1.) As everyone can plainly see, Arlen Specter's pointer/rod in
Commission Exhibit No. 903 is pointing to the UPPER BACK (not the
"neck") for the entry wound. If Specter had placed his pointer up into
the "neck" of the JFK stand-in, the SBT trajectory would be ruined:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

2.) As can also be seen quite clearly and plainly, Specter's "entry
wound" location as seen in CE903 perfectly matches the location of
JFK's real upper-back wound, as seen in this autopsy photograph:

http://reclaiming-history.googlegroups.com/web/010.+JFK+AUTOPSY+PHOTO?gda=zJxoR0gAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQ5URfQ_lX4_IhO5SiV_ggdwoUxDqPr3a3rJhy6a6rzuSDH7k_HBP_EtyS7XaNp0ALGjVgdwNi-BwrUzBGT2hOzg

3.) Hence, it's fairly obvious that the Warren Commission DID NOT
require the entry wound in JFK's upper torso to be situated up in the
"NECK" of the President in order for the Single-Bullet Theory
trajectory to be accurate and viable.

4.) Therefore, conspiracy theorists who continue to insist that Gerald
Ford "moved" President Kennedy's upper-back wound up into the "neck"
in order to make the SBT plausible are simply misinformed and are just
flat-out wrong. And CE903 proves that those conspiracists are
wrong...for all eternity.

Let me now quote a fellow "LNer" (and a fabulous researcher):

"To my knowledge, [nobody] has ever explained how moving the
back wound up to THE NECK supports the SBT. Nobody CAN support it,
because moving the entry to the neck would destroy the WC's SBT
trajectory, not strengthen it.

"Again I'll refer you to CE 903. Although Specter didn't drill a
hole in the stand-in's body and drive the rod through it, had he done
so, the entry would be in the upper back, not in the neck. There's a
string on the wall above his hand that shows an angle of about 18
degrees -- that's the approximate angle measured by a surveyor during
the re-enactment and the one the WC used for its SBT. If the rod is
moved up to the neck, the bullet will exit well above the exit wound
under JFK's Adam's apple.

"Or take a look at this photo of JFK:

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/sbt/hsca.jpg

"Try drawing a line of c. 18 degrees backward from the knot in
JFK's tie. Where does it come out? Upper back, right? The claim that
Ford's change "strengthens" the WC's SBT is simply not true. If I
haven't made my point by now, I give up." -- Jean Davison; January 2,
2007 (Via a post at The Education Forum)

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=8861&st=60

Jean Davison is a woman I respect tremendously. She is the author of
the outstanding 1983 book about Lee Harvey Oswald, entitled "Oswald's
Game":

http://www.Oswalds-Game.blogspot.com

=======================================

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/warren-commission-exhibit-903.html

=======================================

aeffects

unread,

Jan 23, 2010, 4:06:56 AM1/23/10

On Jan 22, 10:05 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

no advertising shithead..... you know the drill!

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 23, 2010, 4:47:26 AM1/23/10

GARRY AT YOUTUBE.COM SAID:

>>> "This may be the first time the phrase "Grassy Knoll" was used [via WFAA's early-afternoon coverage on 11/22/63]." <<<

DVP SAID:

WFAA-TV might have been one of the first to use those words, yes. But
Walter Cronkite of CBS, just minutes after the shooting and prior to
1:00 PM CST, uttered the words "Grassy Knoll" on live television via
one of his voice-over bulletins on CBS-TV.

So those words were being spoken literally before JFK had even been
officially pronounced dead. Most people think the term "Grassy Knoll"
was invented many days (or even weeks or months) after the
assassination, which is not true at all.

Regards,
David V.P.

http://www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

http://www.The-JFK-Assassination.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 24, 2010, 2:27:56 AM1/24/10

http://www.JFKAssassinationForum.com/index.php/topic,1685.msg25498.html#msg25498

>>> "In CE903, the POTUS stand-in is sitting too high and the Connally stand-in is too close to the door. .... If you look at any of the films from 11/22/63, they show JFK and Connally's shoulders nearly at the same level. Possibly an inch difference in height. The distance between the two men is larger in the Lincoln than in the Cadillac." <<<

You're wrong. And the Robert Croft photo illustrates the fact that
you're wrong (particularly about the "height" differential between
Kennedy and Connally):

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/031.+CROFT+PHOTO?gda=cth8m0IAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQ0cwGogNcgDZycXgwidLNuEHiDOKFpt85In-Nkpi71WxV4u3aa4iAIyYQIqbG9naPgh6o8ccLBvP6Chud5KMzIQ

By just eyeballing each of the pictures, the Croft photo (which was
taken at approximately the same time as frame 161 of the Zapruder
Film) matches the re-enactment photograph seen in Commission Exhibit
No. 903 very nicely:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

Of course, the pictures weren't taken from the exact same angle, so
that fact must be taken into account as well.

Here's a side-by-side photo comparison:

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/031a.+CROFT-CE903+PHOTO+COMPARISON?gda=I9oRnlQAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQPrdj2WVWkCm4M_PTy2vI9x-WKqxwrQC7N20b3YHz-0UOrQ0MDWKkTBH7Sr7xpxx6VervUohE3YNENn3wMh1Pnc3OAWZC50hVl-fZ6-QcRqg&gsc=8R962AsAAACjbWbR8LOtSIMU89J_amST

>>> "The car [in CE903] is not the Lincoln but the Cadillac. .... The height difference and the distance between the two bodies in the Cadillac is not the same as the Lincoln." <<<

Yes, there were differences between the two automobiles (Kennedy's
Lincoln Continental and the Secret Service's Cadillac follow-up car,
which was the car used by the Warren Commission and FBI during the re-
creation of the assassination in Dealey Plaza on May 24, 1964, because
JFK's SS-100-X limousine wasn't available for the reconstruction
tests). But those differences were taken into account.

Or would some conspiracy theorists now like to call Lyndal Shaneyfelt
of the FBI a liar, too? Here's the relevant testimony provided by
Shaneyfelt on June 4, 1964 [at 5 H 148-149]:

ARLEN SPECTER -- "Was there any difference between the position of
President Kennedy's stand-in and the position of President Kennedy on
the day of the assassination by virtue of any difference in the
automobiles in which each rode?"

LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "Yes; because of the difference in the
automobiles there was a variation of 10 inches, a vertical distance of
10 inches that had to be considered. The stand-in for President
Kennedy was sitting 10 inches higher and the stand-in for Governor
Connally was sitting 10 inches higher than the President and Governor
Connally were sitting and we took this into account in our
calculations."

SPECTER -- "Was any allowance then made in the photographing of the
first point or rather last point at which the spot was visible on the
back of the coat of President Kennedy's stand-in before passing under
the oak tree?"

SHANEYFELT -- "Yes; there was. After establishing this position,
represented by frame 161, where the chalk mark was about to disappear
under the tree, we established a point 10 inches below that as the
actual point where President Kennedy would have had a chalk mark on
his back or where the wound would have been if the car was 10 inches
lower. And we rolled the car then sufficiently forward to reestablish
the position that the chalk mark would be in at its last clear shot
before going under the tree, based on this 10 inches, and this gave us
frame 166 of the Zapruder film."

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh5/html/WC_Vol5_0079b.htm

------------

There is also this (from page 97 of the Warren Report):

"On May 24, 1964, agents of the FBI and Secret Service conducted
a series of tests to determine as precisely as possible what happened
on November 22, 1963. Since the Presidential limousine was being
remodeled and was therefore unavailable, it was simulated by using the
Secret Service followup car, which is similar in design. ANY
DIFFERENCES WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT." [DVP's emphasis.]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0061a.htm

-------------

Plus, we also have the following Warren Commission testimony provided
by Secret Service Inspector Thomas J. Kelley [beginning at 5 H 131]:

ARLEN SPECTER -- "Without specifying all of the details, Inspector
Kelley, are the follow-up car and the Presidential car generally
similar in dimensions?"

THOMAS J. KELLEY -- "Yes, they are. There are very few, of course,
seven-passenger convertible cars in existence, and...these cars are
specially built for us by the...Ford Motor Company, and the followup
car by the General Motors Company."

[...]

SPECTER -- "And what is the differential between the jump seats and
the rear seat on the Secret Service followup car?"

KELLEY -- "The jump seat of the Secret Service car is a little closer
to the right door. However, the seating arrangement is not exactly the
same in these cars, in that there is a portion of a padding that comes
around on the rear seat. But relatively, when two persons are seated
in this car, one in the rear seat and one in the jump seat, they are
in the same alignment as they were in the President’s car."

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh5/html/WC_Vol5_0071a.htm

--------------

And there's also CE871 and CE872, which consist of diagrams of both
the Secret Service Cadillac and JFK's limousine. It's just about
impossible to read the specific numbers written on these two diagrams,
but the differences in the dimensions between the two vehicles seem to
be negligible (plus there's the fact, as mentioned on page 97 of the
Warren Report, that "any differences" between the two cars were "taken
into account" during the May 1964 re-enactment in Dallas):

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0447a.htm

--------------

More pictures of SS-100-X (President Kennedy's limousine):

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/022a.+LIMOUSINE+AT+LOVE+FIELD+ON+11-22-63?gda=XBHwkVsAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQP2VjaF0KpTrv1_ZufhF2oqIFl7W22pCJDLs79VKWEILJajXn2PF2BSGkRGDE0XnpFoUOEw-dNkI0V1EUe2V6IQZF2vdCvKU-TDZpFtcP-AU

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/064.+JFK%27S+LIMOUSINE+AT+THE+WHITE+HOUSE+GARAGE?gda=_LW8wWIAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQ9ZszQ5qZAYVzXIYVnmchNaWnCNwDZVVftMnhvg2XmNhwHeXcXI5qUMDeAumGuGVgoMpnhypQQu06MGC91QOo6VXi7dpriIAjJhAipsb2do-CHqjxxwsG8_oKG53kozMh

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/144.+PRESIDENT+KENNEDY%27S+CUSTOM-BUILT+1961+LINCOLN+CONTINENTAL+LIMOUSINE?gda=vWj8LnwAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQ4Z8TGcK8rZ_LwCXgQ8CAUdIYkC4uCj-pWAfrUY2yqwAxD6vCi7lSEuP6ulsTs3LkcDzuuJWNOEusaIIsRmk3FM-CjS16KoMbrypI_izJZYtpbGxOFSNFenQyOGS88wJH_Vpvmo5s1aABVJRO3P3wLQ

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0447b.htm

====================================================

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/jfk-assassination-reenactment-film.html

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/warren-commission-exhibit-903.html

====================================================

Gil Jesus

unread,

Jan 24, 2010, 7:09:00 AM1/24/10

Herte's the part of CE 903 Von Pein doesn't tell you:

http://i33.tinypic.com/ht5x6h.jpg

http://i33.tinypic.com/2wgx4c0.jpg

He never tells you the whole story

Von Pein = deception by omission

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Jan 24, 2010, 10:26:48 AM1/24/10

I think it's quite possible that the chalk mark on the back of JFK's
stand-in in CE903 has been placed too low. When compared with the
actual bullet hole in JFK's upper back, it sure looks to me as though
the chalk mark has been placed too low on the stand-in's back (as seen
in the top picture below, which is an opposite-angle view of CE903):

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/119a.+OPPOSITE+ANGLE+VIEW+OF+CE903?gda=c_R6tFQAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQouBeclqzQVGerMQn34wZ7-MlpYeBz-8HcRs1Du0J57vNoTg3RoS0TDFR1-dldp1JVervUohE3YNENn3wMh1Pnc3OAWZC50hVl-fZ6-QcRqg

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/010.+JFK+AUTOPSY+PHOTO?gda=SDXhBUgAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQWHOF9b-AI7NrSFyDiWjh-QoUxDqPr3a3rJhy6a6rzuSDH7k_HBP_EtyS7XaNp0ALGjVgdwNi-BwrUzBGT2hOzg

This makes me think that it's possible that the FBI and WC marked the
stand-in's jacket based on the bullet hole IN KENNEDY'S COAT, rather
than the hole in the actual body (skin) of his upper back.

However, I can't find any specific documentation in the Warren
Commission testimony of the FBI's Lyndal Shaneyfelt or Robert Frazier
to support my theory regarding the chalk marks.

Bob Frazier did say this in his WC testimony (which would tend to
refute my above theory about the chalk mark):

"They had marked on the back of the President's coat the
location of the wound, according to the distance from the top of his
head down to the hole in his back as shown in the autopsy figures." --
Robert A. Frazier

The above comment by Frazier, however, is a bit puzzling, since the
official autopsy measurements performed by the doctors at Bethesda did
not utilize the "FROM THE TOP OF HIS HEAD" method for determining
where Kennedy's wounds were located. Dr. Humes, et al, instead used
the "mastoid process" as the body landmark for calculating where the
upper-back bullet hole was located.

So, I'll confess that Frazier's "from the top of his head" testimony
has me scratching my head a little bit.

Anyway, if the JFK stand-in's suit jacket were to be "bunched up" a
little bit (as Kennedy's jacket was when he was shot in the back), the
chalk mark on the stand-in's back would be elevated slightly higher
than it is in the above-linked photo, and therefore the chalk mark
representing the bullet hole almost certainly would merge with Arlen
Specter's pointer in the opposite-angle photograph.

-----------------------

ADDENDUM:

I recently realized something else that is quite important (IMO)
regarding Warren Commission Exhibit #903---

CE903 provides very good circumstantial evidence to buttress the
conclusion that the entry wound in President Kennedy's upper back was
most certainly located HIGHER (anatomically-speaking) than the exit
wound in JFK's throat (despite an opposite conclusion being reached on
that subject by the House Select Committee on Assassinations in the
late 1970s).

COMMISSION EXHIBIT NO. 903:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

Of course, I fully realize that the person standing in for JFK in
CE903 is not the real John Kennedy. And I also realize that you cannot
extract three-dimensional information from a two-dimensional picture.

But even with those two stipulations in place, I think it's fairly
obvious that Arlen Specter's pointer, in CE903, is being placed in a
position that definitely mirrors the true and accurate location of the
throat wound sustained by JFK in Dallas (i.e., the pointer is located
at the location of the JFK stand-in's TIE KNOT, which has been
determined to be the precise spot where a bullet exited President
Kennedy's throat).

And it's also fairly obvious (via just a casual evaluation of CE903)
that the location representing the ENTRY WOUND on the stand-in's upper
back is in a place that is most definitely ANATOMICALLY HIGHER than
the location representing the throat wound.

And: it's also quite obvious (to my eyes anyway) that the man who is
substituting for JFK in CE903 is NOT LEANING FORWARD to any great
extent whatsoever. He is pretty much sitting straight and upright and
relatively erect in the back seat of the car in Commission Exhibit
903.

Hence, the math isn't too difficult here -- the upper-back bullet
wound was ANATOMICALLY HIGHER than the bullet hole in the throat.

This kind of garden-variety photo analysis, of course, is far from
being "scientific" in nature. But I think it's just basic common sense
(coupled with the things that anybody with at least one working
eyeball can easily see in Commission Exhibit No. 903).

And as far as the REAL John F. Kennedy's body is concerned, toggling
back and forth between the two autopsy pictures linked below provides
further photographic indicators that can only lead to one reasonable
conclusion. And that is: JFK's upper-back wound was located HIGHER
than the wound in his throat. (The HSCA's conclusion to the contrary
notwithstanding.) .....

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/009.+JFK+AUTOPSY+PHOTO?gda=H5IgV0gAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQmfihckO-thuceALm4x4vb3VHd7P92WQT_OogFubXGiaDH7k_HBP_EtyS7XaNp0ALGjVgdwNi-BwrUzBGT2hOzg

http://Reclaiming-History.googlegroups.com/web/010.+JFK+AUTOPSY+PHOTO?gda=SDXhBUgAAADQI8aFoPPpMPozfQ5vu_qQWHOF9b-AI7NrSFyDiWjh-QoUxDqPr3a3rJhy6a6rzuSDH7k_HBP_EtyS7XaNp0ALGjVgdwNi-BwrUzBGT2hOzg

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/warren-commission-exhibit-903.html

0 new messages