Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

[bknight]

According to Dr. Kenneth Strully, a New Hampshire neurosurgeon, JFK's arm movements following Z225 were caused by direct stimulation of the relevant nerves in the spine.

In a letter appearing on another forum long ago he wrote, "Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck. This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck. This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity [….] As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet’s path took place first; — right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps [….] Kennedy did not reach for his throat. All movements seen in the films, occurring relative to the bullet’s passage, were involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands.”

Charts online show that the nerves controlling the arms and hands originate around the C8/T1 area. No, it wasn't the Thorburn position but something similar, evidently.

Going back to lurking now... Carry on, gentlemen.

Hi Jean:
I'm a relative newcomer also, but the comments of Dr. Kenneth Strully clearly refute MJ's contentions, yet again. Thanks for the input and do continue to post.

 

[HSienzant]

According to Dr. Kenneth Strully, a New Hampshire neurosurgeon, JFK's arm movements following Z225 were caused by direct stimulation of the relevant nerves in the spine.

In a letter appearing on another forum long ago he wrote, "Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck. This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck. This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity [….] As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet’s path took place first; — right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps [….] Kennedy did not reach for his throat. All movements seen in the films, occurring relative to the bullet’s passage, were involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands.”

Charts online show that the nerves controlling the arms and hands originate around the C8/T1 area. No, it wasn't the Thorburn position but something similar, evidently.

Going back to lurking now... Carry on, gentlemen.

What about the pointing directly at his throat?
As see in this frame and surrounding frames?
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z257.jpg

 

[HSienzant]

Hi Jean:
I'm a relative newcomer also, but the comments of Dr. Kenneth Strully clearly refute MJ's contentions, yet again. Thanks for the input and do continue to post.

That's just it... she's not a newcomer (except to this forum).

Her book on Lee Harvey Oswald was published in 1983.

Your post is a good example of why hearsay isn't admissible, however.

Hank

 

[Axxman300]

According to Dr. Kenneth Strully, a New Hampshire neurosurgeon, JFK's arm movements following Z225 were caused by direct stimulation of the relevant nerves in the spine.

In a letter appearing on another forum long ago he wrote, "Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck. This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck. This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity [….] As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet’s path took place first; — right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps [….] Kennedy did not reach for his throat. All movements seen in the films, occurring relative to the bullet’s passage, were involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands.”

Charts online show that the nerves controlling the arms and hands originate around the C8/T1 area. No, it wasn't the Thorburn position but something similar, evidently.

Going back to lurking now... Carry on, gentlemen.

Uh oh, MJ, the heavy artillery showed up.

I recommend her book, not that you'll read it, but some of the grownups might find it intriguing.

 

[Axxman300]

2 weeks, 1 day until the final National Archive document dump. I never thought I'd live to see this, so I'm kind of excited.

We're coming up on 54 years since the assassination, I've lost count of how many mass shootings we've had in my lifetime, but at this point it is impossible to ignore what one man can do with a gun when motivated.

 

[bknight]

2 weeks, 1 day until the final National Archive document dump. I never thought I'd live to see this, so I'm kind of excited.

We're coming up on 54 years since the assassination, I've lost count of how many mass shootings we've had in my lifetime, but at this point it is impossible to ignore what one man can do with a gun when motivated.

Sad but so true.

 

[MicahJava]

According to Dr. Kenneth Strully, a New Hampshire neurosurgeon, JFK's arm movements following Z225 were caused by direct stimulation of the relevant nerves in the spine.

In a letter appearing on another forum long ago he wrote, "Before all else, it is necessary to remember that this assassination reveals a sequence of neural responses initiated in the neck by the shock wave and cavitation induced by the bullet in its traverse of the neck. This traumatized all structures in a 6 inch radius in all directions from the path of passage through the neck. This spread of forces occurred in a fraction of a second, traumatizing all neural structures in the immediate vicinity [….] As a result, contraction of the muscles innervated by nerves closest to the bullet’s path took place first; — right deltoid, left deltoid, right biceps followed by the left biceps [….] Kennedy did not reach for his throat. All movements seen in the films, occurring relative to the bullet’s passage, were involuntary; lifting of the shoulders was a result of contraction of the deltoids followed by contraction of the biceps muscles which flexed the upper extremities at the elbows, then forearm and intrinsic muscles of the hands causing clenching of the hands.”

Charts online show that the nerves controlling the arms and hands originate around the C8/T1 area. No, it wasn't the Thorburn position but something similar, evidently.

Going back to lurking now... Carry on, gentlemen.

I have a bigger gun.

The most convincing case against Thorburn's position, however, comes from Dr. Jan E. Leestma, Associate Medical Director and Neuropathologist for the Chicago Institute of Neurosurgery and Neuroresearch at Columbus Hospital. In my conversation with Dr. Leestma11, he adamantly stated that Thorburn's position does not seem a viable outcome of Kennedy's injury. Dr. Leestma says that when a sudden injury, such as a bullet wound, is withstood by a victim, the nerve cells and fibers go into neural shock. The nerves are immediately traumatized; they literally turn off and result in slumping of the victim. He adds "when you physically shock any nerve, the last thing it does is fire. It classically becomes electrically silent. Whether the spinal cord is directly hit or grazed, the nerve cords extending beyond the actual spine would be affected and fall silent."12 When presented with what Lattimer contended occurred during Thorburn's reaction, Dr. Leestma said "it seems to me a reaction as such would just never occur. I don't care if the sixth cervical segment was severed or just touched, the nerves in that area would not go into an immediate neurological reaction with arms flying up, they would fall limp."13 Dr. Leestma placed C-6 at the base of the neck, just above the hump at the bottom of the neck. In sum, Dr. Leestma does not believe that Thorburn's reaction could have occurred. He stated that he thought the back wound was found to be lower than C-6 and that the upsweep of Kennedy's arms did not seem to be a neurological reaction.

http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/JLDUNN.TXT

Dr. Leestma is a well-known neuropathologist. Just Google him.

 

[MicahJava]

The dented lip can be caused by the extractor mechanism after the bullet is fired. This was duplicated in testing by the HSCA back in 1978 -- 39 years ago. News must travel slowly where you are located.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0191a.htm

From Reclaiming Parkland:

The Warren Commission labeled one of the shells reportedly found on the sixth floor, CE 543. The problem is that it is a dented shell. As ballistics authority and expert marksman Howard Donahue has said, this dented shell could not have been used to fire a bullet that day. The weapon would not have fired properly. As Josiah Thompson notes, it also had three identifying marks revealing it had been loaded and extracted from a weapon at least three times before. These were not found on the other shells. As Thompson further notes, “Of all the various marks discovered on this case, only one set links it to Oswald’s rifle, and this set was identified as having come from the magazine follower. Yet the magazine follower marks only the last cartridge in the clip. . . .” The last cartridge in the clip was the live round, not this one. Further, the clip contained no fingerprints, and neither did any of the cases.

One of the things Thompson did was to test whether CE 543 could have been dented when it was discharged. It could not. Bugliosi solves this problem the same way Gerald Posner did. He says it was dented during firing. He uses Monty Lutz from the HSCA as his authority. But when Mike Griffith asked Howard Donahue about this particular issue, Donahue replied that, “there were no shells dented in that manner by the HSCA . . . I have never seen a case dented like this.”

Griffith also communicated with British researcher Chris Mills on this evidentiary point. Mills, who experimented with a Mannlicher Carcano rifle on this issue, said that the only way he achieved this denting effect was by using empty shells, and he had to repeat the experiment sixty times to get the same effect. Mills concluded this could only occur with an empty case that had been previously fired, and then only occasionally.

Author Michael Kurtz noted that the shell “lacks the characteristic indentation on the side made by the firing chamber of Oswald’s rifle.” He then adds that forensic pathologist Forrest Chapman concludes that CE 543 was probably “dry loaded.” Because the dent was too big to support a bullet, it was not fired from the Carcano. Chapman also noted that “CE 543 had a deeper and more concave indentation on its base . . . where the firing pin strikes the case. Only empty cases exhibit such characteristics.” And Kurtz adds that when the FBI fired an empty shell for comparison purposes, it also contained the dent in the lip and the deep firing pin impression. Kurtz also concluded that CE 543 could not have been fired from the Carcano that day.

The updated 2016 edition of Reclaiming Parkland: Tom Hanks, Vincent Bugliosi, & the JFK Assassination in the New Hollywood by James DiEugenio is available for free on libgen.io

Epub file for programs such as Adobe Digital Editions: http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=4C6829661F808341FC6D6B1C5AEDC46F

Mobi file for programs such as Amazon Kindle PC: http://libgen.io/book/index.php?md5=002BD2112F504BA3C9DBACC50CB93A39

Click the lower-left "libgen.io" button and then click "get it".

 

[MicahJava]

Let’s apply Occams Razor.

Which is adds fewest complications:

1) Futuristic ammo types, unknown at the time.
2) A bullet managing to enter the EOP, while carefully dodging bits of the brain right in its path, then taking a trajectory that no doctors actually thought of, in the autopsy.
3) An additional gunman, who somehow had a silenced weapon, that left no traces from the ammunition.
4) Micha Java misunderstandings the word “slightly “ and insisting the wound was on the EOP.

Given there are no anomalies to solve if we consider 4) correct, that remains the most convincing.

You must be confused. You forgot a few important parts.

 

[MicahJava]

A bullet striking the rear of the skull low will go right through the cerebellum.

You like to play this game where you change the subject to high-velocity bullets when the discussion is about the possibility of a low-velocity bullet causing the damage to the scalp and skull near the EOP. Also, bullets are highly likely to deflect as soon as it encounters a curved portion of bone. The area near the EOP and the base of the head is very curved.

 

[MicahJava]

If we say for the sake of discussion that the three autopsy doctors actually believed Kennedy's head was only wounded by a single shot from behind, we must remember that this is really an issue of them claiming the shots came from ABOVE and behind. Since a EOP-top-right side of the head connection would have a straight or upwards trajectory, they have no reason to claim the head shot came from above and behind. The obvious reason being that it looks well with the official story.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

If we say for the sake of discussion that the three autopsy doctors actually believed Kennedy's head was only wounded by a single shot from behind, we must remember that this is really an issue of them claiming the shots came from ABOVE and behind. Since a EOP-top-right side of the head connection would have a straight or upwards trajectory, they have no reason to claim the head shot came from above and behind. The obvious reason being that it looks well with the official story.

There is another obvious reason, of course, which is that it fits well with your story.
Can you give any reason why these doctors would lie about the results of the autopsy to support a cover-up of some sort? At what point were they briefed to do this, and by whom?
Do you have any evidence of threats or inducements made to them?
What benefit would this cover-up have?
Who do you think killed JFK, and why, and why did the administration go to such lengths to cover it up?

 

[Tomtomkent]

You like to play this game where you change the subject to high-velocity bullets when the discussion is about the possibility of a low-velocity bullet causing the damage to the scalp and skull near the EOP. Also, bullets are highly likely to deflect as soon as it encounters a curved portion of bone. The area near the EOP and the base of the head is very curved.

There is no evidence of this deflection.
Nor of the resulting trauma damage to the cerebellum. Or does you bullet not displace the matter it is passing through?

The obvious conclusion would be that your EOP wound, not described in the autopsy, does not exist, and the bullet struck higher than you suppose, causing the massive trauma clearly visible on film.

 

[Tomtomkent]

If we say for the sake of discussion that the three autopsy doctors actually believed Kennedy's head was only wounded by a single shot from behind, we must remember that this is really an issue of them claiming the shots came from ABOVE and behind. Since a EOP-top-right side of the head connection would have a straight or upwards trajectory, they have no reason to claim the head shot came from above and behind. The obvious reason being that it looks well with the official story.

What if we suppose you are placing the wound wrong? How does the single bullet theory fit with the “cowlick wound” as you call it? Or “the wound” as the autopsy calls it. The one that is above the EOP, visible in photographs, confirmed by the WC, and exits from the top of The head, due to massive trauma, whose ejecta is visible on the Z film?

 

[bknight]

You like to play this game where you change the subject to high-velocity bullets when the discussion is about the possibility of a low-velocity bullet causing the damage to the scalp and skull near the EOP. Also, bullets are highly likely to deflect as soon as it encounters a curved portion of bone. The area near the EOP and the base of the head is very curved.

What experience do you have to make this statement? None I suspect and you are just trying to continue the discussion without providing any evidence to support your claims.

 

[Dave Rogers]

There's a nice bit of self-refutation here, in two successive posts no less.

Since a EOP-top-right side of the head connection would have a straight or upwards trajectory, they have no reason to claim the head shot came from above and behind.

So the details of the wound are indicative of the trajectory of the bullet...

Also, bullets are highly likely to deflect as soon as it encounters a curved portion of bone.

...except where the conspiracy theory requires them not to be.

Dave

 

[HSienzant]

The dented lip can be caused by the extractor mechanism after the bullet is fired. This was duplicated in testing by the HSCA back in 1978 -- 39 years ago. News must travel slowly where you are located.
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0191a.htm

Would the dent on the mouth of CE 543, one of the three expended cartridge cases found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository, prevent the bullet from being fired in the CE 139 Mannlicher-Careano rifle, or any other rifle? Can it be determined whether these cartridge cases had been chambered on more than one occasion?
(155) Figure 8B shows a dent on the mouth of the CE 543 cartridge case which Josiah Thompson, a critic of the Warren Commission, said would prevent CE 543 from being fired in any rifle.(79)
(156) It is the opinion of the panel that the dent on the mouth of the CE 543 cartridge case was produced when the cartridge case was ejected from the rifle. This condition was duplicated during test-firing of the CE 139 rifle by the panel. (See fig. 2.) The dent had nothing to do with loading the bullet during the manufacturing process, nor is it the type of deformation expected if the case were stepped on.
(157) There was no evidence in the form of multiple extractor or ejector marks on the cartridge case to indicate that it was chambered in the rifle more than once. This also applies to cartridge cases CE 544 and CE 545.

In any case, how do you know this dented bullet was associated with the missed shot, and not the shot that hit the President in the back, or the bullet that hit the President in the head? How did you determine a plant is the most reasonable explanation?

How come you bring up only the arguments in favor of conspiracy and ignore any resolutions of the arguments that were discovered during the various investigations (like the dented bullet shell resolution known for 39 years)?

I can see only two possible reasons for this:
1. The websites you frequent for your arguments aren't telling you the whole truth.
2. You're not telling the whole truth.
Which is it, or is there another possibility I'm overlooking?

From Reclaiming Parkland:

The Warren Commission labeled one of the shells reportedly found on the sixth floor, CE 543. The problem is that it is a dented shell. As ballistics authority and expert marksman Howard Donahue has said, this dented shell could not have been used to fire a bullet that day. The weapon would not have fired properly. As Josiah Thompson notes, it also had three identifying marks revealing it had been loaded and extracted from a weapon at least three times before. These were not found on the other shells. As Thompson further notes, “Of all the various marks discovered on this case, only one set links it to Oswald’s rifle, and this set was identified as having come from the magazine follower. Yet the magazine follower marks only the last cartridge in the clip. . . .” The last cartridge in the clip was the live round, not this one. Further, the clip contained no fingerprints, and neither did any of the cases.

One of the things Thompson did was to test whether CE 543 could have been dented when it was discharged. It could not. Bugliosi solves this problem the same way Gerald Posner did. He says it was dented during firing. He uses Monty Lutz from the HSCA as his authority. But when Mike Griffith asked Howard Donahue about this particular issue, Donahue replied that, “there were no shells dented in that manner by the HSCA . . . I have never seen a case dented like this.”

Griffith also communicated with British researcher Chris Mills on this evidentiary point. Mills, who experimented with a Mannlicher Carcano rifle on this issue, said that the only way he achieved this denting effect was by using empty shells, and he had to repeat the experiment sixty times to get the same effect. Mills concluded this could only occur with an empty case that had been previously fired, and then only occasionally.

Author Michael Kurtz noted that the shell “lacks the characteristic indentation on the side made by the firing chamber of Oswald’s rifle.” He then adds that forensic pathologist Forrest Chapman concludes that CE 543 was probably “dry loaded.” Because the dent was too big to support a bullet, it was not fired from the Carcano. Chapman also noted that “CE 543 had a deeper and more concave indentation on its base . . . where the firing pin strikes the case. Only empty cases exhibit such characteristics.” And Kurtz adds that when the FBI fired an empty shell for comparison purposes, it also contained the dent in the lip and the deep firing pin impression. Kurtz also concluded that CE 543 could not have been fired from the Carcano that day.

Thank you for that information. So we now know the sources of the misinformation and falsehoods you're telling here.

Not one of your sources tested the actual weapon CE139 to see if the lip could be dented upon working the bolt and ejecting the shell. The HSCA firearms panel did that, and duplicated the issue.

Many of the people you cite are well-known known conspiracy buffs, who are apparently more than content to ignore all contrary evidence that establishes when something they are claiming is false.

They all *assumed* the bullet had that dented lip prior to being fired, and working from that assumption, they concluded that shell could not have been fired that day. But the HSCA did the experiment they did not, using the actual weapon, and reproduced similar damage from a shell after firing a test bullet (see the language above).

Their other claims are also all contrary to the findings of the HSCA firearms panel. Josiah Thompson is cited as saying "As Josiah Thompson notes, it also had three identifying marks revealing it had been loaded and extracted from a weapon at least three times before."

Consulting his book, SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS, the source of that is an FBI memo here: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0243a.htm
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh26/html/WH_Vol26_0243b.htm

But the language is less strong there than Thompson pretends, only saying that there are additional marks that could be marks from a rifle, not that there are additional marks from a rifle. That memo also notes that many of these marks are very faint, and could not be associated with the CE139 rifle (called the C14 rifle by the FBI). They also note throughout there is only one set of marks on each shell that could be associated with the CE139 rifle. And they didn't have sufficient evidence to associate the other marks with a weapon.

And the HSCA firearms panel noted this in stronger language, " (157) There was no evidence in the form of multiple extractor or ejector marks on the cartridge case to indicate that it was chambered in the rifle more than once. This also applies to cartridge cases CE 544 and CE 545."

Note as well that Oswald is only known to own one rifle, CE139, the assassination weapon found on the sixth floor. So where did these supposed other rifle marks come from? They could be random markings on the shells obtained from handling or even markings from the manufacture process.

You don't know. Thompson doesn't know. You (and Thompson) simply pretend the memo says something it doesn't.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

You like to play this game where you change the subject to high-velocity bullets when the discussion is about the possibility of a low-velocity bullet causing the damage to the scalp and skull near the EOP. Also, bullets are highly likely to deflect as soon as it encounters a curved portion of bone. The area near the EOP and the base of the head is very curved.

Granting the bolded above for the sake of argument, you have presented no evidence that the likely deflection would be downwards, rather than upwards or to either side.

Since we do have a wound of exit (determined to be so by the very autopsy doctors you like to cite when it suits your purposes), then why are you not assuming a deflection upwards and to the right to exit the top right of the head as we can all see on the Zapruder film.

Occam's razor and all that.

Instead, you conjecture a bullet exiting the throat without demonstrating it created an exit wound in the base of the skull, conjecture yet another bullet hitting the head and creating the large wound of exit, and ignore entirely the two large bullet fragments found forward of the President that were traceable to Oswald's rifle - to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world - that could only have come from the bullet that struck JFK in the head.

Your problem is that you want a conspiracy at all costs. If some of those costs are ignoring evidence and proposing falsehoods, it appears you're okay with that.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

If we say for the sake of discussion that the three autopsy doctors actually believed Kennedy's head was only wounded by a single shot from behind, we must remember that this is really an issue of them claiming the shots came from ABOVE and behind. Since a EOP-top-right side of the head connection would have a straight or upwards trajectory, they have no reason to claim the head shot came from above and behind. The obvious reason being that it looks well with the official story.

At the time of the autopsy, there was no official story. The Warren Commission wasn't founded until a week later, by executive order.

The autopsists, however, were aware of reports from Dallas that a gunman was seen in an upper story window of a tall building on the President's route. That is mentioned in the autopsy report. Their report could have confirmed or denied the eyewitness accounts (that's part of the reason we have autopsies, to determine the facts surrounding the death of the victim).

They confirmed those eyewitness accounts. That doesn't show a bias on their part, except when viewed through a conspiracy lens.

You have elsewhere argued for a deflection downward, but never conceded a deflection upwards (which destroys your entire argument above and also offered over hundreds of posts over the past year or more) is even possible.

Is a deflection upwards possible, Micah Java? If not, on what basis do you rule it out?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

There's a nice bit of self-refutation here, in two successive posts no less.



So the details of the wound are indicative of the trajectory of the bullet...



...except where the conspiracy theory requires them not to be.

Dave