Jimmy Files Shot To JFK'S Head Killed JFK Instantly:

[ChristophMessner]

Why did Rosselli and Files risk serving two masters at all?

[tom jeffers]

consider yourself a sub contractor and you work for yourself and sometimes you work for hire. sometimes you do more than 1 job for somebody. a man has to eat.

[Pennyworth]

[quote="ThomZajac"]Grrrrr.The back wound was originally created to implicate Oswald (fired from behind, and the original wound to associate with the magic bullet planted on the stretcher) but it was too low to have caused an exit wound to the throat, And so, as everyone knows, they raised it up!I was going to question why they altered the back wound's entrance , but you just answered my questionOne more thing. Proponents of the fragment/shrapnel theory often say that the smallness of the throat wound fooled the doctors into thinking it was one of entrance, but a careful examination of what the doctors observed reveals that they commented on the DIRECTION OF THE DAMAGE; the damage wend inward.Yes I believe that the throat bullet came from the front from an elevated level, entered the throat and continued at a downward slant to the back, then exited. Thats why the car was cleaned up so fast IMO.I certainly understand what you are saying. But so much of the previous post is based on the presumption that shooting from the front was not part of the plan, which I think is backwards. Furthermore, I don't think the shooter intended on shooting through the windshield and hitting JFK in the neck. My guess is he waited a bit too long and then fired about six inches too low- he had planned to shoot over the windshield and into JFK's face.Good analogy It could also fit into the reasoning of the statement that Files 'shot too soon.'Lastly, you could be right, of course. I guess what I object to is the righteous attitude expressed in the above post that anyone who thinks the throat wound was one of entry is living in a fantasy land. The chain of evidence (i.e. JFK's body) was so horribly compromised that it simply can't be relied upon to tell the truth of the assassination. The Warren Commission and the House Select Committee never for an instant doubted the validity of the autopsy and the x-rays and the autopsy photos- it was out of their realm of possibilities that JFK's body had been altered. Let's not make the same mistake here.I agree

[Pennyworth]

Also, in reference to the above post:There had to be a check and cover back up to this operation because....What if the grassy knoll shooters or whoever else missed? They were shooting at a moving target after all. The planners weren't going to overlook this perchance of mishap on the shooter's part..

[Pennyworth]

(6) Judyth Baker, Deadly Alliance (1999) Lee (Harvey Oswald) told me that the driver’s habits (William Greer) had been studied, and a shot going off would cause him to brake, which would slow the vehicle down. This was desired because even this cabal feared Aristotle Onassis, who would send killers out to track down anyone who killed Jackie Kennedy, or so the rumor went – and besides, everybody liked Jackie and orders were out not to hit her. It was to spare Jackie that some very expert marksmen missed or delayed their shots that day in Dealey Plaza: she was in their line of sight a great deal of the time, according to David Ferrie, who got the report from Marcello's henchmen as soon as he arrived in the Houston area.

[Pennyworth]

Hello,I posted the following statement by Jackie Kennedy under Key Witness: Jackie Kennedy.I received no response on that thread.Here it is again.Key witness Jackie Kennedy's fragmented statement speaks volumes.Her 'freudian slip' could have been just that OR an intentional response to her being told not to mention a frontal shot;STATEMENT OF JACKIE KENNEDY:" I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on.""I SUPPOSE THERE MUST HAVE BEEN."

[Bruce Patrick Brychek]

Dear Mr. Michael Calder:Michael - Please read and analyze my analysis, and points in this Headline in conjunction with your Post of 02.09.2010 under the Headline: Two Shots From Behind The Fence, Posted on 02.07.2010 by JDThomas.As you will see, I strongly alluded to aspects of your theory on 09.22.2006, after discussing Jimmy's conviction with him that JFK died one (1) second after he pulled the trigger, and that the cover-up which immediately began, was already set in motion."...we were going for a head shot..."" I was counting misses..."Comments ?Respectfully,Bruce Patrick Brychek.

[Michael Calder]

Bruce Patrick Brycheck,I read the four pages and overall my thinking aligns with Thom Zajac's post with, "direction of the damage." An FBI agent/expert testified he thought the throat wound was caused by a bullet entering the presiden'ts back striking bone and the splintering bone exiting from the throat. I didn't concur but I've always kept it in the back of my mind. My thinking of the throat wound is entirely speculative. After the turn and while proceding down Elm Street, Kennedy is looking straight ahead and then to his left. Suddenly, he looks to his right as if he has heard something that alarms him. At this point the vehicle is hidden behind the sign. When it emerges he has been hit with that throat wound. I wonder if he received the throat wound (entrance) while looking toward his right. Perhaps an early shot from the picket fence near Zapruder. Jimmy Files would be located closer to the overpass than to Zapruder. I haven't got the book and dvds yet so let me see where I am in my thinking after studying Files. www.jfkcia.com

[Bruce Patrick Brychek]

Dear Mr. Michael Calder:Michael - Thank You for your thoughts. Here's my counter-argument, as I thought about bone splinters before.Wim Dankbaar has assembled excellent material about the need for JFK'S face to be filled with wax, and clay,indicating multiple exit paths through JFK'S face, and possibly his neck.Jimmy Sutton/Files had extensive experience with mercury filled hollow points, and head shots. Of course I tendedto believe his experience, and trust his knowledge, but Wim's information sealed my belief.Going further, what shot to JFK could have caused bone splinters ? Yes, JFK was probably hit in the back before he emerged from the sign. However, JFK was wearing two (2) back braces. One (1) due to his ongoing problems, andthe second from an injury caused by recent sexual escapades. Both back braces are in the National Archives, butboth are not listed in The Warren Commission Report.Additionally, one (1) report indicated that a finger probing JFK'S back felt the bullet, with little penetration. Myprevious argument was that the two (2) back braces, one which was extremely heavy duty, would have severely slowedthe speed, and the ultimate penetration into JFK'S back. Both back braces were extremely resilient, stretched fabric with nylon and rubber.Michael - still you raise a good point. The foregoing are my argumentative points against it.Comments ?Respectfully,Bruce Patrick Brychek.

[Michael Calder]

Bruce Patrick Brycheck,I hate arguing with genuis. Do you ever let your poor girlfriend win an argument just because?Now at least I understand why the back shot failed to penetrate very far. I wasn't aware of the braces. I don't think there is much doubt that a shot did hit him in the back, though:"At the moment I looked at the back of the president, I heard another firecracker noise and saw the shot hit the president about 4 inches down from his right shoulder." ( Secret Service Agent Glen Bennett) www.jfkcia.com