Mechanics of an Assassination
We examine the frequently overlooked technical details of the assassination of President Kennedy.

Debunking the Tumble Theory - I

Debunking the Tumble Theory - II

Reflections on Deflections

Energy Crisis

Return to New Leads in JFK Assassination Research
Last Updated on March 24, 2015 by Herbert Blenner
An analysis of the deflection of a bullet by an obstacle has produced the following results. This analysis, which is discussed later, assumes the obstacle can provide sufficient deflecting force and the bullet deflects without fragmentation.
Scientists at the Edgewood arsenal fired bullets from the MC rifle directly into obstacles simulating the neck of President Kennedy and Governor Connally's chest and wrist. They found that the simulations of Connally's chest and wrist deformed the test bullets to a greater extent than CE 399 and concluded that CE 399 lost speed while transiting an obstacle before striking Connally. In support of this obvious conclusion these experiments provided data to test the yaw explanation of the size of Connally's back wound.
To tumble or not to tumble was never part of the tumble theory critique. Critics based their objections on the acceleration problem.
In 1964, a riddle circulated within the technical community. They asked, "What happens to a fast moving bullet?" Their punch line was, "Very, very little!"