Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By News Staff | May 18th 2007 06:30 PM | 5 comments | Track Comments
Combining statistics and chemistry, researchers are challenging the evidence for the lone-gunman theory in the 1963 assassination of United States President John F. Kennedy.

Texas A&M University professor of statistics Cliff Spiegelman recently teamed with former Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent and forensic scientist William A. Tobin of Forensic Engineering International in Virginia and William D. James, a research chemist with the Texas A&M Center for Chemical Characterization and Analysis (CCCA)and conducted a chemical and forensic analysis of bullets reportedly derived from the same batch as those used by suspected assassin Lee Harvey Oswald to gun down Kennedy on that fateful day at Dealey Plaza.

Will new techniques find new evidence?



Using new compositional analysis techniques not available in the 1960s, the team found that the bullet fragments involved in the assassination are not nearly as rare as previously reported. In addition, their findings show that one of the 10 test bullets from one box analyzed is considered a match to one or more of the five existing assassination fragments, meaning that the matching fragments could have come from three or more separate bullets and, therefore, more than one shooter.

As one of the most traumatic events in U.S. history, the Kennedy assassination sparked a wave of scientific investigation, both immediately after the murder and in the decades since. One such investigation, the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations, re-examined the murders of Kennedy and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

With respect to the Kennedy assassination, the committee concluded, largely on the basis of comparative bullet lead analysis and expert testimony by University of California-Irvine chemist Dr. Vincent P. Guinn, that if there were another shooter or shooters — likely firing from the Grassy Knoll — they missed all limousine occupants.

Ancient history — that is, until Spiegelman got a telephone call in 2004 from Stuart Wexler, a humanities and advanced placement government instructor at Highstown High School in New Jersey, who eventually served as the historian for the team’s paper. Wexler had read online about Spiegelman’s recent work on a National Research Council committee that helped the FBI assess its Compositional Analysis of Bullet Lead (CABL) procedure used as forensic evidence in hundreds of murder cases, including the Kennedy assassination.

"Wexler and a friend of his had bought some bullets of the same type believed to have been used in the Kennedy assassination," Spiegelman recalls. "They were Mannlicher-Carcanos, which were only manufactured in 1954 and are now antiques, mainly because most surviving bullets have been bought up by conspiracy buffs. He was looking for someone to analyze them. I thought it was interesting and that it would be a neat project, so I agreed."

To find a qualified metallurgist and forensic expert, Spiegelman had to look no further than to one of the key figures behind the NRC study in the first place — William Tobin, a decorated FBI agent who in retirement had made a veritable second career out of testifying against his former employer where its evidentiary techniques were concerned.

Spiegelman and Tobin turned to Texas A&M research chemist William James and D. Max Roundhill, former head of the Department of Chemistry at Washington State University and now a consultant in Austin, for the chemical portion of their analysis. Finally, Spiegelman recruited Dr. Simon J. Sheather, professor and head of the Texas A&M Department of Statistics, at the writing stage of the project.

In their study, James analyzed the chemical composition of 30 bullets — 10 from each of three boxes of Mannlicher-Carcano bullets that originated from two of the only four separate lots ever produced. Using a measurement approach similar to Guinn’s, they applied more appropriate standards, such as additional chemical elements beyond those considered at the time, as well as a known quality control procedure. They also analyzed physical samples with a known geometry.

In comparing their data to Guinn’s testimony as well as to NRC report findings, the team determined that many bullets within a box of Mannlicher-Carcano bullets have similar composition, leading them to conclude that two-element chance matches to assassination fragments are not extraordinarily rare — even less rare, considering they came from the same box.

Based on their findings, not to mention the international significance of the Kennedy assassination, Spiegelman and his team say it is "scientifically desirable" for the bullet fragments to be reanalyzed.

Kennedy once said during a Yale commencement address, "The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie — deliberate, contrived and dishonest — but the myth — persistent, persuasive and unrealistic." Spiegelman claims that "by properly reanalyzing the bullet fragments, our nation has a chance to shatter a myth about the JFK assassination."

"The reanalysis should include at least the seven elements identified in the NRC report, should establish the scientific basis for matching fragments originating from a single bullet, and should address the critically important issues of bullet and source heterogeneity," he adds.

Their findings, which show that evidence used to rule out a second assassin is fundamentally flawed, is available in the paper entitled "Chemical and Forensic Analysis of JFK Assassination Bullet Lots: Is a Second Shooter Possible" here.

Comments

You may want to read my recent article "Reason under Siege" here on Scientific Blogging. It explains why this revisionist paper fails miserably.

More on this will be published in a forthcoming issue of Annals of Applied Statistics.

John Fiorentino

Fiorentino Research

http://fiorentinoresearch.com


My analysis of the Spiegelman, Tobin et al paper will be published in Vol. 2 #1 of the Annals of Applied Statistics, the journal in which their article will be published shortly. Their article is available online in PDF format on the AOAS website.

Due to an arrangement with AOAS I will not be able to publish my article online here at Scientific Blogging at this time. However, my initial rebuttal is here in my article "Reason under Siege."

John Fiorentino

Fiorentino Research


Hank's picture
John,

Congratulations. When I do my update this weekend I will give it a mention. Will there be an online full version/abstract or is this only print?

Thank You...........

Hank, Yes, My reply will be in the form of a letter to the editor to facilitate a timely response. The rebuttal will not appear on the AOAS website until the authors have had a chance to respond. Both will be posted simultaneously. My letter will appear both online in pdf format, and in print in Vol 2 #1.

A full article will be submitted at a future date, but of course must go through the normal peer review process for publication in Annals of Applied Statistics.

Thanks again for the mention.

John Fiorentino

Fiorentino Research


Hank:.................

BTW, the title of my letter is: NAA & JFK: Can Revisionism take us home?

John Fiorentino

Fiorentino Research


Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.