses who saw the limo. Those at Ford saw
a hole in the windshield as did witnesses at Parkland. Here are some
of them from his work:
"Richard Dudman, a reporter for The St. Louis Post Dispatch, for
example, wrote in an article entitled "Commentary of an Eyewitness"
that appeared in The New Republic (21 December 1963): "A few of us
noticed the hole in the windshield when the limousine was standing at
the emergency entrance after the President had been carried inside. I
could not approach close enough to see which side was the cup-shaped
spot that indicates a bullet had pierced the glass from the opposite
side."
Dudman told interviewers that a Secret Service agent shoved him and
the other reporters away when he tried to examine the hole to
determine the direction from which it had been fired. It is
interesting to note that Dudman became aware of no less than five
bullets that were fired in Dealey Plaza that day. Dudman was also
critical of the lack of security on the top of the triple overpass,
noting that the standing Secret Service orders were to keep the
overpass clear. That order was violated that day. He also wrote that:
"The south end of the viaduct is four short blocks from the office of
The Dallas Morning News, where Jack Ruby was seen before and after the
shooting... No one remembered for sure seeing Ruby between 12:15 and
12:45. The shooting was at 12:30." Mr. Dudman has declined to discuss
the assassination with anyone for many years, while his earlier
commentary bears mute witness to his present silence."
"Former Dallas Police Officer H.R. Freeman, who rode in the motorcade,
noted in a 1971 interview by Gil Toff of his observation of the
limousine at Parkland Hospital immediately after the shooting, **"I
was right beside it. I could have touched it. It was a bullet hole.
You could tell what it was."** And he was not the only police officer
- a type of witness usually prized for his accurate and reliable
observations - who saw similar damage to the glass. Dallas Police
Officer Stavis Ellis, who was in charge of the motorcade escort
through Dallas, remarked, in later interviews to reporters and on
radio programs, **"You could put a pencil through it."** Over
extensive interviews with this author, Mr. Ellis was unequivocal about
observing the hole. His recollection was that the hole was lower in
the windshield, but he is absolutely certain of its existence. He did
describe the hole as being on the driver's side of the rearview
mirror, which is consistent with other observations and the
photographic evidence. He recalls actually placing a pencil in the
hole. He recounted that there were numerous people and police officers
at Parkland Hospital who viewed the hole. He vividly remembers that
while he was observing the hole a Secret Service agent came up to him
and tried to persuade him that he was seeing a "fragment" and not a
hole." Excerpts from "Murder in Dealey Plaza" (2000)
There is NO way to account for all of the damage to the car with just
two shots hitting as per the WC. Mr. Weldon describes the car being
taken apart and rebuilt. They changed the rugs, the seats, the
windshield, etc... all before the investigators could look at it.
Why?
Finally, I remember a women who was a medical student at the adjacent
hospital who witnessed the hole (she was with another doctor who has
remained quiet and anonymous all these years) and told Mr. Weldon
about it in 1997 or 1998. I can't remember her name off the top of my
head, it is the book, but she met him in Feb. '97 or '98 to recall her
story, and he says she is dead within a month of the interview. She
had been planning a vacation and also practicing, so it seems quite
unlikely there was anything medically wrong with her (she would have
told him this as well) so this is another strange death in this long
story.
>6.) No limo occupants other than JFK and John Connally were hit by
>bullets during the shooting in Dealey Plaza.
So???? What does this prove? Nothing is the answer.
> 7.) There were no obstructions (e.g., trees) between the muzzle of Lee
> Harvey Oswald's rifle and the back of John F. Kennedy's head at the
> time when JFK was struck in the back of his head by the fatal bullet
> at Zapruder Frame #313.
Again, what does hypothesizing prove? There was the large tree still
in the lower part of the LOS. He was also shot further down the road
than what the WC said (265 feet) so this is a very unlikely shot.
> 8.) Since #3 through #7 above are true, then the only possible source
> for the fragmentation of the bullet from Rifle #C2766 that produced
> fragments #567 and #569 was the head of President Kennedy.
I love how Dave never PROVES anything, but he makes the assumption
like he has. Where is the proof for statements #3-#7? Even if his
statement was true, AND IT IS NOT, what does this prove in terms of
LHO? Nothing. They never proved he owned the rifle, they never
proved he fired the rifle on 11/22/63 (or any recent time), they never
proved the chain of custody for the two fragments, they never proved
both fragments came from one bullet, they never proved either fragment
had been in JFK, and they never proved anything other than a high-
velocity rifle (which the M-C was NOT) bullet killed JFK.
> ~~Mark VII~~
>
> Perry, your witness.
>
> (You have no case, Perry, but that never stops a conspiracy-happy kook
> from trying, does it now?)
What??? You have provided ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF and this boob is acting
like he has refuted everything! LOL!!!
> >>> "The two large fragments did not have to go through Kennedy's head in order to have been fired from Oswald's rifle." <<<
>
> Yes, they most certainly did. And I just succinctly proved that fact
> (via logic and common sense) in my eight-step chronology above.
What??? Where is the proof again? The WC couldn't even prove they
came from the same bullet! They never proved they had been in JFK's
head either. Eave is lying his butt off.
> >>> "How do you get an intact bullet leaving Kennedy's head on a DOWNWARD trajectory to fall into the front seat?" <<<
>
> Why on Earth would you think the bullet would have to be "intact"
> after having just passed through and destroyed a nice-sized chunk of
> John Kennedy's skull?
Oh, I don't know, maybe because the other official bullet caused 7
wounds and broke two bones and came out intact!!!! Prove a skull is
thicker than a rib bone and a wrist bone.
> And: Why on Earth would you think such a bullet, after having smashed
> through a human skull, necessarily had to stay on the exact same 17.43-
> degree downward course that it was on when it left Oswald's gun an
> instant earlier?
Explain why a skull would shatter a FMJ (the alleged ammo LHO used)
whereas a rib bone and a wrist bone (and the spinal bone too) did
NOT!!!! We are waiting Dave.
> (Geesh. Tony's making this easier than usual today.)
It is always easy when you lie and offer no proof.
> >>> "Answer this question. The base fragment was only the jacket. The lead core was missing. Where did that lead core go? Prove it. Show it to me." <<<
>
> And if I can't "show it" to you, then you (being the conspiracy-giddy
> clown that we all know you are) get to believe in a bunch of stupid,
> off-the-wall shit.
>
> Right, Anthony?
>
> Thought so.
The dancers on Broadway have NOTHING on Dave. Picture him with his
top hat and cane, dancing a quick two-step side step off the stage.
That's all folks!!
David Von Pein
When did John Connally EVER say he was of the opinion that more than
just ONE bullet struck him?
Please provide cites for this claim.
<excising all other kookshit spouted by the mega-kook>
robcap...@netscape.com
You are distorting the point. The point is JBC, and his wife Nellie,
always said HE WAS NOT HIT WITH THE SAME BULLET AS JFK, therefore you
have no SBT.
This is all Dave could muster to all my points? Very sad Dave.
tomnln
"robcap...@netscape.com" <robc...@netscape.com> wrote in message
news:50606fe8-c1ab-495e...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
JBC's Dr. said JBC was hit by more than 1 bullet.
David Von Pein
And the fact of John Connally saying that he didn't think he was hit
by the same bullet that hit JFK somehow all of a sudden means (per Rob
The Kook) that Connally must have thought that HE HIMSELF was hit by
TWO separate bullets.
What an idiot Rob is.
robcap...@netscape.com
He sure did, and the film in spite of being hacked and edited shows
this. You have to disprove JBC's comment that he was NOT hit with the
same bullet as JFK, why haven't you? IF he is NOT hit with the same
bullet (and we know this because he said so and JFK's body supports
this) that means he was hit with multiple shots unless you can come up
with another "magic bullet" scenario for him.
And I'm the idiot. LOL!!! How about all my other points Dave? NO
comment on them?
Gil Jesus
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/8836d2a6ed78cee5
>
> >>> "It is not necessary to link them [CE567 & CE569] to the head wound to prove that they were fired from Oswald's rifle. They were ballistically matched to Oswald's rifle. They could have come from a different shot. Maybe Mark Furhman thinks that they came from the bullet which exited Kennedy's throat and hit the chrome topping. I think they came from the bullet which hit Connally's wrist." <<<
>
> You're both wrong.
>
> The front-seat fragments had NO CHOICE but to have come from the
> bullet that struck JFK in the head. There is no other alternative
> given the ballistics evidence in this case (coupled with common sense
> and a grip on reality):
show us pictures of the "front seat fragments" in their locations as
found.