CIB's exaggerated claim

The most troubling of the CIB's experiment lies not with the sloppiness of the design, but with the far-reaching and unqualified conclusion that their three valid shots were ``consistent with the actual situation in the March 19 shooting'', announced to the press on June 25, 2004. The official CIB report [CIB2] was more restrained, but the CIB never retracted its earlier exaggerated conclusions. The CIB actually pronounced, on several occasions, that they ``stood behind their experiment'', giving the public a false impression at the very least.

We know that none of the three valid shots in the CIB experiment penetrated the undershirt on exit. The CIB did not report the maximum depth of graze wound in its three valid shots. The maximum length of continuous graze wound produced on the pig skin in the three valid shots was 3.6 cm. Clearly the damage patterns produced by the three valid shots are not remotely similar to the damage patterns in the government-certified evidence. If anything, the record of the three valid shots in CIB's shooting experiment are consistent with the results of experiments by Dr. Y's group! The correct conclusion from the CIB' shooting experiment should be that, the damage patterns produced are inconsistent with the actual situation.