The Head Wounds Revisited

[Albert Doyle]

I have to agree with Mr Lifton. I'm forced to comment that it is kind of obvious no honest effort is being made to answer his operative points. The key to this is Pitzer and the film frames Dennis David witnessed of a wound to the front right of the head. CIA screwed-up big time and didn't realize Pitzer was remotely filming the entire covert pre-autopsy. This required Pitzer's assassination by CIA.

[Martin Hay]

Martin Hay:

You're spreading mis-information and disinformation. Let's start with your opening line:

QUOTE:
Your daft theories, however, have done damage to to the truth, helped undo much of the good work done by early critics of the Warren Commission, and made it easy for critics of the official story to be lumped in with moon hoaxers and holocaust deniers. So I will continue to show how factually corrupt your work is, and how little basis your ludicrous hypotheses have in fact, in order to help set the record straight.

This is a give-away that demonstrates you're a follower of the garbage put out by the late Roger Feinmanthat my work, exposing the serious autopsy fraud in this case, somehow has functioned so as to "undo much of the good work done by early critics" . Gee Martin. . why don't you get specific, and tell us what "good work" you are referring to. My work was published in January, 1981, and contained the accounts of the body bag and shipping casket that Robert Blakey had consigned to the classified files, and--were it not for Best Evidence--might have remained there for 50 years. So what are you talking about?

But let's get to your other pots.

First of all: If there was anything "daft," let me assure you that the late Wesley Liebeler, the UCLA law professor and Warren Commission to whom I showed some of this evidence on October 24, 1966, wouldn't have gotten as excited as he did, and then drafted a 13 page memorandum to every member of the Warren Commission, and its legal staff, pointing out thatunbeknownst to themtheir own files contained evidence that the President's body had been altered prior to autopsy. (See Chapter 9 of Best Evidence, for a description of that meeting; and Chapter 10 of Best Evidence, for the story of the Liebeler Memorandum). And, although you may not be aware of it, a member of the White House legal staff --Lee White--then suggested that there be a limited reopening of the case, to investigate this particular matter, and LBJ nixed that option. (Perhaps LBJ contacted you, back then, and you assured him that these ideas were "without merit"? And were "daft"?)

Second: if there was anything "daft", let me assure you that my publisher wouldn't have spent the money they did vetting the book, and then putting up the funds to commission a documentary film, in order to get the key witness accounts (about the body bag and the shipping casket) on film, prior to publication.

The truly "daft" idea is in your post post, and is the absurd notionwhich comes from the fevered imagination of Harrison Livingstonethat there was "another" body at Bethesda.

THE FALSE NOTION OF THE "OTHER BODY" -- LIVINGSTONE'S WAY OF AVOIDING MULTIPLE COFFIN ENTRIES

Here's the bottom line, which I have little doubt you will ever accept, because it would mean capitulating to the essential validity of my work, but here it is anyway: Yes, there was one more than one coffin entry at Bethesda that night (i.e., the shipping casket at 6:35 PM, and then the Dallas coffin entering once (empty) at 7:17 PM, and then a second time at 8PM )with JFK's body)but there was no second body.

Let me repeat that: multiple coffin entries, because of a clumsy attempt to hide the prior intercept; but no "second body." The first proposition (multiple coffin entries) is backed up by the evidence; the second ("second body") is a straw man erected by Harrison Livingstone, who you are now blindly following in an attempt to discredit my work.

You ought to understand that point and stop nit picking and making tendentious arguments attempting to introduce "another body." If you want to believe that, then I suggest you purchase an airline ticket and come visit Livingstone on some fruit farm in northern California, and the to of you can meet in the woods, and fry marshmellows and can commune on that notion.

No on to your next point:

QUOTE:

Boyajian's report does NOT say that the casket he and his men picked up contained the body of President Kennedy. And he did NOT recall the arrival of Kennedy's casket. Those are the FACTS. Additionally, as Jim DiEugenio correctly pointed out, "Bethesda is also a morgue. It did not stop being so just because Kennedy was being transported there that day. Other military men died that day" UNQUOTE

DSL RESPONSE: You're dead wrongand you're playing "lawyers games" again. Boyajian and his men were specifically sent to Bethesda to provide security in connection with the arrival of the President's body. (You can even read about this in Manchester's Death of a President, although he doesn't mention Boyajian by name. But he talks about how Admiral Galloway needed Marines for security, and called over to Fort Myer to get a group). Anyway, that's what Sgt. Boyajian was there for, and that's the subject of the after-action report he wrote on November 26, 1963. There was no other body that arrived at Bethesda that night---and there was no other morgue at Bethesda.." Those are simply facts. As for DiEugenio's unfounded conjecture, "Other military men died that day"would you mind supplying a name? Because if there was such a death, that person's body was certainly not brought to Bethesda on the night of November 22, 1963. Your attempt to fuzz up this issue is outrageous, and againgoes to your motives to be even making such an absurd and dishonest argument.

Next Point: I said that Dennis David told me that the black hearse with the shipping casket arrived "a good 20 minutes" before the naval ambulance carrying Jacqueline Kennedy, which arrived at the front of Bethesda at 6:55 PM EST. Your response: to cite the time of "6:45 PM" 10 minutes later--which was provided by Dennis David when interviewed over the phone by Doug Horne of the ARRB.

Listen up, Mr. Hay: I interviewed Dennis David on July 2, 1979, by phone; and then on camera in October, 1980: I reported accurately what he said. Right there, in his home, in Hoopston, Illinois, and on camera and you can see that in the home video documentary we released in 1989: that President Kennedy's body arrived, in the black hearse "a good 20 minutes before" the naval ambulance. Are you seriously contending that what Dennis David said to Doug Horne in 1997seventeen years after I interviewed him on camerasomehow undercuts what he told me in 1980? Oh pleez. . .get real.

You can huff and puff all you want Martin Hay. We're now coming up on 50 years after the event. So glad that you have become interested in pursuing the matter. No doubt it offers you some escape from your day job. Unfortunately, you cannot undo a historical record that was established by the Boyajian Report in 1963 and by the journalistic work I did in 1979, and on camera in 1980.

But keep trying. . as I'm sure you will.

DSL
6/21/13, 3 AM PDT
Los Angeles, California

Blah blah blah.

Lifton huffs and he puffs but that house still stands.

Boyajian's report does NOT say that the casket he and his men picked up contained the body of President Kennedy. And he did NOT recall the arrival of Kennedy's casket. Those are the FACTS.

ARRB MD177, Call Report Summarizing 2/14/97 Telephonic Interview of Dennis David: "He then got his own duty sailors together, borrowed some more from the dental school, and assembled them outside the morgue at the loading dock by about 6:40 P.M. Five or six minutes later, at about 6:45, he said a black hearse drove up to the loading dock...the Navy sailors (approximately 7 or 8 people) working for him off loaded the casket which was in the hearse. He said it was a simple, gray shipping casket such as he frequently saw used later during theVietnam war."

Just the facts please, ma'am.

[Albert Doyle]

[quote=Martin Hay] Blah blah blah.

Lifton huffs and he puffs but that house still stands.

[/QUOTE]



I submit Martin fails to show an objective interest in the facts and insists on arguing a one-sided contrived version of the evidence. I'm sorry, but I feel Martin surrenders his credibility with this. I feel Martin is avoiding Rebentisch, whom he quotes otherwise but forgets now, the surgery to the head, and Dennis David's witnessing of photographs that could only have come from a pre-autopsy. In my opinion the 1500 gram brain is proof that the autopsy was willing to do physical alteration.

[David Josephs]

David, is the (one way or another) phonied Harper fragment your own theory, or have others written about this as well?

===========
I was going to edit the previous post, but something went wrong with the database.

So I'll just add a tag line. If the plotters or their abetters took the Harper fragment from the seat of the limo or from the trunk or the follow-up SS car or wherever, and planted it further down the street in order to make it look like it was blown forward, then those particular individuals weren't very sophisticated, since the bone is most probably occipital (almost everyone who has examined it or the photo of it, with the exception of the FPP, says so), and it just does not make sense that bone from the back of the head would end up way down the street.

I have not read anywhere about the notion the Harper fragment was planted - it did just come to me as I thought about what you had posted and the reality that IF the wound was actually a 2-3" hole, there is no place from which the Harper fragment could come...

Regarding the delivery of fragments from Dallas to Bethesda that night... I'd need to do more research... but my gut tells me these are the fragments created when Humes et al break up JFK's head...

I know Gordon/Martin claim there was no time for that... I say that after the metal casket was rec'd... and Reed/Custer were asked to leave, we have 15-25 minutes when Humes, Boswell & Ebersole are in the morgue with the president's body... alone.

It is not possible to claim he arrived at 7pm on Humes' table given the contradictory evidence... or the reality of Sibert/O'Neill/Greer meeting Kellerman at the morgue entrance WITH the bronze casketed ambulance after 7pm... and the FBI CYA'ing about seeing JFK removed from this coffin and staying with the body. Admitting that the body was in the morgue at least an hour before it was "officially" and then making the argument that nothing nefarious happens to his head to change the wounds is imo very naive.

Ebersole was a radiation treatment specialist...not an xray tech... Asst Chief of Radiology I believe. His HSCA testimony reveals his desire to give himself more importance than was real... He fails to even mention Custer and Reed... btw - the portable xray machine was not necessary unless there was a problem with moving JFK to the xray room at Bethesda prior to 8pm... which of course there was... He was not yet supposed to be in the morgue when the xrays were being taken by Reed....

I think it very possible that in the 15-25 minutes prior to the SS/FBI casket charade... Humes and created the skull wounds and fragments... Ebersole's HSCA Med Panel testimony is an amazing example of "Specter-izing" the medical evidence.... The one thing that Ebersole would not let go of - even in his dishonesty - was that ALL THE SETS of xrays were done prior to the first incisions and no xrays were taken after the Y incision... The three xrays of the chest that supposedly show no internal organs also do not have JFK's medical record metal plate on them.... (you know like 0185 and 0187 both nor having their numbers on the film... but trust us, they were the original copies...

Back to Harper to conclude... I've seen images on the massive number of people on that grassy area.... kids, curious adults, etc... and this piece is found 4+ hours later. The fact that it is now gone from existence should tell you all you need to know. Like the Brain... this fragment was a prop - NOT from JFK or from the shooting... Even as we discuss a 2nd shot to the head from the rear, there was simply not enough skull missing (and they can't claim that bone exited thru and without the scalp) to account for these fragments....

One of the lowly techs testified that they took a hammer to JFK's head... the brain inside was said to be MUSH... no sections were taken... blah blah blah....

[Gordon Gray]

David, is the (one way or another) phonied Harper fragment your own theory, or have others written about this as well?

===========
I was going to edit the previous post, but something went wrong with the database.

So I'll just add a tag line. If the plotters or their abetters took the Harper fragment from the seat of the limo or from the trunk or the follow-up SS car or wherever, and planted it further down the street in order to make it look like it was blown forward, then those particular individuals weren't very sophisticated, since the bone is most probably occipital (almost everyone who has examined it or the photo of it, with the exception of the FPP, says so), and it just does not make sense that bone from the back of the head would end up way down the street.

I have not read anywhere about the notion the Harper fragment was planted - it did just come to me as I thought about what you had posted and the reality that IF the wound was actually a 2-3" hole, there is no place from which the Harper fragment could come...

Regarding the delivery of fragments from Dallas to Bethesda that night... I'd need to do more research... but my gut tells me these are the fragments created when Humes et al break up JFK's head...

I know Gordon/Martin claim there was no time for that... I say that after the metal casket was rec'd... and Reed/Custer were asked to leave, we have 15-25 minutes when Humes, Boswell & Ebersole are in the morgue with the president's body... alone.

It is not possible to claim he arrived at 7pm on Humes' table given the contradictory evidence... or the reality of Sibert/O'Neill/Greer meeting Kellerman at the morgue entrance WITH the bronze casketed ambulance after 7pm... and the FBI CYA'ing about seeing JFK removed from this coffin and staying with the body. Admitting that the body was in the morgue at least an hour before it was "officially" and then making the argument that nothing nefarious happens to his head to change the wounds is imo very naive.

Ebersole was a radiation treatment specialist...not an xray tech... Asst Chief of Radiology I believe. His HSCA testimony reveals his desire to give himself more importance than was real... He fails to even mention Custer and Reed... btw - the portable xray machine was not necessary unless there was a problem with moving JFK to the xray room at Bethesda prior to 8pm... which of course there was... He was not yet supposed to be in the morgue when the xrays were being taken by Reed....

I think it very possible that in the 15-25 minutes prior to the SS/FBI casket charade... Humes and created the skull wounds and fragments... Ebersole's HSCA Med Panel testimony is an amazing example of "Specter-izing" the medical evidence.... The one thing that Ebersole would not let go of - even in his dishonesty - was that ALL THE SETS of xrays were done prior to the first incisions and no xrays were taken after the Y incision... The three xrays of the chest that supposedly show no internal organs also do not have JFK's medical record metal plate on them.... (you know like 0185 and 0187 both nor having their numbers on the film... but trust us, they were the original copies...

Back to Harper to conclude... I've seen images on the massive number of people on that grassy area.... kids, curious adults, etc... and this piece is found 4+ hours later. The fact that it is now gone from existence should tell you all you need to know. Like the Brain... this fragment was a prop - NOT from JFK or from the shooting... Even as we discuss a 2nd shot to the head from the rear, there was simply not enough skull missing (and they can't claim that bone exited thru and without the scalp) to account for these fragments....

One of the lowly techs testified that they took a hammer to JFK's head... the brain inside was said to be MUSH... no sections were taken... blah blah blah....

" I say that after the metal casket was rec'd... and Reed/Custer were asked to leave, we have 15-25 minutes when Humes, Boswell & Ebersole are in the morgue with the president's body... alone." But were they alone. Reed says there were photographers and lab technicians present when they carried in the shipping casket and placed the body on the table. The 15 minutes would have been the time to take initial photos of the body prior to opening it up. X Rays would have damaged their film. Also when Reed and Custer return, afterward he reports seeing no work having been done to the body."[size=12]They weren't opening anything up. There
was no saws or anything at that time that I was
aware of - anything that was going on medically at
the time" [/SIZE]
Had they reflected the scalp and enlarged the head wound he would have noticed that when he took XRays of the head wouldn't he. Or is he lying about that? If you are going to cite Reed as a source for your theory, you should explain why you discount some parts of his testimony and accept other parts.

[Phil Dragoo]

Malcolm Perry was clear regarding the throat wound. What part of "preserved inviolate" fits the six-centimeter gash with ragged edges.

Dr. McClelland:

In his Warren Commission testimony, Dr. McClelland described his observations in detail:

"As I took the position at the head of the table...to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured almost along its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open" (6WCH 33).

Dr. Clark:

Dr. Kemp Clark, the then 38-year-old Chairman of Neurosurgery, stated in a typed report of November 22 that "[t]here was a large wound in the right occipitoparietal region...(and) [t]here was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound" (CE 392:17WCH 3). Additionally, a handwritten report filed that same afternoon stated, "[t]here was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region...(and) [m]uch of the posterior skull appeared gone at brief examination..." (CE392:17WCH 10). At a 1:30 p.m. press conference on that day, he told reporters that "[t]he head wound could have been either an exit wound from the neck or it could have been a tangential wound, as it was simply a large, gaping loss of tissue" (1327-C 5). During his Warren Commission testimony four months later, he added that he "...examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed" (6WCH 20). In a series of interviews with researcher David Naro in January of 1994, Dr. Clark reaffirmed his original statements on several occasions and thus backed up the account of Dr. McClelland. "[T]he lower right occipital region of the occipital region was blown out and I saw cerebellum," he said. Furthermore, he added, "[i]n my opinion the wound was an exit wound" (Naro).

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.bac...lland.html

No such large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, etc., presents in the report of Humes, the x-rays, the photographs and the lies of Blakey.

These men are capable of the most extraordinary lies.

Ebersole who claimed credit for the x-rays (falsely) may have a very different credit due.

He was in position to add the light blasting at the "patch" on the lateral and the 6.5 mm artifact on the AP.

His phone interview by Dr. David Mantik proceeded amiably enough until the latter asked Ebersole about this artifact--then Ebersole terminated the call and made no further reply to Dr. Mantik, ever.

Regarding the brain, Paul O'Connor said there was none or very little; that his job was to reflect the scalp, saw the skull, remove the brain--none of which were necessary.

And a weight of 1500 grams for the contents of an empty stainless container indicates yet one more lie.

X-ray transport halted for entry of official party--major distortion of the space-time continuum: another lie.

Robert Groden has eighty-one witnesses to this large occipitoparietal wound. There was brain flying everywhere. The odd skull fragment, too.

Yet the harpsichord and viola and the powdered wigs provide background for the photos of the back of the head.

Behold, a miracle.

Or, in the alternative, another lie.

For which Stringer had no explanation and Pitzer paid a very high price.

Humes remained shameless.

Some lied out of fear; some lied out of schedenfreude.

Humes to Gunn, "I certainly hope you figure this out."

[Gordon Gray]

I don't think there is any question that the Autopsists falsified their report, or that the X Rays were altered and some omitted form the archives, or that some of the photo's were either faked, omitted, or substituted for with photo's taken during the mortician's reconstruction, or that there was a large blowout to the back of the head. The question is, for me, was the head wound enlarged beyond what was necessary to remove what was left of the brain? I don't see any reason for that, nor do I see any time when they had an opportunity to do it.

[David Lifton]

Malcolm Perry was clear regarding the throat wound. What part of "preserved inviolate" fits the six-centimeter gash with ragged edges.

Dr. McClelland:

In his Warren Commission testimony, Dr. McClelland described his observations in detail:

"As I took the position at the head of the table...to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured almost along its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open" (6WCH 33).

Dr. Clark:

Dr. Kemp Clark, the then 38-year-old Chairman of Neurosurgery, stated in a typed report of November 22 that "[t]here was a large wound in the right occipitoparietal region...(and) [t]here was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound" (CE 392:17WCH 3). Additionally, a handwritten report filed that same afternoon stated, "[t]here was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region...(and) [m]uch of the posterior skull appeared gone at brief examination..." (CE392:17WCH 10). At a 1:30 p.m. press conference on that day, he told reporters that "[t]he head wound could have been either an exit wound from the neck or it could have been a tangential wound, as it was simply a large, gaping loss of tissue" (1327-C 5). During his Warren Commission testimony four months later, he added that he "...examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed" (6WCH 20). In a series of interviews with researcher David Naro in January of 1994, Dr. Clark reaffirmed his original statements on several occasions and thus backed up the account of Dr. McClelland. "[T]he lower right occipital region of the occipital region was blown out and I saw cerebellum," he said. Furthermore, he added, "[i]n my opinion the wound was an exit wound" (Naro).

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.bac...lland.html

No such large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, etc., presents in the report of Humes, the x-rays, the photographs and the lies of Blakey.

These men are capable of the most extraordinary lies.

Ebersole who claimed credit for the x-rays (falsely) may have a very different credit due.

He was in position to add the light blasting at the "patch" on the lateral and the 6.5 mm artifact on the AP.

His phone interview by Dr. David Mantik proceeded amiably enough until the latter asked Ebersole about this artifact--then Ebersole terminated the call and made no further reply to Dr. Mantik, ever.

Regarding the brain, Paul O'Connor said there was none or very little; that his job was to reflect the scalp, saw the skull, remove the brain--none of which were necessary.

And a weight of 1500 grams for the contents of an empty stainless container indicates yet one more lie.

X-ray transport halted for entry of official party--major distortion of the space-time continuum: another lie.

Robert Groden has eighty-one witnesses to this large occipitoparietal wound. There was brain flying everywhere. The odd skull fragment, too.

Yet the harpsichord and viola and the powdered wigs provide background for the photos of the back of the head.

Behold, a miracle.

Or, in the alternative, another lie.

For which Stringer had no explanation and Pitzer paid a very high price.

Humes remained shameless.

Some lied out of fear; some lied out of schedenfreude.

Humes to Gunn, "I certainly hope you figure this out."

Regarding the last line:

Humes to Gunn, "I certainly hope you figure this out."

Yes, that's what he said. . and now let me remind everyone what he told me, in November 1966, in a call for which there is a crystal clear tape:

"Lots of luck, is all I can tell you. It will take you the rest of your life." (from memory, but unforgettable).

And it has!

DSL
6/22/13; 6:40 PM PDT
Los Angeles, California

[Tracy Riddle]

A couple of points:

Remember the old sniper's motto: "One shot, one kill." The plotters certainly intended to hit JFK in the back of the head with one bullet (from the Dal-Tex bldg or wherever) to be consistent with a bullet fired from their fake sniper's nest. If that had been successful, they could have done the autopsy right there in Dallas. But because Dealey Plaza turned into a shooting gallery, and you had multiple wounds on multiple victims, including shots from the front, they probably had to decide in a panic to whisk the body off to a military facility and do whatever had to be done. This may have been planned for as a contingency, or maybe not. Just one of many things that went wrong.

Sherry Feister's book describes how the huge blowout (right-front of the head) we see in the Z-film is consistent with a shot from the vicinity of the South Knoll/Triple Underpass. Reading Jackie's testimony, it's clear that she was half out of her mind, and was thinking, "Oh dear, Jack, we need to make your head look better before you get to the hospital." So she probably took the reflected scalp in the right-front (seen in the Z-film) and fitted it back into place. With his thick hair matted with blood, this sounds plausible. She couldn't do anything about the wound extending toward the back where the scalp and bone were missing. This may account for the Parkland witnesses not seeing any damage in the right-front area.

[Daniel Gallup]

A couple of points:

Remember the old sniper's motto: "One shot, one kill." The plotters certainly intended to hit JFK in the back of the head with one bullet (from the Dal-Tex bldg or wherever) to be consistent with a bullet fired from their fake sniper's nest. If that had been successful, they could have done the autopsy right there in Dallas. But because Dealey Plaza turned into a shooting gallery, and you had multiple wounds on multiple victims, including shots from the front, they probably had to decide in a panic to whisk the body off to a military facility and do whatever had to be done. This may have been planned for as a contingency, or maybe not. Just one of many things that went wrong.

Sherry Feister's book describes how the huge blowout (right-front of the head) we see in the Z-film is consistent with a shot from the vicinity of the South Knoll/Triple Underpass. Reading Jackie's testimony, it's clear that she was half out of her mind, and was thinking, "Oh dear, Jack, we need to make your head look better before you get to the hospital." So she probably took the reflected scalp in the right-front (seen in the Z-film) and fitted it back into place. With his thick hair matted with blood, this sounds plausible. She couldn't do anything about the wound extending toward the back where the scalp and bone were missing. This may account for the Parkland witnesses not seeing any damage in the right-front area.

Tracy, here is what Jackie actually told the WC: "I was trying to hold his hair on. But from the front there was nothing. I suppose there must have been, but from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on." If Jackie's recollection is accurate, the damage requiring repair was in the back. Period. The rest is urban legend, based upon the assumption that the Z-film accurately depicts the wounding of the head. But long ago ITEK confirmed that no debris are seen exiting the back of Kennedy's head, and no satisfactory answer exists for this strange phenomenon, not in Sherry's book or anywhere else. What we have at Parkland is an avulsive wound in the back of Kennedy's head, with a great loss of blood and brain and skull in that area -- none of which appears exiting the back of the head on the extant Z-film.