Friday, November 14, 2008

TV: Discovery Channel Says JFK Shot from Depository

Sunday, November 16 - 9:00 PM (EST)- Discovery Channel

Using modern technology, a team of scientists have recreated the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the 35th president of the United States, to determine that the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository was the most likely origin of the shot that killed him.

According to a report in Discovery News, the team of experts, which was assembled by the Discovery Channel, used modern blood splatter analysis, new artificial human body surrogates, and 3-D computer simulations, to recreate the assassination.

“The question we were trying to answer is, given the spatter evidence in a vehicle, and knowing an individual was sitting at a particular location, is there something we could use to determine where the shot originated?” said Steve Schliebe, a blood spatter and trace evidence specialist with the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, who was part of the special investigation.

While blood spatter analysis existed in the 1960s, modern innovations have greatly improved its accuracy and the amount of information that can be gleaned from drops of blood.

According to Tom Bevel, an independent expert forensic investigator, Because of innovations like high-speed photography, we have a much better appreciation of what is actually taking place.

A mock-up of the Dallas, Texas crime scene was set up, including the depository, the grassy knoll, and other nearby landmarks. Artificial surrogates of Kennedy were placed in a car. Sharpshooters then shot the surrogates from the model depository, the grassy knoll, and four other plausible locations.

Schliebe, along with Bevel, were brought in to examine the simulated crime scene. The two experts found a simulated gunshot would to the head that closely matched the wound Kennedy suffered.

In addition to the physical environment, a virtual environment was also set up, in the form of a 3-D model of the crime scene. To animate it, the team looked at a video of the assassination filmed by Abraham Zapruder.

Computer graphics expert Doug Martin highlighted the red parts of the frames and the blood resulting from the wound, and plotted them onto the computer simulation to see where the fatal shot came from.

“We might never know if Oswald pulled the trigger, but when you look at the wind pattern, the spread of the debris, the angles and distances involved, it’s consistent with a shot from the sixth floor depository,” said Martin.

YouTube Previews:


ss679x said...

So nice of them to blow a big hole in the WCR, don't you think? How can anyone possibly trust the x-rays, autopsy photos and drawings after watching the SN shot shoot off the top of the head of the dummy?

Dale K. Myers said...

Rewind alert! Take a look at the program again and note that the alternative grassy knoll shots are impossible for a variety of reasons that are quite apparent, while the sniper's nest source results in a wound (and after effects) that compare very well with the physical evidence.

Of course, no test can be a 100% perfect match because of all the variables that cannot be included, however, I thought they did a pretty good job of nailing down the primary variables.

The results? The fatal shot came from the Depository. No big surprise there. Anyone familiar with the physical evidence knows that fact was established in 1964.

Only conspiracy theorists and the uninformed refused to accept the obvious. In that sense, no official investigation, book, or television program is ever going to convince them otherwise.

In short, they see what they want to see and hear what they want to hear.

wraft said...

You would do the world a favor by disclosing who is paying you for your disinfo.

Dale K. Myers said...

Careful. Your ignorance is showing.

Anonymous said...

Mr Myers, There seems to be several problems regarding the Discovery Test, did you notice that the bullet from behind didn't fragment on impact like Oswald's did (according to Gary Mack,) am I to believe what two witnesses from memory could remember and accurately say "this is what I saw" (why wasn't Nellie Connally shown the photos) and it took Michael Yardley twice to get the result, Oswald only had one chance. Why weren't you a part of this documentary; oh wait I wouldn't want to see you or your Emmy again anyways. The fact of the matter is 'we might never know the truth,' and that's the real tragedy of the Assassination.

Dale K. Myers said...

Dear Anonymous, It is no surprise that you’re unwilling to stand behind the courage of your convictions (signing in as “Anonymous” like so many bathroom wall poets) given your general ignorance about the facts of the assassination. For example, the head shot bullet fired by Oswald and recovered from the floor of the limousine broke into two large pieces and left behind a trail of minute, dust-like fragments in the president’s brain (as seen in X-rays) while the Discovery Channel television show never showed their recovered head shot test bullet nor an X-ray of what that test bullet left deposited in the simulated brain material, if anything. Second, Nellie Connally didn’t appear in the television show because she died in 2006, two years before the program was produced (a fact easily ascertained by doing a simple search on the Internet). And third, Michael Yardley, an expert shot, required only two attempts to duplicate the Oswald entrance point which Oswald himself achieved by chance since he was only aiming at the general location of the president’s head and shoulders. That’s damn good shooting in my book.

No test shooting is ever going to duplicate with 100% accuracy what happened in Dealey Plaza – there are simply too many variables that cannot be controlled. The point of the tests, however, is not to duplicate the shooting in every respect but to demonstrate the basic principles involved. To that end, they did a good job.

The real tragedy of the assassination is not that ‘we might never know the truth,’ as you put it, but that the truth as we know it is dismissed without regard by the intellectually challenged.

Anonymous said...

You know Mr. Meyers, it's very interesting that you claim to be a so called "expert" on this subject. I seen your work, read all your web pages and seen you on those documentaries, my question for you is "IF" any evidence ever surfaces that does prove a Conspiracy, would YOU BELIEVE IT AND ACCEPT IT? I Agree with the previous Anonymous commenter about we may never know the whole truth, and personally I don't want to know the truth.

Dale K. Myers said...

Dear Anonymous,

If indeed evidence surfaced that proved a conspiracy I would be compelled to believe it (acceptance being part of that belief). Is that so hard to believe? And let's be clear - I'm not talking about a suggestion, or a notion, or an idea, or someone's tall tale about what really happened. I'm talking about evidence of a conspiracy that is verifiable and proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In essence, a provable truth. Isn't that what we're all after? But of course, you're not interested in knowing the truth.