This discovery is the single most significant "smoking gun" indicating a government coverup with the medical evidence surrounding President Kennedy's assassination, and is a direct result of the JFK Records Act, which in turn was fathered by the film JFK. Without Oliver Stone's movie, and the legislation generated as a response to the controversy engendered by the film, this discovery would not have been possible. The JFK Act forced the release, in August 1993, of the HSCA [House Select Committee on Assassinations] staff's previously withheld medical witness interviews; when these previously suppressed interviews were liberated, and married with Humes' Warren Commission testimony and Dr. Finck's summary reports to General Blumberg, the timeline indicating that two separate brain examinations took place became blatantly obvious to me. Without the HSCA interview reports, my hypothesis would never have been formulated. Furthermore, the JFK Records Act created the ARRB, and it was our depositions of Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck; photographer John Stringer; and former FBI agent Francis O'Neill as well as our unsworn interview of mortician Tom Robinson that confirmed my suspicions, and transformed a hypothesis into incontrovertible fact. (Horne, volume III, page 778; information in brackets added.)

the military did not give in easily. On November 3, 1977 Deanne C. Siemer of the DOD Office of General Counsel sent a letter to HSCA Chief Counsel Robert Blakey refusing to rescind the order not to talk, since the "record with respect to the autopsy is complete and has been preserved intact."

Gunn: Again, I am not asking you to tell me exactly, but I'm just asking whether you remember whether it was within a day or two or whether it was within a week or two?
Finck: Oh, it was not a day or two. That's too short.

Gunn: Drs. Humes and Boswell, when they testified to the Review Board, had an initial recollection that they had done a supplementary examination within two or three days after the autopsy. There is no evidence that you were present as far as I am aware in a supplementary examination within two or three days after the autopsy. Do you have any knowledge whether there was more than one supplementary examination of the brain?
Finck: [frowning, looking deeply troubled] No. (Horne, volume III, page 795; brackets in original)

Gunn: What happened during the supplementary exam, if you could describe the process?
Stringer: They took it out, and put it on the table, and describe it [sic] as to the condition, too some sections of it. We took some pictures of it. I had a copy board there with the light coming down from the well, from underneath and with the lights down on it, and shot pictures of the brain.
Gunn: As it was being sectioned?
Stringer: Yes.
Gunn: Were the sections small pieces, or cross sections of the brain?
Stringer: If I remember, it was cross sections.
Gunn: And what was the purpose of doing the cross section of the brain?
Stringer: To show the damage. (Horne, volume III, page 785)

Gunn: Based upon these being basilar views of a brain and based upon there being no identification cards, are you able to identify with certainty whether these photographs before you are photographs of the brain of President Kennedy?
Stringer: No, I couldn't say that they were President Kennedy's. I mean, there's no identification. All I know is, I gave everything to Jim Humes, and he gave them to Admiral Burkley.

Gunn: Okay. When you took the black and white photographs of the brain of President Kennedy, did you use a press pack?
Stringer: No.
Gunn: Can you identify from the negatives in front of you whether those photographs are from a press pack? And I'm referring to numbers 9, 21, and 22.
Stringer: I think they are. Yes.
Gunn: Would it be fair to say, then, that by your recollection, that the black and white negatives in front of you now were not taken by you during the supplementary autopsy of President Kennedy?
Stringer: Correct. This is Ansco.
Gunn: When you say, "This is Ansco," what do you mean?
Stringer: This is Ansco film.
Gunn: What is Ansco film?
Stringer: Well, it's a super high pan. And I think it's from a film pack.

Gunn: Did you ever use Ansco film yourself in conducting medical photography?
Stringer: Not very often.
Gunn: Did you use Ansco film in the taking the autopsy
Stringer: Not as far as I know.
Gunn: photographs of President Kennedy?
Gunn: Not as far as I know. (Horne, volume III, pages 806809)

Summarizing, John Stringer testified that the brain photographs in the Archives could not be the ones he took because (1) the black and white negatives placed before him at the deposition were numbered proving that there were from a film pack instead of unnumbered, as were all of the portrait pan duplex films he remembered using; (2) the black and white negatives shown to him had no identifying notches in the corner of each negative, as all portrait pan negatives should have had; (3) the color positive transparency images of a brain in the Archives did not have the same identifying notches in the corner of each slide that the Ektachrome E3 slides did; (4) the official collection of brain photographs contained basilar, or inferior views of the intact brain, whereas he did not shoot any basilar views of President Kennedy's brain; and (5) the deed-of-gift brain photographs did not contain any images of serial sections, which in 1996 he vividly remembered seeing dissected, and which he remembered photographing himself at the brain examination, using a light box. (Horne, volume III, page 810)

Gunn: Do you have any sense of what percentage of the brain was missing at the time it was removed from the cranium?
O'Neill: I'm saying this now, 38 years afterwards or something like that 33 years afterwards, 34 years afterwards. It was Oh, well more than half of the brain was missing.

Gunn: Okay. Could we now see the eighth view, what has been described as the "basilar view of the brain," color photograph no.46. And let me say, in the way of preface, these photographs have been identified as having been taken of President Kennedy's brain at some time after the autopsy after they had been set in formalin. Can you identify that in any reasonable way as appearing to be the what the brain looked like of President Kennedy?
O'Neill: No.
Gunn: In what regards does it appear to be different?
O'Neill: It appears to be too much.
Gunn: Could we now look Let me ask a question. If you could elaborate a little bit on what you mean by "it appears to be too much?"
O'Neill: … This looks almost like a complete brain. Or am I wrong on that? I don't know.… In all honesty, I cannot say it looks like the brain I saw, quite frankly I As I described before, I did not recall it being that large. If other people say that this is what happened, so be it. To me, I don't recall it being that large. (Horne, volume III, pages 815817.)