Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

 If you reject the Single Bullet Theory; if you realize that JFK was shot separately in the back and in the throat, then you have to accept what I am saying about the throat shot. That's because JFK was shot in the throat, and just a few minutes later, Dr. Malcolm Perry was in his throat, and he found no bullet there (which was later confirmed by x-ray), and there was also no exit wound.

If a bullet entered his throat, then there are only two possibilities: either the bullet stayed in him, or it exited him. Since neither of those happened, it means that something other than a bullet must have struck him in the throat; something that dissolved and vanished.

And before anyone says that the bullet was dug out of him at the "pre-autopsy," this was before the pre-autopsy. So that argument, even as a hypothetical, doesn't work.

So, the throat shot had to be something unusual and not a metal bullet. There is just no getting around it. It may be an unpleasant reality to some people, but life is full of unpleasant realities. And we need to be mature about it when they happen.

And the same goes for the back shot. If you rejet the Single Bullet Theory, then you are left with accepting that JFK was struck in the back with something that stopped very short in his back. It could not have been a metal bullet because, first, a metal bullet traveling 2000 feet per second couldn't stop that short, and second, even if it could, it would have to be there. The "bullet fell out" theory makes no sense. Once stopped, the bullet would have been inert. It couldn't do anything. The body couldn't push it out. And neither could gravity. So, what could make it fall out? The answer is: nothing.

Since the Parkland doctors didn't discover the back wound, one could suggest that that bullet was extracted at the "pre-autopsy." But, just because it's there as a hypothetical doesn't make it likely or compelling. Extracting a bullet with forceps would affect the appearance of the wound. Bullet extraction is a surgical procedure. No one at the autopsy said that the wound looked tampered with.

I have friends who think that the assassination attempt on Trump in Butler PA was faked. They think it wasn't real blood. They joke about "ketchup ear." But, I point out to them that Trump was taken to Butler Memorial Hospital, where he was examined and treated by doctors who were not under his control. And there is no reason to think those doctors were up to anything corrupt. And they confirmed that he was shot and suffered a minor injury. Apparently, it was very minor, just a graze. But, the fact is: they did establish that he was shot. And for me, that closes the door on any chance that Trump was faking it. It slams it shut.

Well, the situation with JFK was exactly the same. He was taken to a local hospital and seen by local doctors. And the plotters knew ahead of time that that was going to happen. As it turned out, the local doctors missed finding the back wound, but the plotters could not have expected that and counted on it.

And since "the bullet in the back" falls apart anyway when you consider that it couldn't stop that short in his back, I don't have any enthusiasm for the pre-autopsy extraction of the bullet.

So, the bottom line is that you have a choice: Either you accept the Single Bullet Theory or you accept that both the back shot and the throat shot were weird shots that did not involve a metal bullet.