The Disappearing Mastoidectomy scar?

[Jim Hargrove]

Your problem is in insisting records are never wrong for benign reasons. But here, you are simply adding to the confusion they already caused. The wound just above the elbow was not the wound of entry. It was where the bullet was removed. The one we are talking about is the entrance wound.

And your problem is that you are just making shit up. The wound of ENTRY was just above the elbow.

The physician's "NARRATIVE SUMMARY" of the shooting incident, prepared by First
Assistant Dr. R. Guthrie, reads (my emphasis):

"This 18-year-old male accidentally shot himself in the left arm with a side-

arm, reportedly of .22 caliber. Examination revealed the wound of entrance in

the medial portion of the upper left arm, just above the elbow.

If that's not good enough for you, here's a Navy document also showing that the ENTRY WOUND WAS JUST ABOVE THE LEFT ELBOW. I've highlighted the essential words to make this concept easier for you.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5879[/ATTACH]
ATTN MODERATORS: Does the kind of "research" Parker is doing strike you as serious work? He sure makes a lot of posts, and he sure manages to mangle the facts. This seems like an enormous waste of time.

[Greg R Parker]

Your problem is in insisting records are never wrong for benign reasons. But here, you are simply adding to the confusion they already caused. The wound just above the elbow was not the wound of entry. It was where the bullet was removed. The one we are talking about is the entrance wound.

And your problem is that you are just making shit up. The wound of ENTRY was just above the elbow.

The physician's "NARRATIVE SUMMARY" of the shooting incident, prepared by First
Assistant Dr. R. Guthrie, reads (my emphasis):

"This 18-year-old male accidentally shot himself in the left arm with a side-

arm, reportedly of .22 caliber. Examination revealed the wound of entrance in

the medial portion of the upper left arm, just above the elbow.

If that's not good enough for you, here's a Navy document also showing that the ENTRY WOUND WAS JUST ABOVE THE LEFT ELBOW. I've highlighted the essential words to make this concept easier for you.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5879[/ATTACH]
ATTN MODERATORS: Does the kind of "research" Parker is doing strike you as serious work? He sure makes a lot of posts, and he sure manages to mangle the facts. This seems like an enormous waste of time.

No. one Rule in the Rules of Engagement
1. You will not post any material which is false.

You have posted a number of times in this thread your belief that "1 1/4 inch vertical scar with cross-hatching" is on the left wrist. You claimed that I did not know what I was talking about when I told you that the "medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm" was not a description of the wrist. You were wrong and you finally and begrudgingly admitted it.

You have made similar false statements in your attempts to defend your theory in every thread I have started. I am happy to back that up with quotes if required. In short, you have repeatedly and WITHOUT sanction, breached the numero uno rule here.

The bottom line is that the document you posted earlier was confusing, and made me think my previous position was wrong. This document clarifies it better and I now stand by what I said in # 23

The two scars I pointed to originally are the two scars from the self-inflicted gunshot wound.

The wound was not ON the elbow - it was ABOVE the elbow. See: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/ar...sPageId=141374


I pointed to it earlier from Roses report. So for the second time... From the autopsy report: "Over the left arm, below the deltoid there is a transverse 5/8 X 3/4 inch somewhat puckered and irregular scar."

I also remind you that this discussion on the gunshot scars is not the subject of this thread.

That you have steered this off-topic is a breach of the Rules of Engagement - Rule #5. You will not engage in �threadwasting,� another difficult-to-quantify term. Forum owners and staff include in its definition the posting of off-topic material Again I have to note that you have broken rules without sanction.

Is there some form of favoritism happening here?

JH: ATTN MODERATORS: Does the kind of "research" Parker is doing strike you as serious work? He sure makes a lot of posts, and he sure manages to mangle the facts. This seems like an enormous waste of time.

The number of posts is direct proportion to the number of replies.

Any accusation that I habitually mangle the facts is something I take very seriously. Your ONE example is not really legitimate since it was your confusing posts and your confusing documents which led me to believe my previous CORRECT assessment was in error.

Can you back up your assertion with any REAL examples?

I know I can post multiple examples of your errors - and will if requested.

[Jim Hargrove]

Any accusation that I habitually mangle the facts is something I take very seriously. Your ONE example is not really legitimate since it was your confusing posts and your confusing documents which led me to believe my previous CORRECT assessment was in error.

Can you back up your assertion with any REAL examples?

Of course I can, from one page back in this very thread. You wrote:

The medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm is NOT the wrist.

Call a doctor. Please....

Also, would you please post some actual evidence. I keep doing it, and you keep not doing it.

Jim

[Jim Hargrove]

You have posted a number of times in this thread your belief that "1 1/4 inch vertical scar with cross-hatching" is on the left wrist. You claimed that I did not know what I was talking about when I told you that the "medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm" was not a description of the wrist. You were wrong and you finally and begrudgingly admitted it.

I admitted nothing of the sort. Why do you continue to make up shit?

The "1 1/4 inch vertical scar with cross-hatching" was CLEARLY on or near the left wrist, as described by Dr. Rose and as stated by the FBI below.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5880[/ATTACH]
For those non-forum members unable to see graphical documents here, the FBI report of 2/25/64 reproduced above says:

Another scar on the left wrist is recorded at the end of the first paragraph, page 2, lines 19 and 20, which is described as a vertical 1 1/4 inch scar with cross-hatching over the medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm.

I continue to post evidence. Parker doesn't.

Obviously this BS will go on forever until every honest researcher just gives up.

[Greg R Parker]

You have posted a number of times in this thread your belief that "1 1/4 inch vertical scar with cross-hatching" is on the left wrist. You claimed that I did not know what I was talking about when I told you that the "medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm" was not a description of the wrist. You were wrong and you finally and begrudgingly admitted it.

I admitted nothing of the sort. Why do you continue to make up shit?

The "1 1/4 inch vertical scar with cross-hatching" was CLEARLY on or near the left wrist, as described by Dr. Rose and as stated by the FBI below.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]5880[/ATTACH]
For those non-forum members unable to see graphical documents here, the FBI report of 2/25/64 reproduced above says:

Another scar on the left wrist is recorded at the end of the first paragraph, page 2, lines 19 and 20, which is described as a vertical 1 1/4 inch scar with cross-hatching over the medial aspect of the mid-distal third of the left arm.

I continue to post evidence. Parker doesn't.

Obviously this BS will go on forever until every honest researcher just gives up.

I suggest go back and do some reading.

The FBI report is in error. When you go back and review, pay particular attention to post # 28 which is clear proof that the "mid-distal third of the left arm" is NOT the wrist.

[Greg R Parker]

JH:I admitted nothing of the sort. Why do you continue to make up shit?

This sure sounds like an admission to me - though as I said before - a begrudging one.

JH from Post 29:
If you divide the arm into thirds, with the "distal" being the third farthest away from the point of attachment (the shoulder) "mid-distal third" of the left arm sure sounds near the wrist to me, but, quite obviously, it is not "just above the elbow," as the medics described the gunshot wound.

Near the wrist is NOT the wrist. Next you'll be claiming it's possible to be a "bit" pregnant.

I told you pages ago I have not looked into the gunshot scars. No doubt you felt that meant you might be able to win an argument on that subject. You haven't - and now I formally ask that you cease hijacking this thread with your off-topic postings But do feel free to start your own on these scars. I remind you ,you are in breach of the Rules of Engagement.

[Jim Hargrove]

The FBI report is in error. When you go back and review, pay particular attention to post # 28 which is clear proof that the "mid-distal third of the left arm" is NOT the wrist.

Oh, this is rich!

If anyone is bothering to read this, please do the following experiment.

Extend your left arm straight out from your shoulder to your fingertips and mentally (or with your right hand) divide it into thirds. Consider the last third--the DISTAL third (the one farthest from your shoulder). Then find the "mid" point of that "distal third" of the arm.

Did you find your wrist?

I thought so.

Parker's crap will go on forever, don't you think?

Greg: Please post some EVIDENCE!

[Greg R Parker]

The FBI report is in error. When you go back and review, pay particular attention to post # 28 which is clear proof that the "mid-distal third of the left arm" is NOT the wrist.

Oh, this is rich!

If anyone is bothering to read this, please do the following experiment.

Extend your left arm straight out from your shoulder to your fingertips and mentally (or with your right hand) divide it into thirds. Consider the last third--the DISTAL third (the one farthest from your shoulder). Then find the "mid" point of that "distal third" of the arm.

Did you find your wrist?

I thought so.

Parker's crap will go on forever, don't you think?

Greg: Please post some EVIDENCE!

JH: "mid-distal third" of the left arm sure sounds near the wrist to me, but, quite obviously, it is not "just above the elbow," as the medics described the gunshot wound.

Since when is NEAR the wrist the same as BEING the wrist?

Now go and start your own thread on this, or I will lodge a formal complaint that you have hijacked the thread in defiance of the Rules of Engagement which I have been asked to follow. Only a sheer coward would hijack a thread on one topic with a topic that the other party had clearly indicated he had not studied. That is only showing how desperate you are to have some sort of "victory". Unfortunately for you, you still lost because you apparently learnt anatomy from FBI reports.

[Jim Hargrove]

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

[Keith Millea]

Would you like some cheese with that whine?

Come on man!The guy was just banned and you come back and kick him in the balls.Do you kick little puppies too?

Jeezus...