The Head Wounds Revisited

[Phil Dragoo]

I've read Best Evidence, and the Horne Volumes, In the Eye of History, the Livingstone-Groden High Treason, and the like.

On the Clifton tape is a reference to a black Cadillac.

How can the neat tracheotomy of Perry become the larger, jagged gash.

Groden's up to eighty-one (81) witnesses to the baseball-sized occipitoparietal wound at the right, yet the Tres Amigos have 17cm missing, six and five-eighths over the connection between the rear exit and the right frontal entry. Not too glaring.

Why the Three Casket Monte if there's nothing to see here. The same reason as the rest: lone gunman would (subjective) be simple.

Allan Eaglesham addresses Where Were the JFK Autopsy Photographs Taken?

http://www.manuscriptservice.com/AutopsyRoom/

He could comment on this thread being a member.

Arguments on the caskets and the "alterations" usually go to the straw man extreme to paint an impossible scenario.

Custer recalls a T-3/4 with metal, missing from the extant.

An errand to the developing area is held up at the mezzanine for the arrival of the official party.

Can't have a fatal paradox.

It's Paul O'Connor stating metal head rest not in use.

In fifty years no one's addressed the dead horse in the living room: why is the rear of the head shown intact.

Intact rear of head with gloved hand holding ruler. Sure. Eighty-one people were tripping.

[Gordon Gray]

If Sibert and ONeil were outside in the cooling room how did they know that discussions as to the protocol for the autopsy were going on? It would seem to me that they would have to enter the autopsy room to know that. And if they did so wouldn't they have noticed the body on the examining table, if it indeed were there? I miss the import of the whole body alteration thing. The purpose of it would be, one would suppose to alter the body so as to X Ray and photograph wounds supporting the LN theory. Well we know those X Rays and photo's have been tampered with in a number of ways. If they altered the body why did they need to alter the X Rays and photos? And whether or not they did, what does that prove in terms of the general conspiracy? We don't need a pre autopsy body alteration to prove multiple shooters. And we don't need body alteration to prove a massive cover up involving elements of the military. All of the evidence for a body alteration to me, involves a great deal of cherry picking of evidence, supposition, and conjecture to what purpose?. The one possible alteration IMO, is that of the throat wound. The best explanation for the difference between it's description in Dallas, and in Bethesda, would be the probing for and removal of a bullet, IMO.

[David Josephs]

If Sibert and ONeil were outside in the cooling room how did they know that discussions as to the protocol for the autopsy were going on? It would seem to me that they would have to enter the autopsy room to know that. And if they did so wouldn't they have noticed the body on the examining table, if it indeed were there? I miss the import of the whole body alteration thing. The purpose of it would be, one would suppose to alter the body so as to X Ray and photograph wounds supporting the LN theory. Well we know those X Rays and photo's have been tampered with in a number of ways. If they altered the body why did they need to alter the X Rays and photos? And whether or not they did, what does that prove in terms of the general conspiracy? We don't need a pre autopsy body alteration to prove multiple shooters. And we don't need body alteration to prove a massive cover up involving elements of the military. All of the evidence for a body alteration to me, involves a great deal of cherry picking of evidence, supposition, and conjecture to what purpose?. The one possible alteration IMO, is that of the throat wound. The best explanation for the difference between it's description in Dallas, and in Bethesda, would be the probing for and removal of a bullet, IMO.

and reading Robinson's ARRB again... He remembers a fragment of bullet or piece of metal taken from the thorax... the chest area where others have claimed a bullet was removed... the bullet that entered the throat....

Well we know those X Rays and photo's have been tampered with in a number of ways. If they altered the body why did they need to alter the X Rays and photos?

According to Horne... who has seen these images with much greater clarity than any of us... the photos are of the altered head... they are NOT ALTERED PHOTOS, but they are indeed fraudulent.... and that makes sense... an altered photo can be uncovered... Authentic photos of an altered head, much more difficult. The XRAYS on the other hand needed to show a huge defect in the top, middle right of the head... and remove evidence of the right rear blow out seen by everyone from Hill until DC... now you tell me Gordon... are these compatible?

Are you aware of Mantik's measurements and that the spot where everyone saw a hole is represented by 5 inches of solid bone on this xray? and furthermore does not match Boswell's drawing or description of a HUGE loss of skull...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4867[/ATTACH]

All of the evidence for a body alteration to me, involves a great deal of cherry picking of evidence, supposition, and conjecture to what purpose?.

To explain what the FBI wrote which Humes said... that there was surgery performed to the top of the head. and then to explain what occurred at Bethesda starting with Andrews... starting with the pieces of dialogue that mentions a "black hearse" on the AF1 tapes.

If Rose had done an autopsy as he did for both Tippit and Oswald - he would have found what competent doctors looking at an unaltered body in DC would have... a 3 inches avulsed opening in the right rear of JFK's skull as a result of a shot thru the head from the front... and the rest of his head intact...

OR

much more complicated wounds underneath that showed evidence of two shots from different directions...

AND

Rose would have opened up the throat and back to trace the wound... and he would have found it just as impossible for a bullet entering at T3 to exit HIGHER than it entered yet shot from above... he would have found what Humes found... what Finck found... a non-transiting wound.

To this point you offer nothing to refute the following graphic... regardless of whether you cherry-pick, suppose or conject... to a person, not ONE puts a wound to the front of JFK's ears...

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4869[/ATTACH]

THE CIVILIANS, SECRET SERVICE AND ER PERSONNEL see one wound in Dallas... and for some reason are not allowed to see ANY of the autopsy materials FOR YEARS....
they are then made to sign a fraudulent HSCA document claiming the exact opposite of what they saw and said... that the wounds and photos and xrays do NOT depict the injury as seen in Dallas...

WHILE THE AUTOPSY IS ATTENDED BY NO CIVILIANS AND CONTROLLED BY SENIOR MILITARY STAFF UNDER PENALTY OF COURT MARTIAL TO ANYONE THERE SAYING ANYTHING TO ANYONE ABOUT WHAT THEY SAW...

Sorry Gordon... but I'm going with the unimpeachable accounts of those NOT under direct order to withhold information...

Mr. SPECTER. What did you observe as to President Kennedy's condition on arrival at the hospital?
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have any opportunity to observe the front part of his body, to see whether there was any tear or rip in the clothing on the front?
Mr. HILL. I saw him lying there in the back of the car, when I was immediately above him. I cannot recall noticing anything that was ripped in the forward portion of his body.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4868[/ATTACH]


Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker report and the two other shots that I know, those were three shots. But, Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four wounds, Governor Connally three, there have got to be more than three shots, gentlemen.

Senator COOPER. The President?
Mr. KELLERMAN. The President; I am sorry. I did not see any wounds in that man's face.

Mr. SPECTER - Before proceeding to describe what you did in connection with the tracheostomy, will you more fully describe your observation with respect to the head wound?
Dr. McCLELLAND - As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described, 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 was 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 in its lateral haft, 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 tissue 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.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4870[/ATTACH]


From the autopsy report....
Missile Wounds
1. There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right
involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the
temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual
absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures
approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter. (5-6 inches)

[Gordon Gray]

What you don't seem to grasp is that it is possible for there to be missing bone without corresponding missing scalp. Dr. Aguilar's explanation is vey clear to me. Kennedy's hair and scalp covered the missing bone in the top of the head. Most likely obscured the entry wound in the right temple region.

[Albert Doyle]

The 1500 gram brain they swapped for Kennedy's should suggest alteration of the physical body and a pattern of doing so at Bethesda.



There's too much circumstantial evidence pointing to it that doubters are ignoring IMO.

[David Josephs]

What you don't seem to grasp is that it is possible for there to be missing bone without corresponding missing scalp. Dr. Aguilar's explanation is vey clear to me. Kennedy's hair and scalp covered the missing bone in the top of the head. Most likely obscured the entry wound in the right temple region.

Mr. Gray... there is very little concerning this subject that I fail to grasp.... the Lateral xrays and its analysis reveal that there is NO BONE forward of the coronal suture... anywhere.
and the AP versus Lateral xrays show completely different things....

The area where Mantik lets us know correspionds to 5 inches of bone does not show up on the AP image...

We are not talking about covering missing bone... we are talking about the xrays OF THE BONES... and how they are mutually exclusive.

This frontal xray does NOT show 5 inches of bone or even a significant amount of bone in the right rear "Parkland/Dallas" exit location. Between C and D we SHOULD SEE an incredibly white solid bone area as we see in the "patched" lateral xray but we dont because that area was indeed patched... as it there was no bone there... it was blown OUT.

The DARK AREA in front of the skull means there is nothing there... no bone, not brains, nothing.... whereas in the frontal xray.. that area obviously has bone (the photos/drawings of the "brain" also show an intact left hemisphere front to back... if there was brain there in the fronal xray it would darken the effect of having bone both at the front and back.. it does not... this suggests the brain was either gone, more damaged than the record states (duh) of the xrays were altered.

Finally... do you not find it interesting that the xray show such a dark area, in almost a perfect circle... right where we see a number of references to the right frontal shot entry location... and is the starting point of the fragments, the real fragments. I may have not gotten the xray in perfect alignment with the photo... but it's very close.

Gordon... not a soul in Dallas puts any damage to the front of the coronal suture... whereas the lateral xray shows the opposite... AND is a proven fraud.

To recap - wounds don't match, 3 casket entries, Humes lying about WHEN he sees the body, if 6:45 from the ARRB is correct, and not 7:35... how did JFK get into the morgue BEFORE the ambulance and motorcade even arrived at the FRONT of Bethesda... (by the way, you might enjoy this Finck report to Blumberg... "Humes told me... no sawing of the skull was necessary"
=================================
As an aside... Ebersole was shown by Reed to have lied a bit to the HSCA... specifically about his carrying xray cassettes to the 4th floor... but this is what he says when he sees JFK's body:
Upon removing the body from the coffin, the anterior aspect, the only things noticeable were a small irregular ecumonic area above the super ecolobular ridge and a neatly sutured transverse surgical wound across the low neck.
(wonder who would have sutured that wound... as it has never been shown to have been sewn up)

Q: Did you (REED) see any wounds on President Kennedy's throat -
A: Yes, I did.
Q: - in the front?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: Anterior throat. What - Could you describe what you saw?
A: A large, gaping wound. Approximately
seven centimeters in width - in length. Excuse
me, in length. And about two centimeters in width.



Ebersole: (in the entire HSCA deposition the names REED nor CUSTER do not appear, at all.)
Let's alos remember that the SS took a total of 11 xrays with them according the FBI report....

So prior to starting the autopsy we were asked to x ray the body to determine
the presence of a bullet. We took several X rays of the skull, chest, trunk.
These were taken in the autopsy room on the autopsy table. They were hand
carried by me in their cassettes to what we designate as Tower Four, the forth
floor of the hospital, handled by a dark room technician, given back to me and
hand carried by me to the autopsy room.
The initial films showed the usual
metallic fragments in the skull but no evidence of a slug, a bullet. This was a
little bit disconcerting. We were asked by the Secret Service agents present to
repeat the films and did so Once again there was no evidence of a bullet. I
assume you are familiar with portable X ray It is not the kind that gives a fine
diagnostic but it is helpful in picking up metallic fragments. It would stand
out like a sore thumb either intact or shattered.

Page 67 line 15 of Reed's ARRB testomony states that he did not hear the Secret Service ever make any requests regarding xrays... and Dr. Ebersole was there as well ... AND he states that Ebersole did NOT carry cassettes to the 4th floor... not that he sees.

So what is Ebersole doing here?? was he involved in the taking of xrays independent of REED and CUSTER?
===================================

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4873[/ATTACH]


[ATTACH=CONFIG]4874[/ATTACH]

[David Josephs]

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...#post70527

Martin,

the link above was my response to you in our ongoing discussion...

and there has been a good amount of discussion that followed... with a post of mine that discovered a few things I'd like you to comment on:

FBI says Kellerman takes 11 xrays with him...
Reed took at least 16 (8 of the arms/legs, 4 of the head, 4 of the body)
Reed says HE ran up and down to the 4th floor and that it took 25-30 minutes for 4 xrays...
All the xrays were said to be done by 8pm
Ebersole said HE ran the cassettes up
Reed says Ebersole did no such thing and the old man couldn't have made it up and down once in the time he was running back and forth
Ebersole says the SS TOLD THEM TO TAKE ANOTHER SET OF XRAYS - which he says they did
Reed says the SS never made a request related to the taking of xrays....
Finck tells us that there was no use of a saw... while Reed sees Humes cut the forehead.

Once again... seems to me as Reed/Custer are doing one set of xrays, Ebersole is doing another???

Then the question about the photos and Robinson's comments about where he sat in the morgue and what he saw...

Can you help reconcile what he says with the supposed images from Bethesda...
Eaglesham offers the following yet does not take into account Robinson's statement... or the statement that so many in attendance were to JFK's right..http://www.manuscriptservice.com/AutopsyRoom/

Your POV would be appreciated.


[ATTACH=CONFIG]4877[/ATTACH]

[Phil Dragoo]

David W. Mantik on the ARRB's Three X-ray Experts

[Gordon Gray]

I don't know why one would use the X Rays as indication of anything. Mantik has clearly demonstrated IMO, that they have been altered. Again a frangible bullet striking the temporal area, could cause the scalp to lacerate and pieces of scull bone could be blown out at the top of the head the side and the rear, the scalp then falling back into place thus obscuring a larger wound to the Dallas doctors. They did not reflect the scalp, so they would not have been aware of a larger wound. As to Reed, it is interesting how some of his testimony is pointed to in order support a pet theory and some is ignored. He says he came down to the morgue area around 6:30, It had to be later because the shipping casket wasn't delivered until sometime between 6:35 and 6:45. He then assists in moving the casket into the morgue and removing the body and placing in on the examining table. He observes a wound (about 4 fingers)above and slightly anterior to the president's right ear. He sees a fairly large throat wound, 7 centimeters, in length. He sees no wound in the back of the presidents head, the hair and scalp is intact. He and Custer are then asked to leave. They go back upstairs, and wait to be called. He says 15 minutes, Custer says longer. They come back down, it is now at least 7:15-7:20. He then proceeds to take X Rays one at a time, running upstairs to develop it, and then back for each. He says this entire process took 25-28 minutes. It is now close to 7:45 or later. The are then asked to sit in the observation area and wait. During this time the doctors are discussing the X Rays and nothing is being done to the body. No saws or anything."[size=12]They wcrcn'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.There wcrc just more discussions.
Then, after 20 minutes - 15,20 minutes,"
[/SIZE] it hasn't been opened. After 15-20 minutes they are asked to take more X Rays, it is now around 8:00 or later. After finishing with these X Ray both he and Custer went back upstairs to develop all of them. Then they returned. He gives no time interval here but the whole process must have taken another 15 minutes or so, and it is at least 8:15 when they return. Up until that time he has seen no incisions performed on the body. They then observed the first incision which he says was to reflect the scalp. So if you accept all his testimony then there was no wound in the back of the presidents head and there could have been no opportunity for altering the body. So which part of his testimony do you cherry pick and why, and which do you dismiss and why?

[Martin Hay]

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...#post70527

Martin,

the link above was my response to you in our ongoing discussion...

and there has been a good amount of discussion that followed... with a post of mine that discovered a few things I'd like you to comment on:

FBI says Kellerman takes 11 xrays with him...
Reed took at least 16 (8 of the arms/legs, 4 of the head, 4 of the body)
Reed says HE ran up and down to the 4th floor and that it took 25-30 minutes for 4 xrays...
All the xrays were said to be done by 8pm
Ebersole said HE ran the cassettes up
Reed says Ebersole did no such thing and the old man couldn't have made it up and down once in the time he was running back and forth
Ebersole says the SS TOLD THEM TO TAKE ANOTHER SET OF XRAYS - which he says they did
Reed says the SS never made a request related to the taking of xrays....
Finck tells us that there was no use of a saw... while Reed sees Humes cut the forehead.

Once again... seems to me as Reed/Custer are doing one set of xrays, Ebersole is doing another???

Then the question about the photos and Robinson's comments about where he sat in the morgue and what he saw...

Can you help reconcile what he says with the supposed images from Bethesda...
Eaglesham offers the following yet does not take into account Robinson's statement... or the statement that so many in attendance were to JFK's right..http://www.manuscriptservice.com/AutopsyRoom/

Your POV would be appreciated.


[ATTACH=CONFIG]4877[/ATTACH]

David,


Sorry, about not responding to you sooner. I've been too busy to spend much time on forums the last couple of days. Still am really so just time for a brief response.


With regard to the Reed/Ebersole disagreement, all that says to me is that there were two men who wanted to take all the credit for taking those historic X-rays. Human nature, I'm afraid. Nothing suspicious as far as I can see.


Question: how many people said they saw the head wound being enlarged/altered/manipulated/whatever BEFORE the first set of X-rays were taken? I don't know of any. Reading the eyewitness accounts, the chronology is clear. The first thing Humes and Boswell did was take X-rays of the skull. Then they reflected the scalp, sawed the skull, and removed the brain. So before any "alteration" occurred, they had documented the head wounds.


Reed did indeed see Humes sawing the skull and, as I pointed out before, Humes testified to doing so in order to remove the brain. Finck, by his own admission, was not even present when the head wound was opened up and the brain was removed so he had no personal knowledge of what actually happened and was obviously mistaken. That's all there is to that.


I'm finding your graphic confusing so can't offer much by way of meaningful comment.


I'll just note that, with at least (in most cases) 15 years between the autopsy and going on the record about what they saw, I'm not surprised at all that various witnesses gave conflicting accounts, were unsure or just plain wrong about certain details. I just think it's a shame that people don't take this into consideration when they're constructing their theories and try to take every word each witness offered as completely factual. Such an approach is doomed to fail as anyone who has given any thought to the frailty of human memory will understand.