My Journey on Lincoln's Assassination

[L Verge]

(10-28-2018 03:31 PM)Wesley Harris Wrote:  [quote='mikegriffith1' pid='73520' dateline='1540421328']

* The bullet was initially described as a rifle bullet. Read Dr. Arnold's analysis of the damage to the vertebrae and the tell-tale signs that the bullet must have been a high-velocity rifle bullet, and then find me a single forensic case where similar damage was done by a pistol bullet similar to the one Corbett would have used.
/quote]

Bullets can do crazy things. I've seen it too many times in working homicides and other death investigations. Like the man who was shot in the back of the elbow with a tiny .22, the bullet striking bone, tumbling up through his arm to strike his shoulder and then tumbling down to slice his heart nearly in two. Bullets don't follow a straight path and even nicking a bone can substantially change their direction. A bullet can enter at one trajectory, strike bone and go up, down, or all around. Even today with all our technology, in many cases we cannot identify the type of bullet that caused a wound if the projectile is not available. In all the cases I've worked where the projectile was not recovered, I've never had a forensic pathologist claim with a certainty that a specific type of firearm (rifle, revolver, pistol, etc) caused a solitary wound. It would be too risky to make that definitive of a determination.

The muzzle velocity of a 1861 Colt Army revolver is about 500-1000 ft/second, depending on the powder load. The muzzle velocity of a Spencer carbine is about 930-1030 ft/sec. Obviously there is some overlap, so saying one is "high velocity" at 1000fps and the other isn't would be foolhardy. There's simply no way Dr. Arnold could rule out Corbett's revolver as the weapon.

The correct response to a smoke-filled structure is getting the head low where the air is less contaminated. Smoke rises with the heat. Breathable air is down low. You bend over to get low. There's another explanation for your "25% trajectory."

That's all I will say. There's two ways to research. Pursue facts and see where they lead you or establish a preconceived notion and discard everything that doesn't fit it.

Thank you, Wes, and I hope that everyone takes your last sentence seriously to heart...