Part 4: The Tangled Web(In which I explore the many mistakes and

distortions resulting from the HSCA’s incorrectinterpretations of the head wounds.)

HSCA Outshoot /Autopsy Photos Comparison

Groden Autopsy Photo

Left: HSCA Exhibit F-58

Fox Autopsy Photo: left sideimage inverted and red star

added for comparison.

Entrance

HSCA Outshoot/Autopsy Photos Compariso n

Once one gets past the shocking fact that the HSCA pathology panel couldn’t tell the back of Kennedy’s head from his forehead, one can

begin to understand the incredibly confusing tangle of contradictory information that is the HSCA’s depiction of the head wounds.

When one compares exhibit F-58 with the autopsy photos one finds that in their attempt to make sense of the beveled bone on the forehead

in the mystery photo (which I hope you now agree is not a mystery) the forensic pathology panel adopted an outshoot on the President’s

right forehead just above his temple. One not insignificant problem with this is that this location is visible through the v-shaped tear in

Kennedy’s scalp apparent in the right lateral autopsy photo. That solid bone seems to be all around this location, and that the tear of scalp

appears to have come as a result of an explosion from somewhere above the President’s ear, at least an inch away, only highlights how

unlikely it is for this location to be the location of the outshoot. There is simply no large hole here. While there is no shortage of missing

skull back of this location, this is just not the exit location for the largest fragment of the bullet.

But like a row of dominoes, one mistake led to another, and then another, and then another….

The Tell-Tale Art

Zapruder frame 313,revealing an explosionfrom the front side of

Kennedy’s head.

HSCA ExhibitF-66, the Forensic Pathology Panel’s

depiction of Z-313.

Zapruder frame 312,Kennedy’s position just before the fatal shot.

HSCA Exhibit F-141, purported to correspond

to Z-312

The Tell-Tale Art When one looks through the various HSCA exhibits, particularly those regarding the head wounds, one gets the distinct feeling one is

walking through a house of mirrors. Unlike the Warren Commission exhibits, which, while occasionally misleading—let’s not forget the

Rydberg drawings—were at least for the most part consistent with one another., many of the HSCA exhibits are in complete disagreement

with one another, or with the established evidence.

When one looks at Exhibit F-66, for example, which we’ve already demonstrated was in disagreement with the autopsy photos of the back

of Kennedy’s head, one can quickly observe that it was in disagreement with the Zapruder film as well. While Zapruder frame 313 shows

the explosion from Kennedy’s skull occurring on the front half of his skull, F-66 shows it to be at the rear of his skull.

It should be acknowledged, however, that this exhibit, which seems to be in disagreement with every other exhibit, is absolutely correct on

one pertinent detail correct: the drawing replicates Zapruder frame 312 and depicts Kennedy leaning forward 27 degrees at the moment of

impact. Since the drawing has the bullet descending 20 degrees, one can take from this that the bullet ascended 7 degrees in Kennedy’s

skull. If one projects 20 degrees backwards from Kennedy’s position at Z-312, moreover, one can create a trajectory that hits the school

book depository within 20 feet of the sniper’s nest. This would be close enough for most not already skeptical.

The HSCA, on the other hand, apparently wanted something more precise. They hired a trajectory expert from NASA, Thomas Canning,

and asked him to establish the precise locations of the shooter or shooters by connecting the wounds, establishing the positions of the

victims at the time of the shots, and projecting backwards. When Canning looked at Zapruder frame 312, amazingly, he came to the

conclusion Kennedy was leaning but 11 degrees forward.

Thus, the only HSCA exhibit that accurately depicts Kennedy’s position at Z-312 was ignored in favor of a calibration photo, a photo

created for Canning using an anatomically accurate mannequin, which was placed in different positions and photographed until Canning

could find one that supposedly matched Z-312.

Does it match?

HSCA Exhibit F-66 depicting a bullet’s 20 degree descent into the skull at Z-313, rotated

27 degrees to match the forward inclination in F-58.

Mixed-up Confusion

HSCA Exhibit F-58,with marks signifying

the bullet’s entrance and exit.

HSCA Exhibits F-58 and F-66

from the testimony of Dr. Michael Baden,

9-7-78

Entrance

Why does F-58 have thebullet descend in

Kennedy’s skull, and F-66have it rise?

Mixed-up Confusion Should one wonder if there were legitimate reasons for the HSCA to hire Thomas Canning, one need only compare two exhibits presented

in the testimony of Dr. Michael Baden on 9-7-78. When one compares the trajectory drawing F-66 with F-58, the lateral view of Kennedy

purportedly depicting his wounds, and rotates F-66 the 27 degrees necessary to present Kennedy’s nose even with his EOP (the bump on the

back of his head) one finds that the bullet ascends 7 degrees in Kennedy’s skull in F-66, but descends 3 degrees in Kennedy’s skull in F-58.

This means there is a 10 degree discrepancy between the two drawings. Equally disturbing is that, while both entrances are the same

distance from the lamda suture at the back of Kennedy’s head (where the parietal bone meets the occipital bone), the entrance on F-66 is

lower. The suture moved with it. While one might counter that F-66 was drawn in haste and depicted Kennedy’s nose lower than it should

have been in comparison to the back of his head, this doesn’t really help support the accuracy of F-58, once one remembers that F-66

accurately depicted Kennedy’s position at Zapruder frame 312.

When one looks at Zapruder frame 312, one can notice a dark line running across the frame. This would appear to be a shadow in the gutter

on the south side of Elm Street. Since this line appears to be even, and Elm Street was at a 3 degree decline, this would indicate that

Zapruder’s film was created at a slight angle. This would indicate that any projections based on Z-312 should be adjusted by 3 degrees.

This also means the 27 degree forward lean of Kennedy at Z-312 was really a 30 degree forward lean against the horizontal. While this

means the bullet descent in F-66 should rightfully be 23 degrees, which would project back to a point roughly 6 feet above the roof of the

school book depository, it means the bullet descent in F-58 should rightfully be 33 degrees, which would project right back to the sniper’s

nest window, should the school book depository have been stacked atop a building identical in size!

The problems with rear-projection from a head wound with no clear-cut exit have been noted by many, including Dale Myers. Larry

Sturdivan, the HSCA’s ballistics expert, reflecting on the badly damaged nature of the bullet, has written: “the odd-shaped piece of a bullet

is inevitably unstable and will develop some degree of lift that will curve its trajectory in tissue…Of the thousands of examples of yawed,

deformed, and broken rifle bullets fired into gelatin tissue stimulant at the Biophysics Division lab and other similar facilities, none had a

perfectly straight trajectory. Few are even close…The wound locations have no value in reconstructing the exit trajectory of a yawed or

deformed bullet or bullet fragments.” In their final report, the pathology panel even went further, doubting their ability to accurately

reconstruct the paths of intact bullets as well: “The panel is concerned as to the degree of accuracy attainable in determining the missile

trajectory based on backward extension of a bullet track from within the body, particularly if precision within the range of a few degrees is

required. An intermediate or high velocity bullet creates a temporary bullet track relatively larger than that of the bullet itself. This

precludes reconstruction within the required degree of accuracy.” While these statements can be taken as a disavowal by the doctors of the

work of Thomas Canning, they should have acknowledged the added difficulty they created for him by misinterpreting the autopsy photos

and forcing him to try and link an entrance that was not entrance to an exit that was not an exit.

Forward Lean Comparison

Croft Photo corresponding with Z161. Image inverted

The HSCA trajectory analysisdecided this photo represented

Kennedy pitched 14 degrees forward against the road surface.

HSCA ExhibitF-46, a

depiction of Z190

HSCA Exhibit F-141The calibration

photo purportedlycorresponding

to Z-312

Z-312. The HSCA trajectoryanalysis decided this photo

represented Kennedy pitched 8degrees forward against the

road surface.

Forward Lean Comparison Spotlight on Thomas Canning, the HSCA’s trajectory analyst. While little is known of his hiring, it’s clear it came late in the game. A

2-27-78 HSCA executive session transcript reveals that chief counsel Robert Blakey was pushing for the usage of the Rochester Institute of

Technology at USC to not only test the photographs, but “to give us the measurements that we worried about—that is, where Kennedy was.

They are very confident that they can reconstruct the President’s skull and project in whatever direction back from the head the projectory

(sic—trajectory) analysis.” This indicates Canning was hired as an afterthought, and had little time to prepare for his 9-12-78 testimony.

This is reflected in his work. Although he was introduced by Blakey as an over 30 year employee of NASA and as an expert in flight

trajectory, his testimony is as problematic as can be, forcing one to ask the question: can brilliant men really be this stupid? When one

reflects that Canning was given the authority to disagree with the Forensic Pathology Panel, and had the right to move or re-interpret

President Kennedy’s wounds at his discretion, one might rightly wonder whether Canning was hired more as a salesman than as a scientist.

Even so, when one compares the various exhibits prepared by the HSCA, and Canning’s final conclusions, the HSCA house of cards meets

a hurricane. While Canning found that Kennedy was leaning forward anywhere between 11 and 18 degrees (from the road surface, which

was descending at 3 degrees across the plaza) at frame 190, he was quite convinced Kennedy’s head was leaning forward at precisely 11

degrees (from Zapruder, who was standing on a flat pedestal) at frame 313. Since he decided to go with a forward lean of 14 degrees for

frame 190, based upon the previously mentioned 11 to 18 degrees he interpreted as Kennedy’s forward lean in the Croft photo taken at Z-

161, this meant then that he believed Kennedy was leaning slightly forward at frame 190, was hit in the back, and then sat up before being

hit in the skull at 313. This is exactly the opposite of what the Zapruder film reveals. ANYONE who has seen the film can tell you that

Kennedy reaches for his neck, slumps forward, and then gets shot in the head. Since the eyewitness testimony is filled with references to

Kennedy slumping after first being hit, moreover, it would appear Canning believed Kennedy somehow slumped upwards in his seat.

All it really takes to determine something is wrong is to compare the aforementioned Croft photo, in which Kennedy is supposedly leaning

forward 14 degrees from the road surface (thus, 17 degrees against horizontal), with Zapruder frame 312, which supposedly depicts

Kennedy leaning forward 11 degrees from Zapruder (and thus only 8 compared to the road surface). It’s impossible to imagine that anyone

could actually believe that Kennedy was leaning almost twice as much further forward in the Croft photo than he was at Zapruder frame

312, and yet that is exactly what Canning’s analysis contends. Is it possible that the lone-nutters, including historian John McAdams, who

promote Canning’s conclusions really believe this? While one might rightly point out that my comparison of 14 degrees to 8 degrees

reflects a comparison of the forward lean of Kennedy’s torso versus the forward lean of his head, it is obvious that Kennedy’s head is leaned

far more forward of his body at Z-312 than in the Croft photo. Consequently, in order for Kennedy’s head to be leaning forward only 8

degrees from the street at Z-312, his torso must be bent over backwards. It’s not. As a result, one can only conclude Canning was either

incompetent, insane, or a liar.

This is made even more obvious by looking at exhibit F-46 of the pathology panel, which depicted Kennedy leaning at least twice as far

forward as he was in the Croft photo. In F-46, Kennedy appears to be leaning only slightly more forward than in Z-312. When one corrects

Z-312 for Zapruder’s slant, moreover, the forward pitch in the two images is nearly identical! This establishes that Kennedy was pitched

forward approximately 30 degrees at frame 312 and not the 11 degrees Canning proposed Animator Dale Myers believes Kennedy is

pitched forward 27 degrees within Z-312 as well. Holy smokes, we agree on something!

The Big OOPS

HSCA Exhibit F-137,depicting a flat trajectory

through the skull. HSCA Exhibit F-141. Kennedy’s head is pitched forward 11 degrees

HSCA Exhibit F-139, September 12, 1978,depicting a bullet descending 13 degrees

through head, 17 through air.

HSCA Figure II-12, March, 1979,depicting a bullet descending 13 degrees

through head, 18 through air.

The Big OOPS When one looks at the exhibits Thomas Canning presented in his testimony and report, one can only be amazed that so many take his

trajectory analysis seriously. Seriously flawed, yes, but serious evidence that the shots all came from the school book depository? Afraid not.

To begin with, there was exhibit F-137. Canning described this exhibit as follows: “If one draws a line straight from the in-shoot wound in

the right lateral projection, it turns out to be very close to 90 degrees relative to the external facial axis…” From this it’s obvious this exhibit

was supposed to depict a flat trajectory through a skull in the upright position. Problem is that the trajectory was neither flat nor the skull in

the upright position.. That the skull in the diagram was not upright is made clear by comparing it with the calibration photo created by

Canning to represent Zapruder frame 312 and the supposed position of Kennedy’s skull at the time of the headshot. The slope of the top of the

head is so similar on the two exhibits that at first I thought F-137 was designed to represent the skull at Z-312. A close reading of Canni9ng’s

testimony, however, reveals that F-137 is supposed to be an upright skull while the head in the calibration photo is supposed to be pitched

forward 11 degrees. That the forward pitch is indistinguishable between the two should have alerted someone that something was wrong.

But that’s just the beginning. When one considers that a flat trajectory through a skull pitched forward 11 degrees would project backwards at

an 11 degree angle through the air, one can’t help but wonder why Canning’s exhibit F-139 depicting the head wound trajectory displays a 13

degree descent through Kennedy’s head on the close -up insert. Even worse, it has a 17 degree descent from the window next to the

sniper’s nest into the car on the longer view. As the FBI measured a 15 degree angle from the sniper’s nest to Kennedy for the Warren

Commission, one should wonder how Canning could project an 11 or 17 degree angle to the adjacent window.

That something is wrong becomes even clearer when one looks at Figure II-12 in Canning’s final report. Despite the fact that Canning

revised his estimation that the bullet had a flat trajectory through the skull, realizing that a 5 degree descent through a skull pitched forward 11

degrees would project back 16 degrees to just above the sniper’s nest, he failed to lift the rear projection of the trajectory the 5 degrees one

would expect on Figure II-12. Inexplicably, he lifted it just one degree from 17 to 18. The close-up trajectory of 13 degrees through the

head stayed the same. Since neither the 17 degrees in F-139 nor the 18 degrees in II-12 are mentioned in Canning’s testimony or report, it

seems probable these were just mistakes related to his using drawings not properly made to scale. That these were not made to scale can be

demonstrated by comparing the official measurements of the headshot from the sniper’s nest—265 feet through the air from a 60 foot

elevation (for a ratio of 4.4 to 1), with the drawing in F-139, which has a distance to elevation ratio of only 3.7 to 1, even though the trajectory

led back within a few yards of the sniper’s nest. Disturbinlgy, when asked in his testimony if the diagram was made to scale, Canning said

“yes”. While I hesitate to accuse the man of deliberate mischief, that he changed the backwards trajectory from Kennedy’s wounds from 11

degrees in his testimony to 16 degrees in his report and had the point at which this trajectory hit the face of the school book depository change

by only 10 feet or so in the exhibits he submitted to the committee, smells like a dead rat left inside a gym locker over summer vacation. The

5 degree increase in slope should have raised this location by nearly 30 feet.

When one looks at the HSCA Final Assassinations Report published by Bantam Books, one finds additional cause for concern. In this report,

which, prior to the internet, was the only work by the HSCA widely available to the public, exhibits F-122 and 139 were re-printed, even

though Canning had since modified the trajectories on display. (F-122 was a photo of school book depository with overlapping trajectory

circles.) Presumably, no one noticed that Canning had updated his trajectories. Or maybe someone, like the parade of fans stalking Woody

Allen in his film Stardust Memories, just liked the early ones better.

Shrunken Head Analysis

At left and right: HSCA Exhibits F-147 and F-137,

from the testimony of Thomas Canning, 9-12-78

Skulls at right are sized byCanning’s 11 cm measurement.

At left and right: HSCAFigures II-7 and II-6,

from the HSCA trajectory analysis, March, 1979

Canning has shrunk Kennedy’s skull by almost 7 per cent!

Shrunken Head Analysis When Thomas Canning testified before the HSCA on September 12, 1978, he presented them with HSCA Exhibit F-137, and told them

“The diagram on the left is actually generated from a tracing of a pre-mortem x-ray that had been taken of the President’s head, so that one

is a true scale representation of the President’s skull.” Six months later, when he submitted his final report, he presented them with a nearly

identical diagram. Either this second diagram is a complete sham or Canning lied in his testimony.

As already mentioned, in F-137, Canning depicted a flat trajectory through the skull. Since Dr. Michael Baden had presented F-58, with a

slight trajectory through the skull, to the committee only days before, it is embarrassing but not suspicious that Canning might present his

exhibits as planned, and then make a few changes in his final report. A footnote on page 35 of the HSCA trajectory analysis addresses this

issue: “The interpretation of the head wounds used in defining trajectory reported in testimony on September 12, 1978 differs from this

report because the final illustration from the Forensic Pathology Panel showed the exit wound to be 1 centimeter lower than the entrance,

rather than level with it as had been concluded earlier. Thus, the resulting trajectory is somewhat steeper.” Fair enough. The problem is

with the other footnote on that page: “The above conclusions differ to some extent from the testimony given by Thomas N. Canning…In

each case, the differences reflect new information or analysis resulting from work concluded subsequent to the presentation of preliminary

findings at the hearing.” Well, as Dr. Michael Baden submitted F-58, depicting a slight descent within Kennedy’s skull, 5 days before

Canning testified, this footnote would appear to be a lie.

But it gets worse. Since the pathology panel determined that the bullet descended 1cm in Kennedy’s skull, and since they decided it exited

on the coronal suture connecting the frontal and parietal bones, this meant the bullet would have to have been heading on a greater left to

right trajectory through the skull. As the coronal suture, viewed from the front, runs at roughly a 55 degree angle in this stretch, an exit 1 cm

lower and on the suture would also be an exit slightly more forward and approximately 8 mm further to the right on the skull. This meant

that Canning would have to recalculate both his vertical and horizontal trajectories. The 5 degree greater decline in Kennedy should have

made Canning lift his trajectory circle pointing back to the school book depository by 20 feet or more. He lifted it far less. It should also

have led him to move the circle considerably to the east. If we take a 4 degree increase in left to right angle and project it backwards onto

the face of the school book depository, which is at a 45 degree angle to the trajectory, we find the movement is magnified to 6 degrees,

approximately 24 feet. The trajectory circle in F-137, however, would appear to be less than that distance from the east side of the school

book depository. Therefore, this mere 1 cm movement of this exit wound should have forced Canning to move the center of his trajectory

circle across the street to the top floor of the Dal-Tex Building, roughly three windows north of Elm and Houston. Instead, well, he found a

way to keep the bullet on its former trajectory, but still have it exit further to the right on Kennedy’s skull.

He shrank Kennedy’s skull! On II-6 the length of the bullet’s passage through the skull is identical to F-137, even though it exits further

forward on the skull. A comparison of F-137 and II-6 in which the 11 cm passage through the skull is made to match demonstrates that the

skull in II-6 is indeed 6.67% smaller. What’s worse, since the distance from the EOP to the in-shoot supposedly remained 9 cm, this would

indicate Kennedy’s skull was not only shrunk, it was crushed, as the reduction in size occurred laterally.

But Figure II-7 wasn’t any better. In order to maintain that the bullet traveled the same distance through a 6% smaller skull and still exited

on the coronal suture, Canning moved the suture forward on the skull. So much for preserving the “true scale representation of the

President’s skull” …

The Ten Degrees of Misinformation

HSCA Exhibit F-58 from the testimony ofDr. Michael Baden, representing the

findings of the Forensic Pathology Panel

Figure II-6 from the final report of trajectory analyst Thomas Canning,

rotated 10 degrees.

HSCA Exhibit F-297, Kennedy’s pre-mortem x-ray,

rotated 10 degrees.

Drawing by Dr. Lawrence Angel,Taken from Addendum E of the HSCA

Forensic Pathology Panel Report

Blue arrows represent thetrajectory in F-58.

.

The Ten Degrees of Misinformation After noting that both F-66, the Ida Dox Drawing depicting the bullet trajectory through the skull, and F-137, the trajectory analysis

depiction of this same passage, were pitched forward 10 degrees when compared to the other exhibits, I was at a loss. I was unable to

determine how and why such a mistake could be made. After all, by depicting a 10 degree greater descent through Kennedy’s skull it

would force Canning to project Kennedy’s wounds up onto the roof or above, a fate that was only avoided through Canning’s bizarre

interpretation of frame Z-312.. Upon re-reading the testimony of both Canning and medical illustrator Ida Dox, however, I found an answer

to the first part of my question—the how. Cropped x-rays of President Kennedy were used in the creation of both F-66 and F-137. Upon

close inspection, both of these x-rays presented the skull already pitched forward ten degrees (or more). Ironically, this led me to be more

suspicious about the second part of the question—the why

When one looks at the pre-mortem x-ray, which was entered into evidence as Exhibit F-297, one can’t help but notice the crop. For some

reason, the face and jaw have been removed. This was supposedly done for the Kennedy family’s privacy. Since Kennedy’s face is

viewable on the autopsy x-rays, however, and these were entered into evidence, this makes little sense. What’s more, since the x-rays of

Kennedy’s jaw and teeth were used to confirm the authenticity of the x-rays, and were released as public exhibits during the testimony of

Dr. Lowell Levine, the decision to crop the x-rays would have to be considered suspicious. Since both F-66 and F-137, as a result of the

skull’s being tilted too far forward, portrayed the lambda suture and rear bullet entrance a centimeter or so lower on the skull than in F-58,

one can’t help but wonder if the decision to present the x-rays in such a manner was tied to a decision to artificially lower the wound. Or

are we to believe it was merely a coincidence that in Canning’s trajectory analysis, he used an in-shoot 1 cm lower than was measured by

the pathology panel?

Should one doubt that Canning’s trajectory drawing misrepresents the position of an upright skull, one need not even reach for an anatomy

book. Both the HSCA’s exhibit F-58, and the drawing of Dr. Lawrence Angel, a renowned expert on the human skull, presented the skull

in a basically upright manner, with the bump at the back of the head (the EOP) in line with the end of the nose. F-137, of course, depicts

the EOP in line with Kennedy’s eyes.

Calibration Photo/Z-312 Comparison

Calibration Photo/Z312 Comparison

When one looks at the calibration photo prepared for Thomas Canning to demonstrate the President’s actual position at frame 312, one can

sense how desperate Canning was to find a position for the President’s skull where a trajectory would point back to the school book

depository.

On the calibration photo, most noticeably, the President’s right shoulder is lifted far off the back seat of the limo, resulting in a turn of his

whole body sharply to its left. That this 27 degree turn makes it possible for a bullet traveling 8 degrees right to left to enter near the mid-

line of the President’s skull and exit from the right side of his head at the location picked by the pathology panel would have to be taken as

more than a coincidence. That this turn is greatly exaggerated can be demonstrated by simply projecting Mrs. Kennedy into the calibration

photo. When one creates a comparison where the heads are the same size one can see that while the President in Z-312 is looking just to the

right of the first lady, the President in the calibration photo is looking just to the left.

An interesting point about this photo. On one of the footnotes in his report, Canning defends the changes from his testimony by re-stating

his probably false claim that the doctors moved the wounds on him after his testimony. He goes on to say “The remaining revisions resulted

from the availability of a superior enhanced reproduction of Zapruder frame 312 for comparison with the calibration photographs.” This

undoubtedly indicates he changed his interpretation of the calibration photo between his testimony and his report. The numbers given in

each instance, however, were exactly the same: In both cases, Canning asserted that Kennedy was turned 25 degrees from Zapruder, was

tilted 11 degrees forward, and was leaning 15 degrees to his left. This footnote makes me wonder if someone has changed Canning’s

testimony. If Canning originally said the calibration photo demonstrated Kennedy to be leaning forward 15 degrees, for instance, this might

explain both the strange footnote cited above and the failure of F-139 to match the 11 degree descent implied in Canning’s testimony. In

any event, Canning’s interpretation of Zapruder frame 312 is just plain wrong..

Dale Myers is another writer who rejects the accuracy of this calibration photo. While creating his computer simulation/cartoon he ignored

Canning and developed his own interpretation of the President’s position at Z-312. When he projected backwards from the HSCA outshoot

back through the in-shoot in the cowlick, however, Myers found that the trajectory led back to someone hanging in space, well above the

Dal-Tex Building. He determined from this that there was no clear outshoot and acknowledges on his website that his depiction of the head-

shot is not based upon a precise alignment of the wounds. While this is to his credit, it was to ABC’s discredit that they failed to point any of

this out on their Beyond Conspiracy special presenting Myers’ work.

A Nose is a Nose Analysis

Z-268: Kennedy’s nose is easily discernible.

Z-284: less than one second after 268.Kennedy’s nose is still there.

Z-304: barely one second after 284.Kennedy’s nose is still there.

Z-312: less than a half second after 304Is that still his nose or what?

A Nose is a Nose Analysis When Congressman Christopher Dodd pointed out to Canning during his testimony that the calibration photo depicted Kennedy turned far

more sharply to his left than in Z-312, Canning delivered a surprising response: “I can assure you the images play games with you…For

instance, the dark lapel of Mrs. Kennedy’s blue blouse has a notch which is in close juxtaposition with the President’s nose. The notch

makes it look as if the President’s nose extends much further than it really does…On the other hand, when we account for where other pink

and blue elements are and behind the President’s face we conclude that his facial profile is well to the left of its apparent position when

only a cursory examination is the basis.”

According to the book Mortal Error, Canning said much the same thing to ballistician Howard Donahue when he contacted Canning and

questioned his analysis.

When one looks at the whole Zapruder film, however, and keeps their eye on Kennedy’s nose, one can see that Kennedy’s nose is exactly

where it is in Z-312 for many frames beforehand, and that it would be very hard to confuse his nose for Jackie’s ever-moving clothing.

From this it would seem obvious that Canning spent too much time staring at Z-312 and talked himself into believing he was looking at

Jackie’s clothing. Perhaps he realized that if it was Kennedy’s nose he was looking at, then Kennedy wasn’t turned far enough to his left to

allow a bullet to enter his cowlick and exit his right forehead on a straight trajectory from the sniper’s nest. Indeed, it seems Canning

himself knew his interpretation of Z-312 would be controversial, for the last section of his report reads like a pre-planned alibi: “Serious

impediments to accurate interpretation of the photograph (Z-312) were occasioned by the extremely complicated background to the

President’s face resulting from Mrs. Kennedy’s pink suit and dark blue blouse and by the interior surface of the left side of the limousine.

These problems were overcome in part by a computer-enhanced version of Zapruder frame 312.”

While it’s tempting to say that if Canning really believed the nose in Z-312 was Jackie’s blouse, then he must have swallowed the Kool-

Aid, I will refrain from such a cheap shot. Due to his NASA background, one might logically assume that instead Canning swallowed

some TANG.

Mary Moorman Photograph Analysis

Above: Zapruder frame 315 showing Mary Moorman at far left of frame, taking her photograph.

At right: Mary Moorman photograph taken between Z-315 and Z-316

X

At left: HSCA Exhibit F-138, the trajectory analysisof the shot at 313(arrows added)

If Kennedy’s head was turned26.6 degrees to his left at 313, how

come Moorman couldn’t see his face?

Moorman’s view: X marks the estimated position of Moorman

relative to the limo at 315.

Direction of Kennedy’s

gaze as per HSCA

trajectory analysis. Proposed actual angle

Mary Moorman Photograph Analysis

When one looks at the Polaroid photograph taken by eyewitness Mary Moorman just after the headshot one finds further reason to

disbelieve the HSCA’s trajectory analysis. While Moorman’s photo clearly reveals the back of Kennedy’s head, the HSCA’s analysis is

clear that her photo should have shown the side of Kennedy’s head.

The HSCA exhibits show that they concluded the limousine was turned 8 degrees to the right of a straight line coming from the sniper’s

nest at the time of the fatal headshot. The calibration photo reflects that Kennedy was turned roughly 27 degrees to his left. From this the

HSCA could conclude that a bullet fired from the sniper’s nest and entering near the middle of the back of Kennedy’s head and exiting

near his temple would be traveling roughly 19 degrees to his right. Canning’s trajectory analysis backed this up, stating that the left to

right angle across Kennedy’s skull connecting his wounds was 18.6 degrees. All the ducks seemed to be in a row. But what if the bullet

didn’t travel in a straight line? Since accepting this possibility would leave the door open for conjecture that the fatal head shot came from

somewhere other than the TSBD, that would have been troublesome for the HSCA.

And what if it can be demonstrated that Kennedy was not turned 26.6 degrees to his left?

Since Mary Moorman’s photograph shows Kennedy in line with the back tire of the limo and the stairs on the grassy knoll, one can fairly

accurately place both her position on the grass and the timing of her photograph. Consequently, most have her taking her photograph

between Z-315 and Z-316. Ironically, she can be seen in the Zapruder film snapping her photograph in the far left area of the sprocket

holes in frame Z-315. The limousine has scarcely passed her. Since the limousine was heading away from Moorman at 40 degrees left of

her view, and since Kennedy was supposedly turned 27 degrees from the direction of the limousine, this means that In Canning’s analysis,

Kennedy should have been only 23 degrees removed from profile to Moorman. As you can’t even see his face in the photograph, it would

appear he wasn’t really turned that far.

Bu what if he’d changed his head position between 312 and 315?

More Moorman Photo Analysis

Zapruder Frame 312

Mary Moorman photograph taken between Z-315 andZ-316. Is Kennedy turned further away from Moorman

in this photo or from Zapruder in the frames at right?

Zapruder Frame 315: relative position of ear(just behind the splayed open part of the skull)

to the back of the head appears to be the same asat Z-312. Thus there was no turn to the right.

Perspectives of Moorman (green arrows) and Zapruder(pink arrows) as per the HSCA trajectory analysis, on left,

and our new perspective, on right. Blue arrows mark position of ear.

More Moorman Photo Analysi s

To be sure the angle of Kennedy’s head hadn’t changed between Z-312 and Z-315, one need only to look at the photos side by side and

note the position of his ear. A turn to the left or the right would change the position of his ear relative to the rest of his head. As there

appears to be little change, one can assume his head did not turn upon immediate impact of the bullet.

This pretty much demolishes the so-called “jet effect” theory, as proposed by Nobel prize-winning physicist Luis Alvarez. The “jet effect”

holds that the force of brain matter exploding from Kennedy’s pressurized skull was significant enough to fling his whole body backwards,

as seen in the frames following Z-313. Well, if the “jet effect” from matter exploding from the right temple of Kennedy’s head was strong

enough to push his body it should also have been strong enough to turn his head. If you turn your head slightly to your left and apply the

slightest pressure to your right temple area it will turn your head further to the left. And yet there is little change in Kennedy’s position

between Z-312 and Z-315. Even worse, for Alvarez’ theory, the Moorman photos show Kennedy’s head is turned too far to its right, when

compared to the HSCA’s trajectories. If there really was a “jet effect” it would mean then that Kennedy had started out looking nearly

straight ahead, but if he’d been looking straight ahead, a bullet entering near the midline of his skull on an 8 degree right to left trajectory

would have exited out near his left eye, and not his right temple. If anyone knows of any reason why the “jet effect” would fail to move the

skull until after all the ejected brain matter was long gone, I’d appreciate the explanation.

When one turns a skull 23 degrees from profile, the perspective of Moorman on Kennedy should he really have had his head turned 27

degrees to the left within the limousine at Z-312, one can see that the skull is not far from profile, with the ear almost in the middle and the

left side of the face visible. When one turns the skull the degree I theorize Kennedy was actually turned, 36 degrees, the ear moves closer

to the face and more of the right side of the head becomes visible. When one realizes none of Kennedy’s face is visible in the Moorman

photo, due at least in part to Kennedy’s hair being draped to his left, it becomes clear that this new perspective makes a lot more visual

sense than Canning’s trajectory analysis. A quick measurement of the relative positions of the ear within the two theories is convincing,

assuming the anatomic models used are similar to Kennedy. While Zapruder frame 312, after the frame is rotated 30 degrees so that his

skull is made upright, depicts the back of Kennedy’s ear at roughly 50% the horizontal distance between the tip of his nose and the far back

of his head, and our new perspective is in close agreement, the Canning perspective depicts the ear at only 39% of the distance. The head

is turned too far to the left.

If one should continue to doubt that a NASA scientist could screw up to such a degree, one should sit back and consider that by deciding

Kennedy’s head was turned 27 degrees to his left, Canning also decided that Kennedy was more in profile to Moorman, to the extent that

Kennedy was turned only 23 degrees from her at the time of her photograph. Since, as part of this same analysis the HSCA determined

Kennedy was turned from Abraham Zapruder by approximately 25 degrees at frame 312, this means the HSCA determined that Kennedy

was turned further away from Zapruder at frame 312, where he’s almost in profile, than he was from Moorman at the time of her

photograph, which doesn’t even show his face! When one considers that the limousine was still heading towards Zapruder at 312, and

reached exact profile around 315, this means that Kennedy was turned an additional two degrees away from Zapruder at 315, or 27

degrees. And yet Kennedy’s horribly-damaged head in the Zapruder film at 315 is still obviously more in profile than in the Moorman

photo, even though it should be turned 4 degrees further away!

By now, it should be clear that virtually every exhibit created for the trajectory analysis was misleading, and most all the conclusions in

Thomas Canning’s report false. This leads one to ask “But how could this have happened? If the HSCA had hired Canning in order to

move things around and make a case for Oswald as a lone assassin, why did the Committee turn around and find a conspiracy was likely?

The answer is I’m not sure. Researcher Jim Di Eugenio reveals in his article The Sins of Robert Blakey that somewhere in his

investigation Canning stopped listening to Dr. Baden, the head of the forensic pathology panel, and started a back-door channel to two of

its more conservative panelists, Dr. Loquvam, who was quite demonstrative in his urging that all disputes between panelists be kept off the

record, and Dr.Weston, who’d already confirmed Oswald’s sole guilt on a 1975 CBS special. Canning’s frustration with Baden and in

general is confirmed by his January 1979 letter to chief counsel Robert Blakey. In this letter, Canning complained of the adversarial staff

lawyers and the difficulty of getting “quantitative data—and even consistent descriptions—from the forensic pathologists.” That Canning

was not diabolical, but simply sloppy, seems to be confirmed by this letter, as Canning recorded the date as 1978 when it was in fact 1979.

Further understanding of Canning’s errors comes from studying his testimony. First of all, Blakey introduced Canning by telling the

audience that “the trajectory analysis itself was a joint effort between the committee and the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration. An engineer with NASA Space Project Division, Tom Canning, constructed the final product from information provided

by the committee from its various panels.” Hmm, so the man has no experience with wound ballistics but has nevertheless been tasked by

a government agency dependent on congress for survival with creating “product,” based on information given to him by the committee.

Doesn’t exactly sound like an independent search for truth, now does it? Canning’s own words tell the rest of the story: When asked by

Congressman (now Senator) Dodd, about the small size of his trajectory circles (the area from which a shot was most likely fired--derived

through rear-projection of a path between two known wound locations), Canning admitted his circles were much smaller than would

normally be created by a forensic pathologist, whom he described as overly “conservative.” This indicates that Canning felt he had a new

bold approach whereby he could accurately pinpoint the location of a shooter to a far greater degree than any of his more-experienced

colleagues. One wonders then if this “boldness” was a factor in Canning’s employment, if not a prerequisite, since it clearly was not his

experience. Just as troubling as Canning’s over-playing his hand is that Dodd’s request for more “conservative” exhibits, which included

the areas of the Dal-Tex Building which fell within the trajectory circles, went unheeded. The final report was printed and distributed

using Canning’s admittedly bold exhibits, without any conservative or thorough exhibits for balance.

An overall view of the HSCA may also be enlightening. While the HSCA eventually found for a conspiracy, this was based on last-minute

testimony that a recording of the assassination revealed more shots than Oswald could have fired alone, and a subsequent confirmation of

this testimony from a separate group of experts. This means that until the last minute, as late as December, 1978, three months after the

public hearings, the HSCA was heading towards the conclusion that Oswald acted alone. Is it any wonder then that the medical exhibits

and trajectory exhibits, most prepared for testimony many months before the final report, were so bold in their attempts to show there was

only one shooter? The men who prepared these exhibits had reason to believe that this was what the HSCA was looking for: convincing

proof that Oswald acted alone. No one wanted another investigation.

The Forgotten Angle

Above: HSCA Exhibits F-147 and Figure II-7, rotated 25 degreesto recreate Kennedy’s leftward lean in Z-312.

At right: a crop from the Moorman photo demonstratingthe severity of the lean.

The Forgotten Angle Should one still have trouble believing that the HSCA trajectory analysis, performed jointly with NASA, was a complete sham, one need

only look at the Moorman photo and reflect on Kennedy’s severe pitch to his left. While Canning’s interpretation of the calibration photo

acknowledged Kennedy was leaning 15 degrees to his left, a careful reading of Canning’s report reveals that this 15 degrees was 15 degrees

from Zapruder, and that Zapruder was elevated 10 degrees from Kennedy, standing on a flat pedestal. This indicates that Kennedy was

actually leaning 25 degrees to his left when compared to true vertical. A few degrees of this might have been caused by the road surface,

which appears to be slanted ever so slightly towards the middle of the plaza. (If someone has measured this, please let me know.) In any

case, this 25 degree lean is supported by Kennedy’s appearance in the Moorman photo. Ironically, it would appear to be one of the few

correct measurements made by Canning. So why didn’t he use it?

His avoidance of the ramifications of this measurement becomes clear when one looks back at the frontal views of the head wounds. Since

Canning initially testified that the bullet headed left to right and that the entrance and exit of the bullet were on the same level, a 25 degree

rotation to the left will lift the exit to a point above the entrance. Considerably above the entrance. A quick measurement using Canning’s

own diagram tells us that the exit in F-147, once adjusted for the leftward lean, was in fact 1.6 cm above the entrance. Based upon

Canning’s own calculations that a 1 cm drop within the skull represented a descent of 5 degrees, this meant that the bullet causing the

wounds in F-147 in fact ascended 8 degrees within the skull. Since Canning’s interpretation of the calibration photo held that Kennedy was

only leaning forward 11 degrees, this meant that Canning, when taking into account the leftward lean, should have determined that Kennedy

was killed by someone on the ground, somewhere behind him on Elm Street, as Elm Street descends 3 degrees throughout the Plaza.

Adding to the confusion is that this lean to the left decreases the left to right angle through Kennedy’s head by a degree. If one were to trust

Canning’s calibration photo completely, this would indicate that someone on the north side of Elm Street back towards the school book

depository fired the fatal shot.

When one looks at exhibit II-6 from Canning’s final report, of course, things are slightly better. But only slightly. Here, the ascent in

Kennedy’s skull is only 3 degrees. Since Canning stuck by his determination that Kennedy was leaning forward but 11 degrees at Z-312, he

should , if he would have bothered to take into account Kennedy’s severe leftward lean, have also determined that the bullet killing

Kennedy was descending 8 degrees, from the second or third floor of the school book depository. Since Oswald was seen on the second

floor shortly after the shooting, Canning may have been able to make this one fly. He would have had a problem explaining how or why

Oswald ran up to the sixth floor, hid his gun, and then raced back down to the floor of the shooting, however.

I’m being facetious, of course, but the HSCA trajectory analysis is so flawed it’s simply ridiculous. Why anyone still defends it or claims it

as support of their theories is beyond me.

Windshield Fragment Trajectory

HSCA Figure II-19(with head position and windshield mark added)

Arrow represents trajectoryfrom school book depository.

At left:HSCA Exhibit

F-138

At left:Warren Commission

Exhibit CE 350

At far left:Warren Commission Exhibit

CE 902

Windshield Fragment Trajectory One final reason to doubt the HSCA trajectories comes from a close inspection of the Warren Commission and HSCA exhibits depicting the

fatal head shot. Significantly, they all place Kennedy near the middle of the limousine, directly contradicting the Zapruder film, which

shows Kennedy, sitting on the far right side of the limousine, slumped slightly to his left. It is Mrs. Kennedy that moves towards the

President, and not the President who moves closer to Mrs. Kennedy.

This confused me until I began to wonder if this movement placed the exit wound more in line with the crack found on the windshield.

Since the bullet fragment found in the seat directly below the crack was the nose of the bullet believed to have hit Kennedy in the skull, this

only made sense.

This led me to wonder what would happen if one projected back from the windshield fragment itself, at the 8 degrees which would

presumably lead back to the school book depository. This trajectory led back to the President’s position several inches closer to the door

than depicted by the HSCA, or as re-enacted by the FBI for the Warren Commission. So why had they moved him further to his left than

necessary?

I then realized that this movement of Kennedy’s body to its left by a foot or so along with Canning’s excessive turn of Kennedy’s head to its

left allowed for the nose of the bullet to traverse the right side of the President’s skull and continue on to hit the windshield, in a straight

line. A proper placement of Kennedy in his seat, taking into account a slight slump to his left, however, reveals that the trajectory from the

position of Kennedy’s wound to the crack on the windshield was greater than the 8 degrees of the bullet coming from the TSBD. This

means the bullet, if it had come from the TSBD, was slightly deflected to its left upon exit, which makes little sense if it had indeed traveled

through the President’s skull in a straight line, as Canning maintained.

Even worse, the bullet as tracked by Canning would leave Kennedy’s skull still heading 16 degrees downwards, which makes no sense

considering that the nose of the bullet ended up hitting the windshield at the same level or slightly higher than its supposed exit from

Kennedy’s skull. Not that this bothered Canning all that much. He told the HSCA: “I noted qualitatively that damage to the windshield of

the car appeared to be in reasonable directional alignment but did not appear to be particularly in good slope alignment. But I did no

quantitative work in that line.”

Adding to the significance of this fragment’s hitting the windshield is that there was a second bullet fragment, a portion of the copper jacket

including the copper base, which landed in the front seat after striking a metal strip above the windshield. The discovery of this fragment is

a problem for the official story for several reasons. The book Medicolegal Investigation of Death, by the Clark Panel’s Dr. Russell Fisher

and the HSCA’s Dr. Werner Spitz, discussed the separation of a copper jacket from its lead core as follows: “Sometimes the jacket of a

bullet separates from the core upon impact…In such cases the jacket and the core each assume separate paths. Whereas the core may leave

the body, the jacket very seldom does.” So, if a copper fragment “very seldom:” traverses a body, why should we conclude one traversed a

skull heading downwards and then changed directions upon exit?

We shouldn’t. Certainly there’s a reasonable explanation out there for why the two largest bullet fragments ended up on the front seat of

the limo…we just have to find it…

Brain Trajectory Analysis

HSCA Figure 32: a drawing of a photograph of the President’s brain

viewed from above.Black lines added for

purposes of comparison.

HSCA Figure 24, rotated 25 degrees to reflect Kennedy’s lean at Z-312.

Posterior view of a brain,rotated 25 degrees to

reflect Kennedy’s lean to the left at Z-312.

From sniper’snest

Sturdivan exitto windshield

Zapruder frame 312, depicting a 27 degree forward lean

Red stars and arrows representWarren Commission entrances,

and trajectories. Blue stars and arrows represent HSCA

entrances and trajectories. Larger stars represent the positions of exits on the far side of the head.

Cross-section of skull revealing brain in situ,rotated 27 degrees to match Z-312

HSCA exitto windshield

Brain Trajectory Analysis When one compares the Warren Commission trajectory, the HSCA trajectory, and the damage to Kennedy’s brain one finds another

mystery to ponder. Neither trajectory makes much sense. While one of the reasons given by the HSCA pathology panel for accepting the

Clark Panel’s location for the entrance wound was that they determined by looking at the autopsy photos that “the posterior-inferior portion

of the cerebellum” was “virtually intact…It certainly does not demonstrate the degree of laceration, fragmentation, or contusion (as appears

subsequently on the superior aspect of the brain) that would be expected in this location if the bullet wound of entrance were as described in

the autopsy report,” the entrance in the cowlick makes even less sense. For one, a bullet entering the cowlick with the skull leaned as far

forward as a t Z-312 would have to traverse the brain just beneath the skull for a distance before exploding upwards; this seems unlikely, as

the strong impact of a fragmenting bullet with the skull almost on edge would almost certainly guarantee a large “gutter” wound of both

entrance and exit and rule out the smooth oval entrance identified in the autopsy photos. For two, a bullet entering the HSCA’s entrance

would enter the skull at a point further forward than 20% of the brain, and yet still somehow create a channel running just right of the mid-

line of the brain for the length of the brain. For three strikes and out, even though a fragmenting bullet is reputed to leave a trail the shape

of an ever-widening cone, the greatest damage to the brain apparent in the only released drawing of the brain appears to the left of the

trajectory, with the largest section of intact brain seemingly right on the trajectory at the exit.

The Warren trajectory is also unworkable. A bullet entering just right of the EOP would almost certainly strike cerebellum, which was

reportedly undamaged. While there were extensive lacerations of the brain, they were not reflective of the passage of a fragmenting bullet

from low on the occipital lobe to high on the frontal lobe. Outside of the three autopsy doctors, I’m unaware of any doctor looking at the

photos of the brain and coming away from the archives convinced a bullet could have entered low and exited high.

The one man who ardently defends the low entrance is, ironically, the HSCA’s Larry Sturdivan. In his book, The JFK Myths, he explains

that fragmenting bullets will sail upwards and leave a curved trajectory. While this could very well be, he offers little in the way of

explanation as to why the cerebellum remained intact. Even if one concedes the entrance could have been higher than the cerebellum, it

still wouldn’t explain why the area of the cerebellum closest to the entrance wasn’t damaged, as there were areas significantly above the

entrance that were destroyed. Sturdivan also acknowledges that a “Gutter wound extends from tip of occipital lobe to tip of frontal lobe,”

but fails to note that this damage is to the left of a trajectory entering one inch to the right of the EOP and exiting on the right side, as in his

analysis. Finally, Sturdivan’s trajectory is tainted by his belief that a fragment exited Kennedy’s forehead, where not one of the dozens who

saw Kennedy’s wounds reported an exit. If one were to hold, as the HSCA, that this presumed exit was that of the nose of the bullet,

moreover, one would have a difficult time explaining why this bullet traveled 5 degrees right to left, once one takes into account Kennedy’s

leftward lean (based on a 17 cm length of Kennedy’s skull). This 5 degree right to left angle through the skull, when taken in conjunction

with the fact Kennedy’s skull was turned at least 14 degrees to his left at Z-312, along with the 3 degree or more ascent of the bullet, would

project back to a shooter lying on the ground 10-20 yards behind the President’s right shoulder. This is incredibly problematic unless one

accepts as Sturdivan that the nose of the bullet curved both significantly upwards and to the left within the skull while traveling at better

than 1,000 feet per second. The Warren Commission itself never even tried to explain this fragment’s trajectory.

If one could figure out how Kennedy’s brain could be damaged the way it was by a bullet whose fragments would logically go on to hit the

windshield, the nonsensical Warren Commission and HSCA trajectories could be dismissed. There’s simply no reason to believe them.