Kroth explanation of Who dun it...

[Freddy Janes]

This makes as much sense to me as anything else I've ever heard...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65N3eP2yvbQ

[djt52800]

Agreed this may be as close as we get to what happened.

[Bob]

I agree with a lot of what was presented. I do disagree on one point, though. Chuck Nicoletti did not shoot JFK in the throat, like Dr. Kroth had mentioned. No one did. When JFK threw his arms up to his chest, he was reacting to a back wound. The same one Gerald Ford moved up several inches to make the ridiculous single bullet theory even remotely possible. Take a look at the Zapruder film. A close look. Tell me if you see an actual throat wound. You won't see a wound or any blood whatsoever. Like JFK, I have had multiple back issues due to some herniated discs (one which was replaced in 2012). JFK was actually wearing a back brace that day in the limo. Anyway, when I am touched in the back unexpectedly, my hands immediately go up around my chest area. I have closed fists as well. Just like JFK.Nicoletti hit JFK in the back of the head just before Jimmy Files hit JFK in the temple with his shot. Files has said that he was aiming for the right eye of JFK, but just as he fired, JFK's head moved forward due to the impact of the Nicoletti shot. That is why there was such a monstrous hole in the back of JFK's head. Not to mention that Jimmy used a mercury bullet that exploded on impact. In fact, Files says the JFK throat wound was caused by some exiting shrapnel from his mercury round. Sound unbelievable? One of the few people who were at both the pre-autopsy procedure and the actual autopsy, Thom Robinson, said that there were a couple of small shrapnel wounds on JFK's face. That also came from the mercury round. Robinson also told Wim that the doctors traced JFK's head wound all the way to his throat. Doug Horne talks about Robinson quite a bit in Volume IV of Inside the ARRB.

[Freddy Janes]

Seems to me a throat would caused by shrapnel from temple shot would be highly unlikely. Would almost be another magic bullet movement. Don't think it could have made it that far down without hitting some other mass first. Why couldn't there have been multiple mercury rounds, which would have made a small entry wound and no particular exit?

[JDB4JFK]

Bob if the first shot hit Kennedy in the back why wasn't he thrown violently forward, and why couldn't he had told he's wife I'm hit get down?He appears to me to be in a state of shock and can't talk. The shot in the back didn't penetrate the body so if that was the first shot why wouldn't Kennedy be able to communicate to people in the limousine especially his wife like "Guys I've been shot get down"? It looks like to me he's trying to cough up a bullet. Your comments appreciated!

[Freddy Janes]

I think a 22 short suppressed or something along that line would have hit with practically no reaction and no thru and thru. I have always heard that hitmen often used the 22 short for close range head shots, like Beretta 950BS with suppressor , but guess they could have also shot them in a bolt action or semi-auto as well. 22CB caps are pretty quiet unsuppressed. That would explain the lack of rifle shot cracks in the time before the high powered rifle shots later on.

[Slav]

Bob who would you say shot JFK in the back?The only think I don't understand is when he was shot in the back it's like he was drugged or something it seems like he does not move or do anything until the nickoletti and files headshot, what happened to make him sit still like a sitting duck, did they drug him ?

[Bob]

Freddy, please look at some of the threads about what a mercury-laced bullet will do. It explodes and goes in various directions after impact. Jimmy only took one shot and he was the only shooter to use a mercury round.JDB4JFK, the back brace basically stopped the bullet from impacting at a violent force. Ironically, that same back brace also hampered JFK from being able to get down. Also, we know now that the version of the Zapuder film we watch has been altered. Again, Doug Horne in Volume IV of Inside the ARRB proves without a doubt that the CIA had their hands on the film the weekend of the assassination. People that saw the original film say the version we see now is completely different from the original version. Slav, the shot could have come from any of three places. The TSBD (but not LHO), the Dal-Tex-Building or the Records Building. I don't think he was drugged, although he did take a fair share of medication for all of his ailments. The back brace hampered his ability to get down.

[JDB4JFK]

Thanks for replying Bob, and I know the back brace kept the bullet from entering his body but why couldn't he talk and say I've been shot or hit? It looks like Jackie is trying to fine out what's wrong with him but he cant seem to tell her that's what I don't understand unless he was shot in the throat!

[JDThomas]

Although I don't have the links to hand at the moment, two researchers have made some interesting points in recent times:1. Bob Harris has postulated that JFK's reaction to the first shot is actually an involuntary muscle reflex to being wounded in the back. The position of the back wound, close to but not impacting the spine would support this, as would JFK's clenched fists and high elbow angles. Whilst this idea is certainly not a done deal, it makes a lot of sense. The trauma/shock reactions following such a hit would also limit JFK's movement in the time after the involuntary reaction, perhaps even a temporary partial paralysis, apparently common in near spinal trauma injuries. This leaves the frontal throat wound as either being damage from the front or fragmentation from a different shot. Please remember that the Parkland doctors, who were experienced in dealing with gunshot wounds, were treating it as a wound of entry. Normally an entry wound is smaller and cleaner than an exit wound and experienced emergency medical staff would know the difference in nearly all (but not all) cases.2. Although James R. Gordon has not be the first down the road that he is on, his mathematical and computer-generated modelling together with excellent use of language makes him the best in his field to my mind. His point is that too many researchers in the past (particularly Warren apologists) have treated JFK 's and Connally's bodies as hollow vessels when studying wounding patterns and trajectories ... or at best, if we are charitable, have treated them as no more than crash test dummies. They forget, disregard or diminish the three dimensional nature of bodies; that they contain bone, cartilage, muscle flesh, nerves and blood vessels. Gordon demonstrates that the Warren Commission fallacy of JFK having a rear-to-front thru-neck wound without causing serious damage to vertebrae, tracheal cartilage, major blood vessels and multiple strap muscles really is a nonsense.Importantly Gordon also concentrates on the effects of wound damage. Thus when Connally's wrist is shattered by a bullet wound, it would be impossible for him to hold his hat with that hand, or anything else for that matter. This helps narrow down the time when he was hit - any film of photos of him holding his hat in Dealey Plaza shows time when he was not wounded (hence dissproving the SBT). Furthermore, Connally had 10 cm of his fifth rib smashed by a bullet wound - for practical purposes the portion of bone was obliterated - it would have been physically impossible for him to turn his body after receiving this wound. Thus again, when Connally is seen turning, he cannot have been hit at that point.Taking this into consideration, Gordon concludes that with the trajectory of the wounds that he received, by the time that he was hit, he was no longer in a position to have been hit by a shooter from the Book Depository, it is HIGHLY unlikely that he could have been hit from a shooter in the Daltex, but he was well within parameters to have been hit by a shot from the County Records building.