Dr. Humes, can you compare the angles of declination on 385, point "C" to "D", with 388 "A" to "B"?
Commander HUMES. You will note, and again I must apologize for the schematic nature of these diagrams drawn to a certain extent from memory and to a certain extent from the written record, it would appear that the angle of declination is somewhat sharper in the head wound, 388, than it is in 385.
The reason for this, we feel, by the pattern of the entrance wound at 388 "A" causes us to feel that the President's head was bent forward, and we feel this accounts for the difference in the angle, plus undoubtedly the wounds were not received absolutely simultaneously, so that the vehicle in which the President was traveling moved during this period of time, which would account for a difference in the line of flight, sir.

Mr. Specter.

Aside from the slight differences which are notable by observing those two exhibits, are they roughly comparable to the angle of decline?
Commander HUMES. I believe them to be roughly comparable, sir.

Mr. Specter.

Could you state for the record an approximation of the angle of decline?
Commander HUMES. Mathematics is not my forte. Approximately 45 degrees from the horizontal.

Mr. Specter.

Would you elaborate somewhat, Doctor Humes, on why the angle would change by virtue of a tilting of the head of the President since the basis of the computation of angle is with respect to the ground?
Commander HUMES. I find the question a little difficult of answering right off, forgive me, sir.

Mr. Specter.

I will try to rephrase it. Stated more simply, why would the tilting of the President's head affect the angle of the decline? You stated that was--
Commander HUMES. The angle that I am making an observation most about is the angle made that we envisioned having been made by the impingement of the bullet in its flight at the point of entry. This angle we see by the difference of the measurement of the two wounds.
Therefore, this is--we have several angles we are talking about here, unfortunately, this is-the angle of which we speak in this location, "A" to "B", and it is difficult.
I have to retract. Since we feel from their physical configurations, wounds 385 "C" and 388 "A" are entrance wounds, if there wasn't some significant change in the angulation of the President's head with respect to the line of flight from these missiles, the physical measurements of 385 "C" and this 388 "A" should be similar. They aren't, in fact, dissimilar in that there is a greater angulation in 388 "A". Therefore, there has to be either a change in the position of the vehicle in which the President is riding with respect to the horizontal or a change in the situation of the President's head. I believe that the exhibits submitted earlier, the photograph.--

Mr. Specter.

I believe the ones were given to you so far. excuse me, you are right, 389.
Commander HUMES. 389, in fact at this point shows the President's head in a slightly inclined forward position, and I am not enough aware of the geography of the ground over which the vehicle was traveling to know how much that would affect it.

Mr. Specter.

If you were to be told that there was a distance traversed of approximately 150 feet from the time of Point "C" on 385 to Point "A" on 388, and you would assume the additional factor that there was a slight angle of decline on the street as well, would those factors, assuming their to be true, help in the explanation of the differences in the angles?
Commander HUMES. I think that they would make the figure as depicted in 388 quite understandably different from 385.

Mr. Dulles.

Was it possible, in view of the condition of the brain to point with absolute accuracy to the point of exit there? I can see that the point of exit in 385 can be clearly determined. Is it equally possible to determine the point of exit in 388?
Commander HUMES. No, sir; it was not, other than through this large defect because when--

« Previous | Next »

Found a Typo?

Click here

Last Update: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 21:56:32 CET