JFK RFK MLK Assassination Forum

Thanks, Bruce.I think David Lifton has mentioned this too. Like many aspects of the shooting, it seems plausible, but it also seems unknowable. I do know that Files claims otherwise- says he missed the eye because of the other shot. But Im not as sold on all aspects of Files' story as many at this f...

dankbaar wrote:Anyway, if I've got it right, according to those who believe that the president was struck from behind as well as the front, he was hit from behind twice (or more?). One shot entered the back of the head and did not exit, and the entry wound was obliterated by the exit wound caused by...

dankbaar wrote:So here's a question: if Nicoletti (or anyone else) fired a shot from the rear that hit JFK in the head an instant before Jimmy's shot, why did not one at Parkland see evidence of such a wound? Easy: The evidence for such a wound have been destroyed by the exit blastout (the size of a...

Thanks, Robert.Chilling, but not at all surprising.

Bruce,Excellent points, and you may very well be correct on all counts. I wish I had all the faith in Jimmy as you do, and maybe that will come over time, but I remain skeptical to some degree: I certainly believe it very likely that he was CIA/Mafia, in Dallas on November 22, 1963, and aware of and...

I have to confess I have not read Doug Horne's masterpiece and so I'm a bit in the dark about how and when he believes JFK's body was altered and when precisely Thom Robinson got to look at it. But I do understand that Robinson believes the throat wound to be one of exit- caused by a shot from the f...

Bob wrote-Thom, you make some valid points. However, we know that there were shooters in the back, based on John Connally's wounds and the curb shot that hit James Teague. We also know that there were men on the 6th Floor of the TSBD and the Algens photo clearly shows three men in the Dal-Tex buildi...

tom jeffers wrote:thomi think every effort was to come from behind just as it is in jimmys story. the front shot was a fluke and needed to be dealt with. the conspirators would have no way of knowing who would be looking at the wounds at parkland so a shot from the front was just another loose end f...

Brilliant.Some will argue that the lower back wound was so shallow because JFK was wearing two back braces, but if that were true I'm sure the braces would have been produced as evidence, and I'm fairly certain no bullet holes in them have ever been shown. (Well, I guess this might have created anot...

Thanks, Wim, it's good to finally get that squared away.As for me, I'm going with the wounds being precisely what the multitude of witnesses reported at Parkland.Thom