The Single Bullet
Theory
It is hard to believe that 50 years after it was first conceived we
are still discussing something as ridiculous and ill-supported as the
Single Bullet Theory. If not for the fact that it has been endorsed
by so many socially constructive government panels it may well have
been consigned to the ash heap of history where it belongs decades
ago. But Warren Commission apologists will simply not let it die
because they know that to admit to the obvious fallacy of the SBT is
to admit to a conspiracy. As former Warren commission lawyer Norman
Redlich commented to author Edward Epstein, “To say that they
[President Kennedy and Governor Connally] were hit by separate
bullets, is synonymous with saying that there were two assassins.”
(Epstein, Inquest, p. 38) It
is no surprise, then, that Reitzes makes a stab at defending the
theory. But make no mistake, he does so in spite of the evidence.
Because the SBT is challengeable on every level, from the
trajectories involved, to the nature of the wounds, to the condition
and provenance of the bullet itself. There is not one facet of the
SBT that holds up to scrutiny.
It has long been accepted that
Commission lawyer Arlen Specter, a man with no medical or ballistics
training, was the “father” of the SBT. But hoping to lend it some
legitimacy, Reitzes claims that it was actually JFK's pathologist Dr.
Humes “who first voiced the possibility that JFK and Governor
Connally had been struck by the same bullet.” Let's be very clear
about this: The SBT holds that a bullet (dubbed
Commission Exhibit 399) entered JFK’s back heading downwards and
leftwards. Hitting no bony structures it exited his body from an
anatomically higher position, just below the Adam’s apple, then
somehow struck Connally under his right armpit. It sailed along
Connally’s fifth rib, smashing four inches of it, before exiting
his chest below the right nipple and pulverizing the radius of his
right wrist. It then entered his left thigh just above the knee,
depositing a fragment on the femur, before miraculously popping back
out to be found in near-pristine condition on an unattended stretcher
in Parkland Hospital. That is the SBT and, despite the impression
Reitzes attempts to convey, Humes neither suggested nor endorsed it.
At Specter's
prompting, Humes did raise the “possibility” that one bullet had
passed through the torsos of both men. However, he considered it
“extremely unlikely” that the same bullet had also caused the
wounds to Connally's wrist and thigh. The report from Parkland
Hospital noted that “small bits of metal were encountered at
various levels throughout” Connally's wrist wound as well as in his
thigh. Looking at CE399, Humes noted, “this missile is basically
intact; its jacket appears to me to be intact, and I do not
understand how it could possibly have left fragments in either of
these locations.” He suggested that a separate bullet had been
responsible for these two wounds. (2H375-76) Humes' colleague, Dr.
Finck, concurred. Asked if CE399 could have “inflicted the wound on
Governor Connally's right wrist” Finck said, “No; for the reason
that there are too many fragments described in that wrist.” (Ibid,
382) Connally's wrist surgeon, Dr. Charles Gregory—who
also did not believe the SBT—testified
that the amount of debris carried into the wound suggested "that
an iregular missile had passed through the wrist". (6H98) Dr.
Gregory pointed to the two mangled fragments found on the floor of
the limousine as being likely culprits. (5H127-28)
Nonetheless,
Reitzes assures his readers that the trajectory analysis of "an
actual rocket scientist" and "meticulous reconstructions of
the shooting...have confirmed again and again the plausibility, if
not certainty, of the single bullet theory". He finishes his
discussion of the SBT with the following quote from Vincent Bugliosi:
“‘the single-bullet theory’
is an obvious misnomer. Though in its incipient stages it was but a
theory, the indisputable evidence is that it is now a proven fact,
a wholly supported conclusion.” There are numerous hyperbolic
statements in Bugliosi's tedious and bloated tome but this is one of
the most ridiculous. In fact it may be one of the silliest claims
found anywhere in the JFK literature. In point of fact, the SBT
barely meets the requirements necessary to be considered a viable
theory. Why? Because it is based on a number of entirely unproven and
highly contradicted assumptions.
Firstly, there is
the location of Kennedy's back wound. Because a bullet fired from the
sixth floor of the depository building would have been travelling at
a downward angle of apprxomiately 20 degrees, for the SBT to work,
the back wound had to have been considerably higher than the hole in
the throat. But as crazy as it seems, five decades after the
assassination, we still do not know the precise location of this
wound. In large part this is due to the faliure of the autopsy
doctors to record its position according to fixed anatomical
landmarks. The autopsy report states that the "7 x4 mm oval
wound" was "14 cm from the tip of the right acromion
process and 14 cm below the tip of the right mastoid process."
But as the HSCA pathology panel noted, the mastoid process and the
acromion "are moveable points and should not have been used."
(7HSCA17) A more precise way to record the location of the back wound
would have been with respect to the thoracic vertebrae. This was, in
fact, done but not by the autopsy doctors.
The official death
certificate prepared and signed by Kennedy's personal physician, Dr.
George Burkley—who
was present at both Parkland Hospital during the attempts to
save the President's life and at Bethesda Naval Hospital for the
autopsy—states that the wound of "the
posterior back" was situated "at about the level of the
third thoracic vertebra" which is typically 4 to 6 inches below
the shirt collar. This location is fully supported by the bullet
holes in Kennedy's shirt and jacket, which are approximately 5.5
inches below the top of the collar, (7HSCA83) and by the autopsy
descriptive sheet prepared by the autopsy surgeons. (ARRB MD1)
However, it must be admitted that Burkley's wording, "about
the level of", is not precise and the clothing could have
ridden up Kennedy's back somewhat during the shooting.
The Warren
Commission could and should have tried to clear this matter up but
instead it added to the confusion. The transcript of the Commission's
January 27, 1964, executive session reveals that it had the autopsy
photos at its disposal and was fully aware that Kennedy's rear wound
was below the shoulder. Nonetheless, in order to make the SBT more
palatable, the Commission wrote with deliberately misleading language
that the bullet had "entered the base of the back of his neck"
(WR2). It then kept the troublesome autopsy photos out of the report
and accompanyng volumes and instead presented another of its
deceptive drawings which showed a bullet hole above the
shoulder (CE386)—far above where the
Commission knew it to be.
A decade and a half
later, following its review of the autopsy materials, the HSCA
forensic pathology panel suggested that the bullet had entered at the
approximate level of the first thoracic vertebra (T1). Although this
location has been generally accepted by proponents of the SBT, it is
far from proven. The HSCA panel admitted that it was not possible to
determine "the exact entrance point" from the available
evidence (7HSCA87) but largely based its conclusion on two factors:
Interstitial emphysema (a pocket of air) overlying T1, and a fracture
of the transverse process of T1. (Ibid, 93) However, the panel
explained that although the "air in the soft tissues" could
have been caused by the passage of a bullet, it was just as likely a
result of the tracheotomy performed at Parkland Hospital. (Ibid) As
for the alleged fracture of the transverve process, Dr. Baden only
said in his testimony that it could have been caused by a
bullet strike. "...we cannot be certain of that," he
admitted. (1HSCA305) Additionally, it seems that there is some
disagreement as to the very existence of the fracture as one of the
panel's consultant radiologists, Dr. William Seaman, told the panel
that to him, "the transverse process appears normal..."
(7HSCA99)
The available
evidence simply does not allow us to pinpoint exactly where the
bullet entered the President's back. When the three autopsy doctors
gave depositions for the Assassination Records Review Board, both
Humes and Finck refused to be pinned down on this issue. Dr. Boswell,
however, at least tried to be a little more helpful. "Well, it's
certainly not as low as T4", he said. "I would say at the
lowest it might be T2. I would say around T2." (Boswell
deposition, p. 155) But this again is just an estimate. It seems that
the best that can be said is that the wound was somewhere between T1
and T3.
As
previously noted, most single bullet theorists accept the HSCA's T1
hypothesis. But even this assumed entrance location is problematic
for the SBT since it is anatomically lower than the hole in the
throat. Looking to endorse the SBT, the pathology panel suggested
that the theory was still possible but that JFK had to be leaning
significantly forward at the moment he was struck. The necessity of
the forward lean was confirmed by two of the "meticulous
reconstructions" Reitzes alluded to. One of these, utilizing
lasers, dummies, and the Presidential limousine, was undertaken in
1998 for the TV special, The
Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files.
In order to get a trajectory through the body that pointed back to
the sixth floor, the show's participants had to bend the JFK dummy
markedly forward.
The
second of these reconstructions was conducted for the 2004 Discovery
Channel show, JFK: Beyond
the Magic Bullet.
The Discovery Channel shot a rifle from a crane set at the height of
the sixth floor window into specially made torsos that were placed in
normal, upright seated positions. The bullet entered the upper back
of the Kennedy torso just below the shoulder and exited through the
upper chest—completely
missing the throat. Thus, these real-world experiments demonstrated
that the forward lean is absolutely integral to the SBT. The problem
is that the Zapruder film shows President Kennedy in the moments
before and immediately after he was shot and at all times he is
sitting upright.
SBT proponents,
therefore, must assume that Kennedy adopted the necessary pose during
the tiny 0.9 second interval that he was hidden from Zapruder's view
by the Stemmons Freeway sign. Forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht
rightly ridiculed this notion in his HSCA testimony: "I just
think it is important for the record to reflect upon the fact that
what presumably they are asking us to speculate upon is that in that
0.9 second interval, the President bent down to tie his shoelace or
fix his sock, he was then shot and then sat back up...I would suggest
that is a movement that the most skilled athlete, knowing what he is
going to do, could not perform in that period of time."
(1HSCA339)
On
top of assuming that the back wound was at T1, and that Kennedy was
leaning forward when shot, it must also be assumed that the throat
wound was an exit for the bullet which entered the back. This has
also never been established. As noted in part one of this critique,
all of the doctors at Parkland Hospital believed the wound looked
more like an entrance than an exit and described it as small, round
and neat. Dr. Perry told Dr. Humes that it measured only 3-5 mm and
Dr. Carrico recalled that it had "no jagged edges or stellate
lacerations." In tests performed for the Commission at Edgewood
Arsenal using the very rifle and ammunition Oswald is alleged to have
used, Dr. Alfred Olivier fired numerous rounds through blocks of
gelatin, horsemeat, and goatmeat with skin and clothing attached. At
a distance of 60 yards, which was the approximate distance from the
sixth floor window to Kennedy's back at Zapruder frame 224, typical
exit wounds were elongated and measured 10-15 mm
(5H77, 17H846)—twice
the size or more than the wound in Kennedy's throat.
More
importantly, no pathway between the two wounds was observed at
autopsy. On the contrary, physical probing of the wound led the
prosectors to conclude that the back wound was shallow with no point
of exit. FBI agents James Sibert and Francis O'Neil were present for
the entire autopsy and filed a report of their observations. The
report states: "During
the latter stages of the autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which
appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two
inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column. This
opening was probed by Dr. Humes with the finger, at which time it was
determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point
had entered at a downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further
probing determined that the distance travelled by this missile was a
short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with
the finger." (AARB MD44) Further inspection of the wound was
carried out with the use of a surgical probe as Secret Service Agent
Roy Kellerman explained in his Warren Commission testimony: “There
were three gentlemen who were performing the autopsy. A colonel
Finck—during
the examination of the President, from the hole that was in his
shoulder, and with a probe, and we were standing alongside of him, he
is probing inside the shoulder with his instrument and I said,
‘Colonel, where did it go?’ He said, ‘There are no lanes for an
outlet of this entry in this man’s shoulder.’” (2H93)
Bethesda
laboratory technician James Curtis Jenkins recalled that the back
wound was “very shallow…it didn’t enter the peritoneal (chest)
cavity.” He remembered the doctors extensively probing the wound
with a metal probe, “approximately eight inches long”, and that
it was only able to go in at a “...fairly drastic downward angle so
as not to enter the cavity.” (MD65) Jenkins also recalled in an
interview with David Lifton that the doctors continued to probe the
wound after the chest was opened and the organs removed. At that time
he could “see the probe…through the pleura [the lining of the
chest cavity]…where it was pushing the skin up…There was no entry
in the chest cavity…it would have been no way that that could have
exited in front because it was then low in the chest cavity…somewhere
around the junction of the descending aorta [the main artery carrying
blood from the heart].” (Lifton, Best
Evidence,
p. 713)
Jenkins'
colleague, Paul O'Connor, concurred. In an interview for the HSCA,
O'Connor said that “it did not seem” to him “that the doctors
ever considered the possibility that the bullet had exited through
the front of the neck.” (MD64) He later told author William Law:
“…another thing, we found out, while the autopsy was proceeding,
that he was shot from a high building, which meant the bullet had to
be traveling in a downward trajectory and we also realized that this
bullet—that
hit him in the back—is
what we called in the military a ‘short shot,’ which means that
the powder in the bullet was defective so it didn’t have the power
to push the projectile—the
bullet—clear
through the body. If it had been a full shot at the angle he was
shot, it would have come out through his heart and through his
sternum.” (Law, In
the Eye of History,
p. 41)
In
1973, pathology professor John Nichols, MD, Ph.D., suggested that a
straight-line from the back wound to the throat wound would have had
to have to passed directly through the hard bone of the spine. In
1998, radiologist Dr. David Mantik provided striking confirmation of
Nichols' conclusion using a cross-sectional CAT scan of a patient
with approximately the same upper body dimensions as President
Kennedy. Mantik added the proposed entrance and exit points to the
CAT scan and demonstrated that a straight-line from one to the other
had to intercept the spine. Any bullet taking this path through
Kennedy's torso would have been severely deformed and the spine would
have been shattered. And yet there had been no major trauma to
Kennedy's spine and CE399 is in the same near-pristine condition as
test bullets fired into water.
To
recap, the SBT assumes that the back wound was at T1 but there is
evidence that it was considerably lower. It assumes that President
Kennedy was leaning significantly forward when he was struck even
though the Zapruder film shows no such thing. And it assumes that the
throat wound was an exit for the bullet which entered the back when
no such thing was established at autopsy, the only physical
examination ever conducted contradicts the idea, and medical evidence
strongly suggests that such a path through the body was not possible.
The reader will notice that all of these assumptions have to do with
the wounds to President Kennedy which is just one section of CE399's
supposed journey. There are numerous other problems with the bullet's
magical voyage but to highlight them all now would be simply flogging
a dead horse. The point has been made: The SBT is not built upon
proven facts but upon a series of unproven assumptions that are not
borne out by closer examination of the evidence. The SBT, therefore,
is not even remotely close to being considered a “proven fact”
and no honest person would make or repeat such a claim.
No comments:
Post a Comment