The Head Wounds Revisited

[Albert Rossi]

There are a number of accounts of Bethesda personnel witnessing the arrival of the gray Navy ambulance as x-rays were being developed.

Which would evidence a pre-autopsy wouldn't it?

Jerroll Custer claimed this (I can't recall whether Reed confirms this or not). But there are issues with Custer's testimony, which has shifted around over the years.

Dennis David does not talk about X-rays; he says that after he met the black hearse + civilians with the shipping casket on the morgue dock, he went up to was it the 4th floor in the tower at the front of the hospital and then saw the cortège with the Navy ambulance arrive at the front gate. David is unshaken in his testimony to this day, and is seconded by another witness whose name fails me at present. The only problem is, he did not witness the opening of the casket. O'Connor and Custer (for what his testimony is worth) are the only ones to tie these pieces together: the plain casket, the opening, JFK inside. Jenkins only partially corroborates this. This is what I believe Gordon was referring to. You have to piece the witnesses together in order to arrive at the full sequence. Can we do this reliably?

Then there is the business of multiple arrivals. That there are so many conflicting versions is, as in the case of the medical evidence itself, suspicious. But what really was going on in this apparent shell game (the impression you get if you simply combine all the versions)? Do we really have solid evidence enough to reconstruct this?

And then, there is this business with the Boyajian report (Horne, Appendix 38, http://maryferrell.org). Livingstone suspects that it indicates the arrival of some other deceased officer. Dennis David would have to be remembering this arrival. Now, this is certainly possible. But what bothers me are the following:

a) We now have three teams (aside from the FBI entry) claiming they unloaded some casket at the morgue entrance. But the Boyajian report does not speak of a black hearse and civilians, as does Dennis, nor does it describe the casket (point 3 of the report). The report does say that the team was scrambling around (double-timing) because there were conflicting orders as to where the casket would be arriving. All that commotion only makes sense in the context of JFK's arrival. Livingstone would thus require us to believe that they happened, just by chance, to be on hand to assist with bringing in the remains of someone else, and were not recalled thereafter to assist with JFK's casket (otherwise I would think the two separate incidents would have been reported). This all seems a bit strained to me.

b) Why was the name of this putative officer never logged? Who was it? David does not say he was told either way who was in the coffin, though his actions were a response to the orders he had just received concerning "his visitor" only 15 or 20 minutes prior.

c) And why would a military officer be brought in this way by civilians, according to Dennis (he actually spoke with the driver)?

d) Further, Custer explicitly refutes there being two bodies in the morgue; Custer as witness, however, admittedly does not generally inspire confidence, so I cannot call this probative evidence.

The matter, in my view, does not appear to be resolved. Doubts about the Boyajian report itself are well-taken: it may indeed never have been submitted because of its vagueness in terms of who was taken into the morgue. But then David also insists he gave a report of his activities to Boswell, a report which seems to have disappeared.

[Gordon Gray]

There are a number of accounts of Bethesda personnel witnessing the arrival of the gray Navy ambulance as x-rays were being developed.

Which would evidence a pre-autopsy wouldn't it?

Jerroll Custer claimed this (I can't recall whether Reed confirms this or not). But there are issues with Custer's testimony, which has shifted around over the years.

Dennis David does not talk about X-rays; he says that after he met the black hearse + civilians with the shipping casket on the morgue dock, he went up to was it the 4th floor in the tower at the front of the hospital and then saw the cortège with the Navy ambulance arrive at the front gate. David is unshaken in his testimony to this day, and is seconded by another witness whose name fails me at present. The only problem is, he did not witness the opening of the casket. O'Connor and Custer (for what his testimony is worth) are the only ones to tie these pieces together: the plain casket, the opening, JFK inside. Jenkins only partially corroborates this. This is what I believe Gordon was referring to. You have to piece the witnesses together in order to arrive at the full sequence. Can we do this reliably?

Then there is the business of multiple arrivals. That there are so many conflicting versions is, as in the case of the medical evidence itself, suspicious. But what really was going on in this apparent shell game (the impression you get if you simply combine all the versions)? Do we really have solid evidence enough to reconstruct this?

And then, there is this business with the Boyajian report (Horne, Appendix 38, http://maryferrell.org). Livingstone suspects that it indicates the arrival of some other deceased officer. Dennis David would have to be remembering this arrival. Now, this is certainly possible. But what bothers me are the following:

a) We now have three teams (aside from the FBI entry) claiming they unloaded some casket at the morgue entrance. But the Boyajian report does not speak of a black hearse and civilians, as does Dennis, nor does it describe the casket (point 3 of the report). The report does say that the team was scrambling around (double-timing) because there were conflicting orders as to where the casket would be arriving. All that commotion only makes sense in the context of JFK's arrival. Livingstone would thus require us to believe that they happened, just by chance, to be on hand to assist with bringing in the remains of someone else, and were not recalled thereafter to assist with JFK's casket (otherwise I would think the two separate incidents would have been reported). This all seems a bit strained to me.

b) Why was the name of this putative officer never logged? Who was it? David does not say he was told either way who was in the coffin, though his actions were a response to the orders he had just received concerning "his visitor" only 15 or 20 minutes prior.

c) And why would a military officer be brought in this way by civilians, according to Dennis (he actually spoke with the driver)?

d) Further, Custer explicitly refutes there being two bodies in the morgue; Custer as witness, however, admittedly does not generally inspire confidence, so I cannot call this probative evidence.

The matter, in my view, does not appear to be resolved. Doubts about the Boyajian report itself are well-taken: it may indeed never have been submitted because of its vagueness in terms of who was taken into the morgue. But then David also insists he gave a report of his activities to Boswell, a report which seems to have disappeared.

There is some confusion I believe about the two military guard units and their function. Boyajian's unit was a security team who's charge was to keep out reporters, curiosity seekers, and other unauthorized personnel. Then the was the multi service Honor guard(white gloves) who did not arrive until 8:00(after chasing a decoy ambulance). I think a number of witnesses confused the two in there recollections. Some should go through a time line, listing just who was where when, and who saw what when.

[Jim DiEugenio]

If there was any good stuff in Kaleidoscope, and there was, one thing was Harry's clearing up what the stuff that Horne was trying to say about the whole Boyajian Report.

That was not JFK's coffin.

And Boyajian did not say it was. And that report was not really a report.

Because it was unsigned by anyone. IF it was JFK's coffin it would have been.

[Albert Doyle]

Kiss: How could they be developing x-rays just as the show casket was arriving?


Kiss: If they could have identified the "other officer" they would have. The reason they made no attempt to is because they didn't want to draw attention to the ruse and risk opening the can of worms by drawing more witnesses towards the issue.

[Gordon Gray]

Here's what O'Neill said, I find it hard to dismiss him: [size=12]Q: Were you present when the casket was
161opened?
VI A: Absolutely.
PI Q: And was there anytime between the time the
[sl casket was taken out of the ambuIance and that you
IO] saw the casket opened that you were not with the
III casket?
PI A: No, sir. In fact there was no time-from
[/SIZE][size=12][/SIZE][size=12]131 [/SIZE][size=12]the first time I saw the casket being taken out of[/SIZE]
[size=12][/SIZE][size=12][/SIZE][size=12]141 [/SIZE][size=12]the aircraft with Bobby Kennedy and Mrs. Kennedy[/SIZE]
[size=12]IS] until the time that it was opened and the body
Iq taken out-that that casket was not in my view or
III the vehicle, which it was in, in my view.
[/SIZE][size=12]

[/SIZE]

[size=12]

[/SIZE]

[Albert Doyle]

I think if you analyze O'Neill to the Hay degree Dennis David, the x-rays, and Pitzer's front right entry wound tip the scales in the direction of a pre-autopsy. It's very simple, you can't have Pitzer's extracted frames without a pre-autopsy. The critics never quite get around to calling Dennis David a liar directly because I feel they feel a sense they dare not, IMO. You have to use common sense with these things. If you try to make all the quote-mining angels line up in perfect unison you'll be doing this forever. Remember O'Neill worked for Hoover's FBI.

[Martin Hay]

all we have left is the coroborrated word of those who were there... and THEY tell us that JFK was worked upon prior to his official arrival...

DJ

David , could you be more specific here? It's hard to respond to nameless witnesses without citations.

In the meantime, I'd like to point out something. You mentioned before, if I understood you correctly, that Tom Robinson and Ed Reed were witnesses to the enlarging of the head wound at some pre-autopsy event. Well, that's not what Reed said in his ARRB testimony. In fact, he made it clear that all of the X-rays had been taken before Dr. Humes made his first incision into the scalp:

Q. Okay. You've described the sequence of the taking of the X-ray films. Can you tell me whether there were any incisions that were performed on the body between the time of the first X-ray and the time of the last X-ray that you took?
A. As Far as I know,no.
Q. When you brought the last of the X-rays that you had developed back to the morgue, had there been any incisions performed on the body at that time?
A. No.
Q. Were you present during the time of the first incision?
A. Yes.
Q. What was the first incision?
A. The Cranium. The scalp, right here. (p. 57)

As for Tom Robinson, his ARRB interview simply says that he arrived "early in the autopsy" as "gross examination of the head was just beginning".(ARRB MD180) He doesn't say anything about witnessing the taking of X-rays at any point, or being removed while this happened, so it can be logically inferred that he arrived after they were taken. Which means his statement corroborates that of Reed. And neither of them gave testimony that in any way corroborates illicit pre-autopsy enlargement of the head wound.

[Martin Hay]

It's pretty clear JFK went into Bethesda in an aluminum shipping casket after 6:30. I believe someone wrote somewhere that there were negro (in terms of the day) hospital workers in the autopsy room when the pre-autopsy was done who witnessed it. They did not have the full secrecy pressure applied on them because they were not considered serious credible threats. The pre-autopsy could have been done on military national security orders. There's no reason to overthink this event and suggest it wasn't necessary because the event was under full covert control anyway. The pre-autopsy was done simply because they needed to present an allegedly fresh body that showed wounds similar to shots from the Depository. Perfectly in line with the honestly-explained greater covert picture surrounding the event.


The pre-autopsy is where Pitzer got his right front entry wound frames that Dennis David witnessed first hand. Or is Dennis David lying too? CIA murdered Pitzer for it.

The CIA did not murder William Bruce Pitzer. It's just another silly story that deserves to be forgotten.

He committed suicide.That's all there is to it.

World renowned and independent-minded forensics experts Cyril Wecht and Herbert L MacDonell have both studied the autopsy photographs and concluded that the evidence is consistent with a suicide. In fact, MacDonnell considers it "almost impossible that someone could have shot him".

More info here:http://www.manuscriptservice.com/WBP-Resolution/

[Albert Doyle]

DiEugenio would scoff at any forensic expert looking at pictures from years away.



Ask Mr Hay what happened to the film frames and films Commander Pitzer was assembling? Where did they go and why?



Ask Mr Hay what exactly Pitzer was doing that evening at Bethesda?



It is travesty to ignore that Dan Marvin witnessed the CIA plan to kill Pitzer (IMO).

[Gordon Gray]

I think if you analyze O'Neill to the Hay degree Dennis David, the x-rays, and Pitzer's front right entry wound tip the scales in the direction of a pre-autopsy. It's very simple, you can't have Pitzer's extracted frames without a pre-autopsy. The critics never quite get around to calling Dennis David a liar directly because I feel they feel a sense they dare not, IMO. You have to use common sense with these things. If you try to make all the quote-mining angels line up in perfect unison you'll be doing this forever. Remember O'Neill worked for Hoover's FBI.

So instead you just line up your quote mining angels to support your pet thesis and ignore anything to the contrary, per Horne/Lifton?