What Follows from the Fragments?
A Tremendous Lot; That’s What
Kenneth A. Rahn
31 August 2001
Now that the remaining doubts about the genuineness of the fragments have
been removed (Why The Fragments Weren’t
Planted, 30 August 2001), it is time to turn to begin a series of steps
that build on this result. In the spirit of exploring the evidence to the
fullest, we take the smallest possible step and ask what follows from the
genuineness of the fragments. Included in “the fragments” is the evidence
from their ballistic analysis and their neutron-activation analysis (NAA). It
turns out that these two sets of information go a surprisingly long way toward
settling the assassination, so much so that every student of the case should be
aware of it.
The NAA and ballistics jointly show that
the fragments fell into two tight groups, each representing a bullet that hit.
The show that both bullets were fired from Oswald’s rifle in the TSBD. One
group of fragments comes from the body shot, the other from the head shot.
Together, this evidence deals with the rifle, the big fragments, the little
fragments both external and internal for each shot. Not a trace of any such
evidence exists for any other presumed shot.
These sets of evidence provide a natural
explanation for the wounds to the bodies, the hits to the chrome and the
windshield, and the hit to James Tague. By freeing up the shot that is
traditionally reserved for Tague, they provide an opportunity for a missed shot,
which then explains the third empty shell and the reports of an early miss.
Collectively, these results create the most defensible shooting scenario to
date—an early miss onto Elm Street, a hit to both bodies (the double-body hit,
or DBH), and the killing head shot that also damaged the chrome and the
windshield and hit Tague.
These sets of evidence validate the
forward snap in the Zapruder film, the general forward spray of tissue and
fluids from the head, and the obvious features reported for the wounds, among
others. They invalidate claims of tampering or planting by the FBI or anyone
else, and claims of alteration of wounds. They make moot the chains of custody
for the fragments, the details of entrance and exit wounds in the head, the
details of entrance and exit wounds in the bodies, the positions of holes in
JFK’s coat and shirt, the Zapruder film, the line of wounds through
neck/throat, and the worries about faked X-rays and autopsy photos. They don’t
deal directly with the acoustics and the reports of shooters on the knoll, among
others, but these are lower levels of evidence because they contain nothing
immediately physical—no rifles, shells, fragments, etc.
In short, the fragments show that
Oswald’s rifle, and probably Oswald, did everything to the bodies that day for
which we have a physical record. They also provide a natural way to damage the
front of the car, to hit Tague, and to allow for an early miss. Their
genuineness ultimately validates the rest of the physical evidence as well. In a
word, the fragments settle the major events of Dealey Plaza.
One thing the fragments do not do,
however, is address anything that might have happened outside Dealey Plaza, such
as conspiracy. But the powerful simple, direct scenario that they establish
predicts that all alternative scenarios be unsupported or disproven, which is
exactly what has happened over the past 37 long years.
If the fragments can do all this, what is
left for the other physical evidence to do? Is it to be relegated to a
secondary, redundant role? It is appearing more and more that this is indeed the
case, and that the center of gravity of the evidence has taken a big shift in
the direction of the fragments. The prints, the cartons, the fibers on the rifle
all tighten the web around Oswald, but they can never prove that he fired the
shots. They are not part of the core case. The wounds provide details that
corroborate and fill out the story from the fragments, but are definitely
subsidiary to them. The Zapruder film confirms the fragments’ information
about the head shot, and shows that a single shooter could do all the damage,
but it too is secondary. The endlessly controversial photos and X-rays from the
autopsy are also secondary, and should probably be downplayed, for the fragments
strongly predict that they are materially genuine. The details of when the
Zapruder film shows Kennedy and Connally being hit are clearly subservient to
the conclusions from the fragments about who hit the men. The question of
whether the autopsy was rushed is obviously a peripheral detail that may be
interesting, but is certainly not crucial. The exact entrances and exits to
Kennedy’s back and head are secondary to the origin of the bullets that hit
him. In sum, a surprising amount of traditional evidence appears to no longer be
central. Since so much of this evidence remains mired in controversy, we can
sidestep it without losing significant explanatory power.
The JFK assassination has been bogged down
in unenlightening controversy for much too long. It is time to take a fresh look
and reevaluate everything. The way to do this is the time-tested critical way of
starting at the core, finding the minimum evidence needed to establish the
central points, and refusing to be sidetracked by secondary evidence that
doesn’t change anything. This amounts to the scientific procedure of
establishing a solid working hypothesis, which in this case is nonconspiracy.
This is clearly not the same as proving nonconspiracy, even though it is often
viewed that way.
It should be emphasized that all the
evidence in the working hypothesis of nonconspiracy is also consistent with
conspiracy. Individuals must decide for themselves how much effort they are
willing to expend in search of that elusive proof of conspiracy that has managed
to keep itself hidden for nearly 38 years now. Researchers who choose to
continue searching in this direction must recognize that the odds are stacked
heavily against them, for the negative results of 38 years, multiple official
investigations, and innumerable private sleuthing must count for a lot. While we
all applaud inveterate souls who never give up, it is getting harder and harder
to justify that tack in this case.