For John Fiorentino (and everyone else)

[Robert Harris]

First, let me thank you again for your kind words, and commend you for
having the integrity to confirm what others of your belief, refuse to do.

But as I'm sure you expected, I must take issue with your claim that the
cause of that skull piece flipping to the rear was something other than a
second headshot. This is in reply to your previous post:

In article <5082975f$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>,
"John Fiorentino" <jefior...@optimum.net> wrote:

> I think Robert could well be right about this, (sans the "second shot.")
>
> In looking at Groden's rotoscope I think you can make a case for it in the
> Z-frames after 313 (the ones that are not very blurry that it is)
>
> The area in question seems to correspond to the lateral X-ray.
>
> It's quite possible I should think, with JFK being thrown backward
> combined with the force of the eruption and evulsion of bone that these
> factors resulted in what we are apparently seeing.
>
> But NO second shot.
>
> Good work Bob
>
> John F.

My sincerest hope is that having confirmed that I am at least partially
right about this, you might respect my analysis enough to consider the
evidence which convinced me that this the result of a gunshot. First, I
would direct you to this image:

http://jfkhistory.com/hair.png

Notice that by frame 317, the explosion has completely subsided.
Obviously, that piece of skull has not yet flipped, nor has it begun to.

Also, please notice the hair toward the front of the head at which I point
with a superimposed, blue arrow.

The image to the left is of frame 337. Notice that the hair we saw at 317,
toward the front of the head, has been displaced and is now part of a
brown colored layer, behind and just above the indention where that skull
piece used to be.

The point of all this is, that whatever the force was that caused that
skull piece to flip, had to have been substantial enough to rip out and
displace hair and scalp. It has to have been substantial.

Since the explosion seems to have dissipated by 317, I don't see how that
could have been the cause.

I considered that the momentum of JFK's head moving "back and to the left"
might have been great enough to have been the cause. But as I examined
that motion in the Zapruder film, I discovered that as the head reversed
direction (probably due to the jet effect that Alvarez described), it
really didn't go back very far. In fact, the head never went all to the
back of the seat. It actually only traveled about 2 feet during the seven
frames in which there was rearward motion.

By my calculation, the head was moving then, at a velocity of less than 4
mph. Of course, the explosion at 313 generated force that was vastly
greater than that of JFK's backward movement.

Perhaps you can suggest a better alternative, but I cannot think of any
other force at that time which could have caused the "flip", other than a
gunshot.





Robert Harris

[John Fiorentino]

Bob:

First off, thank you for thanking me.

However, I've looked at what you have presented and more importantly, I
should think, I like many others have looked at the medical evidence, the
autopsy, etc.

There is no evidence of any "2nd shot" which hit JFK in the head.

I think it's quite possible that it happened just as I outlined in my ist
post to you on this subject.

A few points to ponder, and maybe you might reconsider?........

I personally begin to see a slight disruption of the top of JFK's head
(visible portion in the z-film) even at z317 which you allude to in this
post.

A rather large portion of the top of JFK's head was blown off, with some
rather extensive fracturing of the remaining cranium.

A backward motion of JFK's torso and his abrupt stoppage after hitting the
seatback should be quite enough to cause what we are seeing, I should
believe.

Remember that the underlying bone that had been dislodged was most likely
still attached to the scalp, (that portion that had not been torn or
shredded by the ejection of other skull pieces) so in effect what was there
to hold that skull in place?? Not much.

Reading Jackie's testimony (which you provided excerpts from) makes may
things come into better focus, and that piece of bone she was referring to
was most likely the flap which opened up over JFK's right ear, and which is
closed in in several of the autopsy photos which we have available in the
public domain.

It really boils down to the salient question with which we all (honest
researchers and the general public) grapple with.

"Was there a conspiracy in the JFK assassination"

Now, as a critical thinker, I can't just give you my belief and say "no."

But, what I can say is this: "There is no credible evidence of a
conspiracy."

Hey, I STILL look into things re: JFK. I'm doing that as we speak.

So, while I do partially agree with your observations and commend you for
your research, I don't agree about any 2nd shot hitting JFK in the head.

Good work again Bob!

John F.






"Robert Harris" <bobha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bobharris77-5E39...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...

[Robert Harris]

Just a couple other thoughts:

The simple fact that that skull piece resisted the enormous force of the
313 explosion and did not flip then, suggests that although it may have
already been broken, it was still firmly in place, and required a
substantial amount of force to dislodge it.

I also believe that the reason Mrs. Kennedy rose from her seat and
reached back to retrieve a piece of her husband's brain, was that she
caught a glimpse of matter being blown to the rear. In her interview
with Theodore White, she described the last thing she saw before rising
from her seat,

"..I could see a piece of his skull coming off; It was flesh colored not
white - he was holding out his hand - and I can see this perfectly clean
piece detaching itself from his head - then he slumped in my lap."

This had to have been what she reached back to retrieve. Both Mrs.
Connally and Mr. Connally remembered her then saying, "I have his brains
in my hand.".

Since John Connally lost consciousness before the limo was even out of
Dealey Plaza, she must have said this immediately after sitting back
down.

I would urge you to carefully study her moves in the Zapruder film.
There was absolutely no wasted motion, no looking around or hesitation.
She got up, reached back to retrieve that piece of brain tissue, and
promptly returned to her seat.

The entire action from rising to sitting back down, took about 4
seconds. I think it's obvious that she knew something was back there
that she wanted to retrieve.




Robert Harris

[Robert Harris]

In article <5087f981$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>,

"John Fiorentino" <jefior...@optimum.net> wrote:

> Bob:
>
> First off, thank you for thanking me.
>
> However, I've looked at what you have presented and more importantly, I
> should think, I like many others have looked at the medical evidence, the
> autopsy, etc.
>
> There is no evidence of any "2nd shot" which hit JFK in the head.

Then why did the top three independent experts to examine the Xrays at
Bethesda conclude that there was conclusive evidence of two head shots?

And John, I am giving you evidence. Don't you think it would be good to
refute that evidence before declaring that it doesn't exist:-)

>
> I think it's quite possible that it happened just as I outlined in my ist
> post to you on this subject.

Are you suggesting that this piece was blown to the rear with sufficient
force to rip out hair and scalp, after the explosion had completely
subsided??

How exactly, could that happen?

>
> A few points to ponder, and maybe you might reconsider?........
>
> I personally begin to see a slight disruption of the top of JFK's head
> (visible portion in the z-film) even at z317 which you allude to in this
> post.
>
> A rather large portion of the top of JFK's head was blown off, with some
> rather extensive fracturing of the remaining cranium.
>
> A backward motion of JFK's torso and his abrupt stoppage after hitting the
> seatback should be quite enough to cause what we are seeing, I should
> believe.

John, the head never hit the back of the seat. It didn't even come
close. In order to have a meaningful conversation, it is necessary for
us to read what each other says. Let me repeat:

I considered that the momentum of JFK's head moving "back and to the
left" might have been great enough to have been the cause. But as I
examined that motion in the Zapruder film, I discovered that as the head
reversed direction (probably due to the jet effect that Alvarez
described), it really didn't go back very far. In fact, the head never
went all to the back of the seat. It actually only traveled about 2 feet
during the seven frames in which there was rearward motion.

By my calculation, the head was moving then, at a velocity of less than 4
mph. Of course, the explosion at 313 generated force that was vastly
greater than that of JFK's backward movement.

(unquote)

I would urge you to verify what I said. I would also be happy to direct
you to resources which make it extremely easy to see what I am talking
about.

>
> Remember that the underlying bone that had been dislodged was most likely
> still attached to the scalp, (that portion that had not been torn or
> shredded by the ejection of other skull pieces) so in effect what was there
> to hold that skull in place?? Not much.
>
> Reading Jackie's testimony (which you provided excerpts from) makes may
> things come into better focus, and that piece of bone she was referring to
> was most likely the flap which opened up over JFK's right ear, and which is
> closed in in several of the autopsy photos which we have available in the
> public domain.

The flap was made of scalp, John. Mrs. Kennedy was talking about a wedge
shape piece of skull bone, with ridges that could only have been visible
if it was inverted.

But that is not the most important issue here. The question on the table
is, what caused that piece of skull to flip to the rear and rip out hair
and scalp? We know that didn't happen during the explosion at 313. And I
have to doubt that a 4mph motion with no abrupt stop, was sufficient to
do what the force of that massive explosion could not.

Can you think of any other alternatives to the obvious?


Robert Harris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 10/24/2012 10:26 PM, Robert Harris wrote:
> In article <5087f981$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>,
> "John Fiorentino" <jefior...@optimum.net> wrote:
>
>> Bob:
>>
>> First off, thank you for thanking me.
>>
>> However, I've looked at what you have presented and more importantly, I
>> should think, I like many others have looked at the medical evidence, the
>> autopsy, etc.
>>
>> There is no evidence of any "2nd shot" which hit JFK in the head.
>
> Then why did the top three independent experts to examine the Xrays at
> Bethesda conclude that there was conclusive evidence of two head shots?
>

They didn't. It's only in YOUR head.

> And John, I am giving you evidence. Don't you think it would be good to
> refute that evidence before declaring that it doesn't exist:-)
>

No, you are not. You don't know the difference between evidence and opinion.

[John Fiorentino]

Bob:

I'm not going to write a book about this with you. I agreed with your
observation as far as it goes and now you want me to step in the quicksand
of a lengthy discourse.

You said:

"We know that didn't happen during the explosion at 313."

I say..........

I don't know any such thing. I stated after close viewing I can see a slight
disruption starting at z-317 as you posted.

I never said JFK's *head* hit the seatback Bob, I said *he* did.

Please name your top 3 independent experts.

John F.





"Robert Harris" <bobha...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:bobharris77-9ED5...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net...

[Robert Harris]

In article <5089364b$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>,

"John Fiorentino" <jefior...@optimum.net> wrote:

> Bob:
>

> I'm not going to write a book about this with you.

May I take that to mean that you intend to evade many of the questions
and issues I raised, John?

> I agreed with your
> observation as far as it goes and now you want me to step in the quicksand
> of a lengthy discourse.

Answering a few important questions is hardly quicksand and certainly
doesn't need to be lengthy. Refusing to answer however, is usually more
revealing than answering.

>
> You said:
>
> "We know that didn't happen during the explosion at 313."

That is correct.

>
> I say..........
>
> I don't know any such thing.

Well, if it flipped at 313, I'm pretty sure we would have seen it in the
frames that immediately followed. This thing is not exactly hard to see.

> I stated after close viewing I can see a slight
> disruption starting at z-317 as you posted.

Yes, we see that same disruption at 313 and 314. By 317, it hadn't
changed at all.

In these blowups from the Nix film, it's easy to see that the protrusion
was inflicted at about 319-320. By 321, it is quite prominent.

http://jfkhistory.com/protrusion.jpg

>
> I never said JFK's *head* hit the seatback Bob, I said *he* did.

I don't think he did either, although his lower back may have been
already touching the seatback. What's important however, is that inertia
was not the cause of the flip.

>
> Please name your top 3 independent experts.

Sure, Dr. David Mantik, who I might add, was saying this long before he
went into "everything's a forgery" mode, and he was IMO, a pretty
rational guy. We had talked on the phone a couple times and exchanged
emails. In one of them, he told me that he had compared the Nix and
Muchmore films with Zapruder and they all synched perfectly with each
other.

A couple years later, when I questioned a claim he made about the Zfilm
being a forgery, he accused me of working for the CIA, and we never
talked again. I think there is something about this case that is not
good for one's mental health:-)

Anyway, back to business. Number two is, Dr. Joseph Riley, who holds a
Phd. in neuroanatomy. He said,

"When the correct relationship between the X-rays is appreciated, what
emerges is a clear, coherent, and consistent description of John
Kennedy's head wounds. John Kennedy was struck in the head by two
bullets, one from the right front and one from the rear."

You can read his entire paper here:

http://www.jfkhistory.com/riehl/What_Struck_John.html

The third is Dr. Randy Robertson, an MD and board certified radiologist,

"In sum, it is a medical and scientific fact that the damage to the
President's skull did not result from a single shot but was instead
caused by two separate bullets."

You can read his paper here - just do a search for "appendix A"

http://www.jfkhistory.com/k/answers.html

Whether you respond to me or not, do a little research for your own
personal satisfaction. Look at statements by highly reliable witnesses -
Clint Hill, Charles Brehm, SA Kellerman, Greer, Hickey, Landis, Mary
Moorman, and countless others who actually heard the final shots.

Contrary to nutter dogma, these witnesses were not "all over the place".
They were extremely consistent. Even the WC admitted that "most"
witnesses said the final shots were "closely bunched".

They were also, almost unanimous that there was only one *audible* shot,
prior to the very end of the attack. And they were right about that too. I
can prove it.






Robert Harris

[Saintly Oswald]

Robert's point about the witnesses saying the shots at the end were close
together is more important than many will admit. Preferring to add up
numbers of witnesses who heard shots from certain directions, they ignore
the more important issue of the intervals. For example, one witness in the
5th floor window directly beneath the sniper's nest described the shots as
relatively evenly spaced. If anybody would have noticed the spacing, it
should have been he. Yet, there is consistent testimony that shots were
bunched together at the end, even on top of each other. That might have
sounded like one shot to many witnesses, the final volley. Kellerman even
said a "flurry of shells" entered the car. Clearly this implies that 3
shots were fired from "Oswald's window," but that other shots were fired
from elsewhere. This is where the witness reports of the directions of
those shots might be helpful, if you are writing a major new article on
the topic. Witnesses have said, the grassy knoll, the overpass, and even
"from right there in the car itself," my favorite.

[Robert Harris]

Saintly Oswald wrote:
> Robert's point about the witnesses saying the shots at the end were close
> together is more important than many will admit. Preferring to add up
> numbers of witnesses who heard shots from certain directions, they ignore
> the more important issue of the intervals. For example, one witness in the
> 5th floor window directly beneath the sniper's nest described the shots as
> relatively evenly spaced.

These are the relevant statements by the three men on the 5th floor.

Bonnie Ray Williams

?The second and the third shot was closer together than the first shot
and the second shot,?

Harold Norman,

?I heard a shot and several seconds later I heard two more shots?
(Norman changed his recollections during his WC testimony, claiming he
was misrepresented).

James Jarman

?and then the third shot was fired right behind the second one. ?

> If anybody would have noticed the spacing, it
> should have been he. Yet, there is consistent testimony that shots were
> bunched together at the end, even on top of each other. That might have
> sounded like one shot to many witnesses, the final volley. Kellerman even
> said a "flurry of shells" entered the car. Clearly this implies that 3
> shots were fired from "Oswald's window," but that other shots were fired
> from elsewhere.

Only Norman said that all three shots came from inside the depository.

Jarman's recollection of the first shot was quite interesting.

Mr. JARMAN - Well, it sounded, I thought at first it had came from
below. That is what I thought.
Representative FORD - As you looked out the window and you were looking
at the President's car.
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.
Representative FORD - Did you have a distinct impression as to whether
the sound came from your left or from your right?
Mr. JARMAN - I am sure it came from the left.
Representative FORD - But your first reaction, that is was from below.
Mr. JARMAN - Yes, sir.

Williams also believed the first shot came from outside the building.

"..first I thought they were saluting the President, somebody even maybe
a motorcycle backfire."

> This is where the witness reports of the directions of
> those shots might be helpful, if you are writing a major new article on
> the topic. Witnesses have said, the grassy knoll, the overpass, and even
> "from right there in the car itself," my favorite.

My analysis suggests that audible shots were fired at 160, 285 and 313,
from the rear. The first was from the Daltex.

The final shot was fired about a third of a second after 313, probably
from an unsuppressed handgun. It was mostly drowned out by the much louder
shot that preceded it, but was heard by many of the people in the
immediate vicinity, like Charles Brehm, Clint Hill, Mary Moorman, Jean
Hill and several of the other Secret Service agents.

This video presentation covers the attack from beginning to end.

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





Robert Harris