Sherry Guiterrez’s Rebuttal to My Webpage

FROM THE ZIMMERMAN ARTICLE:

1. THEREFORE, SINCE ONLY TWO SPATTER PATTERNS ARE EVIDENT, ONLY ONE SHOT HIT PRESIDENT KENNEDY. THE ABOVE STATEMENT DOES NOT ADDRESS LOCATION OF THE ENTRANCE OR EXIT WOUNDS. Gutierrez response: It has never been my objective to address the precise location of the entry or exit wounds. That area of expertise is best left to persons with the necessary knowledge of the medical evidence.

2. HOWEVER, SHE DOES STATE THAT BLOOD, BONE AND TISSUE WERE DISCOVERED BEHIND THE PRESIDENT. THIS COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH A SHOT FROM EITHER DIRECTION. Gutierrez response: Tissue fragments when located in back spatter are consistently minute in nature; however, the fragments in forward spatter vary in size and are occasionally large. Back spatter is normally found within 4 — 5 ft. of the wound. Forward spatter can travel up to 20 ft. or more depending on the velocity of the projectile. The blood, bone and tissue located behind the President and in front of him within the limousine are consistent with forward spatter and are not consistent with back spatter.

3. TWO BULLET FRAGMENTS WERE FOUND IN THE FRONT SEAT OF THE LIMOUSINE AND WEIGHED 44.6 AND 21.0 GRAINS. THE FBI FOUND THREE SMALL LEAD PARTICLES, WEIGHING EACH BETWEEN .7 AND .9 GRAINS, IN THE LEFT FRONT JUMP SEAT. Gutierrez response: The location of lead fragments within a crime scene is not used in Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. As this is not an acceptable technique used in bloodstain pattern analysis, it is not appropriate for me to comment on them.

4. SMALL RESIDUE OF LEAD WAS FOUND ON THE INSIDE OF THE WINDSHIELD WITH SMALL CRACKS INDICATING THAT A BULLET FRAGMENT HIT THE WINDSHIELD ON THE INSIDE. Gutierrez response: Using the location of lead residue within a scene is not they type of evidence used in Bloodstain Pattern Analysis since there may have been multiple shots from multiple directions. What is used is blood.

5. A DENT IN THE CHROME STRIP SURROUNDING THE WINDSHIELD WAS FOUND AND CONSISTENT WITH BEING HIT FROM A FRAGMENT OF THE FATAL SHOT. Gutierrez response: Bloodstain Pattern Analysis does not include evaluation of vehicle damage. It simply evaluates the presence of physical evidence in the form of stains left from the physics of a traumatic event. This information is not the type of evidence used in this field. Additionally, in my opinion stating the dent is consistent with the fatal headshot is a huge assumption. More than one shot was fired, so it is inappropriate to make such a absolute statement and attribute all fragments or damage to the vehicle as having come from the fatal head shot.

6. THE ‘MIST OF BLOOD’ COULD BE MANY THINGS. IT MAY CONTAIN BLOOD, BONE AND BRAIN TISSUE. IT CANNOT BE DETERMINED TO BE ONLY ONE. Gutierrez response: The premise of my work has never been to determine exactly what type of tissue was expelled. The substance expelled in either a back or forward spatter pattern created as the result of a gunshot to the head can contain fluids from the head, and solid particulate of bone or brain tissue. “Mist” is simply the descriptive word I chose to describe the visual appearance of the pattern shown in the Zapruder film.

7. THIS (context indicates the mist in the Zapruder film) IS CONSISTENT WITH EITHER BACK SPATTER OR FORWARD SPATTER. Gutierrez response: Back spatter, in the hundreds of cases that I have worked has never contained large tissue particles of bone or brain. I would categorize the Harper fragment as large. Therefore that “mist: could not have been contained the Harper fragment. Additionally, when tracing the white streak back toward the President’s head it does not appear to be a part of the “mist”.

Frame 313 depicts a forceful impact pattern as evidenced by a conical shaped “mist” that appears toward the front of the limousine from the President’s head. Blood, bone and tissue are found on areas of the scene behind the President where the “mist”, could not have deposited them because of its direction of travel. The “mist” is prevented from being deposited on some areas due to body position of the President and Mrs. Kennedy, and the structure of the vehicle. Other blood deposited on the scene outside these parameters would have to come from the corresponding exit or entry wound. The known characteristics of back and forward spatter to blood found elsewhere on the scene and the vehicle and found on the deposits on the limousine exterior, motorcycle officers, and the follow up car is consistent with forward spatter and the 313 pattern created is consistent with back spatter.

8. WHEN CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OTHER AVAILABLE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, ONE MUST LEAN TOWARDS FORWARD SPATTER. Gutierrez response: Bloodstain Pattern Analysis is a science in itself. Patterns are analyzed independent of other evidence present on scene. Evidence that is used in Bloodstain Pattern Analysis to determine if a pattern is back or forward spatter includes the following: Volume of bodily fluids Tissue and particulate projected Droplet size Blood stain distribution Number of stains Travel distance

9. WE CAN SEE FROM OFFICER HARGIS’ TESTIMONY THAT HE WAS HIT WITH A MIST OR FINE SPRAY OF BLOOD AND BRAIN. THIS CERTAINLY DOESN’T DESCRIBE HIM BEING HIT WITH A HEAVY AMOUNT OF PARTICULATE MATTER. IT SOUNDS LIKE A MIST OF BLOOD AND FINE BRAIN MATTER AND CERTAINLY DOESN’T INCLUDE “LARGE AMOUNT OF BLOOD, TISSUE AND BONE” THAT GUTIERREZ DESCRIBES AS BEING CONSISTENT WITH FORWARD SPATTER. NOW, LET’S TAKE A LOOK AT GOVERNOR CONNALLY’S TESTIMONY. SHERRY SAYS HE WAS HIT WITH “A FINE SUBSTANCE LIKE SAWDUST”. GOVERNOR CONNALLY SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT HE COULD “SEE ON MY CLOTHES, MY CLOTHING, I COULD SEE ON THE INTERIOR OF THE CAR WHICH, AS I RECALL, WAS A PALE BLUE, BRAIN TISSUE, WHICH I IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZED, AND I RECALL VERY WELL, ON MY TROUSERS THERE WAS ONE CHUNK OF BRAIN TISSUE AS BIG AS ALMOST MY THUMB, THUMBNAIL”. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH HEAVY, PARTICULATE MATTER CONSISTENT WITH FORWARD SPATTER, AS OPPOSED TO THE ‘BLOODY WATER’ THAT OFFICER HARGIS REFERRED TO. SAWDUST PARTICLES CONTAIN SOLID MATTER. IN ADDITION, THE MERE FACT THAT GOVERNOR CONNALLY COULD RECOGNIZE THE MATTER AS BRAIN MATTER SUGGESTS THAT IT WAS NOT FINE PARTICLES OF BRAIN, BUT RECOGNIZABLE BITS AND CHUNKS OF BRAIN MATTER. Gutierrez response: Blood and tissue were deposited on Bobby Hargis and blood on James Chaney, riding on the passenger side of the limousine. The windshield of the follow-up vehicle and Sam Kinney’s arm also had blood and brain matter spattered on them. A schematic of the limousine indicates the rear of the vehicle to be approximately 8 feet long. Samuel Kinney stated the vehicle he was driving was approximately 5 feet from the rear of the presidential limousine. I do not know the length of the hood of the follow-up vehicle; but if it were only 4 feet this would mean the blood striking Kinney and the windshield traveled over 17 feet. The pattern observed in the Zapruder film does not have this large a distribution area, is traveling in the wrong direction and would be blocked by other occupants and the vehicle structure.

Agent Frazier testified “We found blood and tissue all over the outside of the vehicle from the hood ornament, over the complete area of the hood, on the outside of the windshield, and all over the entire exterior portion of the car; that is, the side rails down both sides of the car, and, of course, considerable quantities inside the car and on the trunk lid area. “ The President was approximately 20 feet from the hood ornament. So this blood had to travel approximately 20 feet. Back spatter rarely travels over 4-5 feet. The pattern observed in the Zapruder film does not have this large a distribution area and although it is moving in the correct direction, other occupants and the vehicle structure would block it.

The blood spatter pattern that disbursed droplets of blood and bits of tissue both to the front and rear of the President had a diameter of approximately 37 feet. This definitely indicates a pattern with wide perimeters characteristic of forward spatter. And since a large area was blood spattered, a large volume of blood must have been distributed. This large pattern area is characteristic of a forward spatter pattern. The President had only to have the origin of the exit wound spatter exposed to both directions. This is easily accomplished if the wound portion of the head was at a high point by having the head tilted down and toward his left shoulder. Although the exit spatter is not visible in the Zapruder film, it did exist.

The pattern more easily visualized in the Zapruder film is moving in a cone shape away from the President’s face and generally downward and toward the front of the vehicle. The observed pattern indicates it has a limited target area that could not be responsible for the blood and tissue deposited on Kinney, Hargis and Chaney. Nor could it have covered the hood of the limousine. Back spatter rarely travels over 4-5 feet. When comparing the characteristics of the visible pattern with the characteristics of the larger, but not filmed pattern, it can be stated the visualized pattern is back spatter. So, if the observed pattern is back spatter, the shot had to come from the front.

10. GUTIERREZ’S NEXT POINT OF CONSIDERATION INVOLVES THE SPATTER EVIDENCE IN THE ZAPRUDER FILM. HOWEVER, CAREFUL EXAMINATION OF THE FILM SHOWS A LARGER AMOUNT OF HEAD MATTER THROWN OUT ABOVE AND TO THE FRONT OF KENNEDY’S SKULL. Gutierrez response: The tissue or bone is consistent with forward spatter. The whitish streak observed in the Zapruder film may be the Harper fragment being projected as spatter. Because spatter moves in all possible directions, the fragment’s movement forward of the President is not be significant if at the time of the shooting that portion of the head was exposed to a position both forward to and behind the President. Meaning if the head was tilted so the wound is at the highest point on the head and exposed to both the rear and rear the forward spatter would be expelled in directions both in front of and behind the President.

11. AS THE BLOOD AND OTHER MATTER DISTANCES ITSELF FROM THE HEAD, IT CAN BE SEEN SLOWING DOWN AND MOVING TO THE REAR AS THE CAR MOVES THROUGH THE CLOUD OF BLOODY MIST. Gutierrez response: Blood expelled in a gunshot injuries can easily travel at 80 miles per hour or faster. I doubt it could be projected into the air at that speed and yet hang there waiting for a vehicle to drive through it. What Mr. Zimmerman is seeing is not visible in the copies Bill Miller graciously provided to me, so it is hard to address what he is specifically describing.

12. THIS IS COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH A REAR HEADSHOT WHEN WIND RESISTANCE IS TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. Gutierrez response: A strong wind can slow the blood or move it sideways from its trajectory. However, wind speeds would have to be very, very fast to reverse the direction of initial travel.

13. WOULD CAUSE THE EXPLOSIVE BODY MATTER TO SLOW AND/OR REVERSE DIRECTION DUE TO THE SMALL DIAMETER OF THE BLOOD DROPLETS ENCOUNTERING AND EXTERNAL FORCE. Gutierrez response: Is wind the unnamed external force? Wind speed the day of the assassination will not reverse the direction of droplets or tissue traveling over 80 miles and hour.

14. HOWEVER, FRAME 313 SHOWS THE NEARLY EXACT TIME THAT KENNEDY’S HEAD EXPLODED AND THE MAJORITY OF THE WOUND SPATTER IS THROWN FORWARD. Gutierrez response: Blood droplets expressed from the entry and exit wounds are not all captured in the Zapruder film. That is why documentation of spatter in testimony is important. Just because it isn’t in frame 313 doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

15. A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THE FORWARD SPATTER CAN BE SEEN CREATING A CLOUD OF FINE MIST THAT GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF MOVING TO THE REAR SINCE THE CAR WAS MOVING FORWARD. NO DOUBT, SOME OF THIS ENDED UP ON THE TRUNK AND MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE “BLOODY WATER” THAT HARGIS REMEMBERED BEING SPRAYED WITH. THIS, AGAIN, IS CONSISTENT WITH A REAR SHOT. Gutierrez response: Documented experiments on shooting bloody items indicate spatter patterns can be created, the blood expelled, and the blood deposited on a target surface in 1/6 of a second. The mist in the Zapruder film appears to be about 3 feet in front of the President in the first frame in which it is visible. Since that frame depicts 1/18th of a second, we can determine the mist is moving 54 feet per second or 36.8 miles per hour. In order for the limousine to overtake it, it must be traveling faster than the blood. I believe the speed of the limousine was much slower than 36 miles per hour at this time of the event.

16. THE BIGGEST PROBLEM SURROUNDING GUTIERREZ’S ANALYSIS IS HER LACK OF INCORPORATING ALL OF THE FACTORS. Gutierrez response: I considered every piece of physical evidence and witness testimony possible as it relates to blood or tissue to arrive at my conclusions. Other areas out side of this field were not incorporated, as this is not the method used by experts in this field.

17. HER ANALYSIS IS BASED UPON SELECTIVE TESTIMONY AND THE BLOOD SPATTER EVIDENCE FROM A .45 CALIBER SLUG TRAVERSING THROUGH THE CENTER OF A BLOOD-SOAKED, SOFT SPONGE AND APPLYING THE ANALYSIS TO A MOVING HARD TARGET WITH SOME AMOUNT OF WIND RESISTANCE. Gutierrez response: I have documented these findings with various weapons using a wide range of caliber and types of projectiles. This can be accessed via footnotes in my article. I selected the .45 because it is a slow moving bullet and creates a slower moving pattern that is easier to study when filmed. Shooting through blood in a sponge is an internationally accepted method for studying blood spatter and is used by every instructor in this field. And since it is usually done on an outdoor range, I am very aware of the effect of wind on stains. The blood will leave an injured person in the same manner and with the same characteristics. This is observed on crime scenes and well documented. The exception is in a head wound the blood is expelled at a much greater speed due to the temporary cavity formed within the skull.

18. IN ADDITION, THE .45 CALIBER SLUG WAS TRAVELING IN A NEARLY PERFECT HORIZONTAL TRAJECTORY AT LESS THAN 50% OF THE CARCANO 160-GRAIN BULLET’S VELOCITY THAT HIT IN THE UPPER HALF OF THE SKULL. Gutierrez response: I was unaware the bullet that struck the President’s head had been scientifically and positively identified. Furthermore, greater velocity means blood projected faster, thereby making it inconceivable for to be mist suspended in the air for the vehicles to drive through overtake the blood, or for the wind to reverse its direction.

19. WHEN THE REMAINING FACTORS ARE CONSIDERED, THE EVIDENCE CITED IN GUTIERREZ’S ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT THE FATAL SHOT CAME FROM THE REAR, AS ALL COMMISSION INQUIRIES HAVE FOUND. Gutierrez response: I am unaware of a commission inquiry to study Bloodstain Pattern Analysis. Prior to my publishing my first article, I submitted my findings at COPA. I had to present written information for their scientific panel to review and approve. One of the persons who sat on the panel was Herb MacDonnell of Corning New York. In the years 1969 to 1971, Herbert L MacDonnell did research for the government under the Department of Justice. In 1971, the U.S. Department of Justice published his work as Flight Characteristics and Stain Patterns of Human Blood. I believe anyone would be hard pressed to find an authority in this field who would suggest his credentials were less than profound. Professor McDonnell determined the information I was providing to be accurate. Additionally, the expanded article was submitted to my peers prior to publication and these Bloodstain Pattern Analysis experts found no fault with my methods or findings.

20. NOW, PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE LIMOUSINE WAS MOVING FORWARD AT THE TIME OF THE FATAL HEADSHOT. GIVEN THIS MOTION, ANY MATERIAL EJECTED FORWARD WOULD BE FOUND TO THE REAR (OR SHORT) OF THE NORMAL LANDING POSITION IF THE CAR WERE STATIONARY. Gutierrez response: I agree forward movement of the limo may have modified the landing site of the blood by a few inches, but not the 15 feet or more he is suggesting. If the blood is moving 80 miles an hour, how could the car have overtaken it in a few seconds?

21. SHERRY EVEN MENTIONS THE WHITE STREAK OF EJECTED HEAD MATTER SEEN IN THE ZAPRUDER FILM. WHAT SHE MAKES NO MENTION OF, IS THAT BY FRAME 314 THIS PIECE OF BONE OR BRAIN IS AT A POSITION SLIGHTLY IN FRONT OF GOVERNOR CONNALLY. OBVIOUSLY, THIS LARGE PIECE OF EJECTA CONTAINS A SUBSTANTIAL MASS. IT IS THE MOST PROMINENT PIECE OF MATTER EJECTED AS VISUALIZED BY THE ZAPRUDER FILM. SINCE THE RULES OF BLOOD SPATTER STATE THAT LARGE PORTIONS OF TARGET MATTER ARE ONLY FOUND ON FORWARD SPATTER, THIS WOULD INDICATE THAT THE EJECTA IN QUESTION IS PART OF FORWARD SPATTER, HENCE A REAR HEADSHOT. Gutierrez response: Spatter moves in a very wide conical shape, it literally radiates outward and upward from the wound site. Therefore, finding forward spatter in front of the President, moving from a point high on the head is very consistent with the large piece of matter believed to be the Harper fragment. Spatter travels in a 360-degree direction from the wound in addition to having forward movement. It does not move like water from a hose or hair spray from a can or pump bottle; these are too straightforward and lack early movement to the side.

22. THEN, THE BLOOD CLOUD SLOWS AND FORMS A MIST AS IT SLOWS DOWN AND APPEARS TO MOVE TO THE REAR SINCE THE LIMOUSINE IS MOVING FORWARD. Gutierrez response: This suggests the blood be disbursed into the air where it just hangs there without movement, suspended to form a stationary mist comparable fog. Then as the limo drives forward the mist appears to move behind the President. This is physically impossible.

23. SHERRY STATES,” WHEN COMPARING THE SPATTER DESCRIBED BY THOSE BEHIND THE LIMO, TO THOSE WITHIN THE LIMO, IT APPEARS LARGER VOLUME OF BLOOD WAS OBSERVED BEHIND THE PRESIDENT (33)”. HOWEVER, WHEN THE REFERENCE IS CHECKED IT QUOTES THE FOLLOWING TESTIMONY: “33. " ...IT WAS LIKE A BUCKET OF BLOOD WAS THROWN FROM HIS HEAD" -BOBBY HARGIS Gutierrez response: My quote is from Bobby Hargis directly. It was made in the presence of others and I have no problem with you confirming it with him personally.

24. "MY EYES SAW BLOODY MATTER IN TINY BITS ALL OVER THE CAR." -NELLIE CONNALLY" APPARENTLY, SHERRY DOESN’T FEEL THAT NELLIE CONNALLY’S REFERENCE TO “TINY BITS” IS CONSISTENT WITH FORWARD SPATTER AS WELL AS BACK SPATTER. Gutierrez response: No, I am not referring to this as back spatter. It is forward spatter and is used as an example to show the forward spatter moved in all directions, including in front of the President. I used this since I can not prove the white streak is the Harper fragment and felt it was a better example than the one piece of tissue Governor Connally spoke of.

25. NOR DOES SHE REALIZE THAT “RED MIST OR CLOUD OF BLOOD” IS CONSISTENT WITH FORWARD AND BACK SPATTER. Gutierrez response: Since I am published in this field multiple times, nationally recognized as an instructor in this field, have over 20 years of crime scene investigation experience and have been court certified as an expert multiple times — I am well aware mist sized droplets are found in both forward and back spatter.

26. OF COURSE, YOU HAVE TO REMEMBER THE BONE, BULLETS, BLOOD AND BRAIN THAT WERE FOUND IN FRONT OF KENNEDY THAT ARE COMPLETELY DISREGARDED AND CONSISTENT WITH FORWARD HEAD SPATTER AND A REAR HEADSHOT. Gutierrez response: I have not disregarded anything; I simply used the expertise and training I possess to interpret the evidence in the correct manner. Zimmerman and I both agree the bone, blood and tissue in front of Kennedy are forward spatter. We just disagree about how it got there. Remember I didn’t just read a book and do a few experiments; I am a Bloodstain Pattern analyst.

27. WHILE THIS AUTHOR IS IN COMPLETE AGREEMENT WITH THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF CONTROLLED BLOOD SPATTER EXPERIMENTATION, I CANNOT AGREE WITH SHERRY GUITERREZ’S CONCLUSIONS. Gutierrez response: Mr. Zimmerman and any other reader has the right to disagree with my findings, methods and research. I am used to being challenged every time I testify, and when I first posted on this forum, I assure Opposing viewpoints are what make the forum great, ityou I was challenged! challenges us to re-examine our findings, stretch our intellect and search for new information. I don’t feel challenging or questioning me professionally is a personal matter. And, even after reading Zimmerman’s work, I stand by my original conclusions.

28. SOME OF THE FORWARD SPATTER FORMED A MIST THAT THE REAR PORTION OF THE CAR AND THE MOTORCYCLES DROVE THROUGH, CREATING SOME OF THE BLOOD AND MATTER EVIDENCE VISUALIZED AND TESTIFIED TO. Gutierrez response: Again, this suggests that blood be disbursed into the air where it just hangs there without movement, suspended to form a mist similar to fog. Then as the limo and motorcycles drive forward, the mist appears to move behind the President and is deposited onto the limo, motorcycles, the car Kinney was driving, etc. This is physically impossible. But, because he is not clear on where the forward spatter is located, and how the location of the wound impacts that; he is using what he believes to be a reasonable explanation.

29. SHERRY GUITERREZ HAS NOT ADDRESSED ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND CONTINUES TO MISCONSTRUE TESTIMONY WITH A HIGH DEGREE OF SELECTIVITY AND INTERPRET EVIDENCE TO PROMOTE A FRONTAL HEADSHOT THEORY. Gutierrez response: I have carefully read all testimony pertaining to blood, brain tissue or bone that may have been expelled as spatter. I have also carefully examined exhibits related to spatter in this case. When possible I spoke directly with many of the persons who provided testimony in this case. I have not been selective in the evidence and ask Mr. Zimmerman to state specifically evidence I did not consider. I continue to interpret the evidence in a manner that is professional, non-biased and in agreement with others in this field.

30. THIS MAY BE SUMMED UP WITH AN OPENING STATEMENT THAT IS ON THE JFK LANCER WEBSITE DESCRIBING HOW SHE BECAME INTERESTED IN EVALUATING THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION. IT READS: AFTER MUCH CONVERSATION, SKETCHING, DRAGGING OUT POLICE CASEWORK PHOTOS AND MY BLOODSTAIN PATTERN RESEARCH MATERIAL, DEBBY BEGAN HER PUSH FOR ME TO DO A SERIOUS STUDY AND PUBLISH MY FINDINGS. AS WE NOW KNOW, SHERRY GUITERREZ IS THE SISTER OF DEBRA CONWAY, WHO OPERATES THE JFK LANCER WEBSITE AND IS A STAUNCH CONSPIRACY BELIEVER. AND, AS DESCRIBED IN HER OWN WORDS, SHE APPROACHED THE PROJECT WITH A PREDETERMINED CONCLUSION THAT THE FATAL HEADSHOT WAS FIRED FROM THE FRONT. HOWEVER, THE EVIDENCE IS CONTRADICTORY TO THE PREDETERMINED HYPOTHESIS. Gutierrez response: My documented research with Bloodstain Pattern Analysis, some of my published works, court testimony and status as an instructor were established prior to my interest in the JFK assassination. When I stated I did research and study after the conversation with Debra I meant I researched the evidence in the JFK case — not bloodstain pattern research. I was not familiar with the case or what the Warren Commission held as testimony or exhibits. I did not however, live in a vacuum. I knew about Hargis, the Harper fragment, the grassy knoll and the controversy over the number of shots. No predetermined conclusion was made concerning my analysis of the head shot spatter patterns. I used my experience and training that day to recognize the small pattern visible in 313 could not have been the same one that deposited blood on Hargis, and expelled the Harper fragment. I have let the evidence dictate my position. I have not manipulated the findings to fit the outcome my sister wanted. Her belief was that there had to have been two shots to the head from either direction, since she was unaware one penetrating injury would result in both a back and forward spatter patterns. Perhaps I could have worded this in a way to more accurately describe any predetermined shot from the front as being Debra’s, not mine. I apologize for not being more careful in my choice of words.

Chad, Concerning your Lancer Post:

From the Lancer post: I THOUGHT I WOULD TAKE THIS TIME TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS RAISED OVER MY WEBPAGE. FIRST OF ALL, THAT WEBPAGE IS NOT A PUBLIC WEBPAGE. Gutierrez response: A google search of your web site address resulting in the following links. So although you may not want this to be a public page, any person reading the news group can access it:

Re: "SBT: Fact or Fiction?" by Ed Cage... Please take note of such an example on my webpage at: http://www.zimmermanjfk.com/frontmenu_00000b.htmalt.assassination.jfk - Feb 12, 2003 by Chad Zimmerman - View Thread (310 articles)

Re: Debunking The Tumble Theory - I... Please see: http://www.zimmermanjfk.com/frontmenu_00000b.htm I believe you'll see the 'jet effect' in action without a fluid filled cavity. ... alt.assassination.jfk - Feb 15, 2003 by Chad Zimmerman - View Thread (54 articles)

Re: Walt C--Q re CarcanoOkay, check out: http://www.zimmermanjfk.com/frontmenu_000008.htm you will find a clip of an exact replica, complete with scope. ... alt.assassination.jfk - Feb 5, 2003 by Chad Zimmerman - View Thread (19 articles

From the Lancer Post: (IT HAS NOT BEEN REGISTERED WITH ANY SEARCH ENGINE OR WEBSITE.) THERE ARE NO LINKS ON ANYONE ELSE'S PAGES. Gutierrez response: You may not be aware of it, but JFK-Online.com has a link to your web page. You can view that link at http://www.jfk-online.com/jfklinks.htmlI. So, any person going to the JFK-Online site can access your pages. Of course, links can be done without permission so that is an issue that may continue.

Chad, I want to thank you for the opportunity to address in detail the issues you have raised, even though you may not have planned for me to see it when I did. I hope this clarifies your concerns and perhaps you will let me know if I have persuaded you to change your conclusions. And may I assure you I have not taken this as a personal affront. We all disagrees with our spouse occasionally, but still love them. Friends can disagree and still be friends. And strangers can disagree and not become enemies. Perhaps in our exchange of ideas we can become friends and just agree to disagree.

Sincerely,Sherry