JFK Conspiracy Theories IV: The One With The Whales

[Axxman300]

BStrong, how do you get from point A to point B without demolishing the cerebellum?

1. The skull wasn't level, and the bullet didn't approach from a 45 degree angle.

2. The entry point was higher.

3. Your question assumes that all brains are uniform, and that just ain't so.

It's like you just haven't seen the Zapruder Film because you can significant amount of brain exiting his skull, and even pour into his lap once he goes limp.

One bullet. The Carcano round...made specifically for one rifle...the rifle located in the Texas School Book Depository...the rifle belonging to Lee Oswald.

 

[Axxman300]

And for people who are interested, the National Archives quietly posted this announcement:

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/processing-project.html

NARA Commits to Processing the Withheld JFK Assassination Records by October 26, 2017

After this only 1% of the Assassination documents will be restricted.

My guess is those will be the autopsy photos and x-rays.

 

[traxy]

Traxy, Dr. Finck was an expert who participated in hundreds of gunshot victim autopsies. Finck participated in the autopsy at a later time, and he always swore the entry was in the original EOP location. How could he have seen this hypothetical cowlick entry if that part of the skull was almost certainly taken out (to remove the brain) before he arrived there?

I am not advocating for a second entry. The large head would could be tangential.

So your assertion is that "an expert who participated in hundreds of gunshot victim autopsies" somehow missed seeing a second head wound?

 

[traxy]

BStrong, how do you get from point A to point B without demolishing the cerebellum?

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/Nt7wEul.jpg[/qimg]

The right cerebellum was only disrupted:

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/4AVxVnI.png[/qimg]

Tilt the head downward, flatten the trajectory of the bullet and elevate the entry wound slightly.

Bingo.

A couple very slight modifications to your dishonest image and it's entirely possible.

 

[MicahJava]

So your assertion is that "an expert who participated in hundreds of gunshot victim autopsies" somehow missed seeing a second head wound?

Traxy, a tangential wound means a large gunshot wound of both entrance and exit. It's just like one big hole.

Tilt the head downward, flatten the trajectory of the bullet and elevate the entry wound slightly.

Bingo.

A couple very slight modifications to your dishonest image and it's entirely possible.

The current official story is that the entry was a whole 4 inches above the original EOP location.

Also, the head wasn't tilted that much in real life, as shown in the films of the shooting.

Dr. Michael Baden of the HSCA medical panel explains their (purported) reasoning for choosing the cowlick theory:

"...And further, although the original examination of the brain was not complete, photographs of the brain were examined by the panel members, and do show the injury to the brain itself is on the top portion of the brain. The bottom portion or undersurface of the brain, which would have had to have been injured if the bullet perforated in the lower area as indicated in the autopsy report, was intact. If a bullet entered in this lower area, the cerebellum portion of the brain would have had to be injured and it was not injured. So that is the basis for what remains a disagreement between our panel and the original autopsy doctors. .... It is the firm conclusion of the panel members...that beyond all reasonable medical certainty, there is no bullet perforation of entrance any place on the skull other than the single one in the cowlick."

Baden just doesn't see that the next logical explanation is not that all of the records and professional witnesses are wrong, but that a missile entered the original location in the skull and only grazed the cerebellum while not completely destroying it. The original EOP location is perfect for such an explanation.

 

[MicahJava]

And for people who are interested, the National Archives quietly posted this announcement:

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/processing-project.html



After this only 1% of the Assassination documents will be restricted.

My guess is those will be the autopsy photos and x-rays.

The government should release bright, high-resolution scans of all of the autopsy films. Anybody can find graphic photos of JFK's head on Google so what's the point in hiding it.

 

[Africanus]

The lack of severe damage to the right cerebellum is one of the stated reasons the cowlick entry theory was fabricated.

Really? Do you get this right? To the best of my knowlegde the description of cerebellum pouring out of the head wound by several Parkland doctors was cited as evidence of a wound in the back of the head.

If a bullet entered the EOP location and exited the top-right side of the head, it would have had to tumble in and out of the right cerebellum.

(The cerebellum is the orange/red part)

ETA:

If we listen to autopsy witnesses like Richard Lipsey, the autopsy surgeons did indeed believe or strongly suspect that Kennedy was hit in the head twice.

Can you cite the part of his account that refers to that?

 

[MicahJava]

Really? Do you get this right? To the best of my knowlegde the description of cerebellum pouring out of the head wound by several Parkland doctors was cited as evidence of a wound in the back of the head.



[qimg]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Cerebellum_animation_small.gif[/qimg]

(The cerebellum is the orange/red part)

Those observations only concern the theory that there was a massive cover-up of the medical evidence. You can argue conspiracy with none of the medical evidence being faked or altered, and the official medical evidence says that the cerebellum was only partially disrupted.

Can you cite the part of his account that refers to that?

In his HSCA testimony, Richard Lipsey vividly recalled the autopsy doctors concluding or strongly considering the possibility that 1. The bullet that struck the back did not exit, 2. A bullet entered low in the head and exited the tracheotomy site, and 3. The large head wound was tangential. Three hits to Kennedy.

HSCA interview report: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=349

Full transcript: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm

Audio of HSCA interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIM7Tj2s4Hg

 

[Africanus]

Those observations only concern the theory that there was a massive cover-up of the medical evidence. You can argue conspiracy with none of the medical evidence being faked or altered, and the official medical evidence says that the cerebellum was only partially disrupted.

I understand, but what is the connection of the "partially disrupted cerebellum" with the "cowlick entrance wound". I would not expect the cerebellum to be severely damaged by a bullet entering there.

In his HSCA testimony, Richard Lipsey vividly recalled the autopsy doctors concluding or strongly considering the possibility that 1. The bullet that struck the back did not exit, 2. A bullet entered low in the head and exited the tracheotomy site, and 3. The large head wound was tangential. Three hits to Kennedy.

HSCA interview report: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=349

Full transcript: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm

Audio of HSCA interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vIM7Tj2s4Hg

Nice, but it would be better, if you actually cited the part, that confirms your claim.

BTW: I had a discussion with a JKF-CTist on a german discussion board, who claimed that Lipsey's testimony actually confirms a second bullet entering JFK's back. Quite funny how different the same testimony is interpreted by differnt CTists.

 

[MicahJava]

I understand, but what is the connection of the "partially disrupted cerebellum" with the "cowlick entrance wound". I would not expect the cerebellum to be severely damaged by a bullet entering there.

The original recorded location of the entry wound in the back of the head was 2.5 centimeters to the right and slightly above the external occipital protuberance. The cowlick entry wound idea was fabricated based on an interpretation of the BOH photographs and X-rays that nobody who was there agrees with.

Nice, but it would be better, if you actually cited the part, that confirms your claim.

BTW: I had a discussion with a JKF-CTist on a german discussion board, who claimed that Lipsey's testimony actually confirms a second bullet entering JFK's back. Quite funny how different the same testimony is interpreted by differnt CTists.

Lipsey sometimes refers to the small head wound as an "upper neck" wound, and the back wound as a "lower neck" wound. But looking at the face sheet he marked, it's easy to see exactly what he's talking about in his testimony:

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=349#relPageId=11&tab=page

Here's an excerpt:

LIPSEY: The bullet entered lower part of the head or upper part of the neck. To the best of my knowledge, came out the front of the neck. But the one that I remember they spent so much time on, obviously, was the one they found did not come out. There was a bullet -- that's my vivid recollection cause that's all they talked about. For about two hours all they talked about was finding that bullet. To the rest of my recollection they found some particles but they never found the bullet -- pieces of it, trances of it. The best of my knowledge, this is one thing I definitely remember they just never found that whole bullet.

Q: What was it you observed that made you feel that exited -- the bullet that entered the rear portion of his head exited in the throat area?


LIPSEY: The throat area. Right. The lower throat area.


Q: What, were there markings there that indicated that the doctors came to that conclusion?


LIPSEY: I saw where, you know, they were working and also listening to their conclusions.

 

[traxy]

Traxy, a tangential wound means a large gunshot wound of both entrance and exit. It's just like one big hole.

So your assertion is that Finck, with his vast expertise in gunshot autopsies, completely missed this tangential wound?

Or did Finck and the other surgeons see the tangential wound and didn't think it was important enough to include in the autopsy report?

It has to be one of those two explanations. Which will it be?

Regarding the position of Kennedy's head, you also have to take into account the 11 degree downward declination on Elm street and add that 11 degrees on top of the amount his head was leaned forward, which was considerable.

http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Da... JFK-RELATED PHOTOS/ZapruderFrame312.jpg.html

His chin was basically in his chest.

Now look back at the image you posted. Pretty dishonest, isn't it?

 

[MicahJava]

So your assertion is that Finck, with his vast expertise in gunshot autopsies, completely missed this tangential wound?

Or did Finck and the other surgeons see the tangential wound and didn't think it was important enough to include in the autopsy report?

It has to be one of those two explanations. Which will it be?

I don't know if Dr. Finck ever saw the brain. Either way, the brain wasn't sectioned. He saw the skull. It would be a simple mistake for some to assume that the small and large head wounds were created by the same bullet. We're also assuming that Finck is admitting everything he knew.

Regarding the position of Kennedy's head, you also have to take into account the 11 degree downward declination on Elm street and add that 11 degrees on top of the amount his head was leaned forward, which was considerable.

http://s217.photobucket.com/user/Da... JFK-RELATED PHOTOS/ZapruderFrame312.jpg.html

His chin was basically in his chest.

Now look back at the image you posted. Pretty dishonest, isn't it?

Traxy, that's a total red herring. There is no way to have this situation without the bullet smashing against the cerebellum and base of the skull. From what I understand, there's no evidence of anything that could be construed as an entry in the occipital lobe on the brain photographs or X-rays, either.

Just a reminder, the brainstem was also damaged in the shooting, or if we feel crazy, it may have been found severed entirely.

 

[Axxman300]

I don't know if Dr. Finck ever saw the brain. Either way, the brain wasn't sectioned. He saw the skull. It would be a simple mistake for some to assume that the small and large head wounds were created by the same bullet. We're also assuming that Finck is admitting everything he knew.

The VISUAL EVIDENCE shows only one bullet strike the head.

Again, I'll bet good money Finck never saw a 6.5x52mm round to the head before. Not a lot of folks outside of Europe had seen that kind of damage in 1963, and each bullet type has a signature.

You are basing a theory of questionable second and third-hand testimony, and then you are reading your bias into the things these guys didn't say.

The evidence points to one rifle. There are only two bullet wounds to the President. This fact has never been in dispute by reasonable people.

The cerebellum is too low in the head to have been struck, and the only person who has a problem with the entry wound is you. The lethal strike is on film. Watch it, the bullet strikes well above the base of the skull. This isn't even something to interpret, it's visible for all to see.

 

[MicahJava]

The VISUAL EVIDENCE shows only one bullet strike the head.

Again, I'll bet good money Finck never saw a 6.5x52mm round to the head before. Not a lot of folks outside of Europe had seen that kind of damage in 1963, and each bullet type has a signature.

You are basing a theory of questionable second and third-hand testimony, and then you are reading your bias into the things these guys didn't say.

The evidence points to one rifle. There are only two bullet wounds to the President. This fact has never been in dispute by reasonable people.

The cerebellum is too low in the head to have been struck, and the only person who has a problem with the entry wound is you. The lethal strike is on film. Watch it, the bullet strikes well above the base of the skull. This isn't even something to interpret, it's visible for all to see.

You don't see more than one head shot in the films? Well, since the EOP shot apparently didn't cause any severe brain damage, I would not expect a huge ejecta splatter to show up on the photographic evidence or to be seen by the witnesses, as it was only a small hole within Kennedy's hair.

The EOP shot could have been at z190-224 or after the z313 shot. I'm thinking it was z190-224 because Kennedy's behavior after he emerges behind the sign is something you would expect from someone with some damage to their cerebellum.

 

[Tolls]

I still would like to know exactly what it is about the quote that you supplied, that re-awakened this thread, that you think helps your argument?

Here it is again:

I forgot to mention yet another important autopsy witness attesting to the EOP wound, Chester H. Boyers.

4/25/1978 affidavit to the HSCA:

"5. During the autopsy people were frequently moving around. In regard to the wounds inflicted upon President Kennedy, I recall an entrance wound situated near the external occipital protuberance in the rear of the head which exited on the right side of the head above the right eyebrow and towards the rear. Another wound was located near the right shoulder blade, more specifically just under the scapula and next to it. I also observed that a tracheotomy had been performed on the President."

Nothing there indicates two head shots.

Nothing.

So what is it you think that shows?

 

[cmikes]

If the autopsy surgeons "strongly suspected" that Kennedy was hit in the head twice, they have never once mentioned it in any of the statements they've made.

So I can infer from your answer that not a single expert in 53 years has ever endorsed the 2 headshots explanation.

To be fair to MicahJava, Cyril Wecht, who was a member of the medical panel of the HSCA strongly believed that there were two headshots. He based this belief on "evidence" (read as personal confirmation bias) other than the medical evidence, however.

His explanation of why there wasn't any medical evidence of a headshot from the front was that the headshot from the rear miraculously obliterated all the evidence of the shot from the front. Even he wasn't crazy enough to buy into any "THEY altered the body!" or "THEY faked all the evidence!" theories so he merely adopted a stance that the evidence just coincidentally happened to support one shot from the rear.

 

[cmikes]

BStrong, how do you get from point A to point B without demolishing the cerebellum?

[qimg]https://i.imgur.com/Nt7wEul.jpg[/qimg]

Which conspiracy site did you get your image from? It's images like this that have no relation to reality that perpetuate the conspiracy culture to this day.

First of all, the entry wound is in the wrong place. Every qualified pathologist that has examined either the body or the photos and x-rays place the entry wound above and slightly to the right of EOP, not below it.

Second, the angle of the bullet is wrong for a shot from the TSBD. It was flatter, I don't know of any conspiracy believers that allege that JFK was shot from a hovering helicopter.

Third, the exit wound is in the wrong place. Yes, it was chiefly parietal but also extended forward into the frontal lobe. It was a much bigger wound than shown on your picture.

Fourth, JFK was not sitting with perfect posture, ramrod straight with absolutely no bend to his spine or neck when Oswald shot him in the head. He was leaning forward slightly with his head lowered while reacting to Oswald's shot that went through his upper back and exited through his throat.

My advice is to cross check everything you're cribbing from conspiracy websites with the actual evidence from the WC, the HSCA, and even the ARRB. All their reports and supporting evidence are now available online and there's really no excuse anymore to not be familiar with it. They're certainly not perfect, but much closer to reality than anything you'll find from a conspiracy site.

 

[cmikes]

And for people who are interested, the National Archives quietly posted this announcement:

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/processing-project.html



After this only 1% of the Assassination documents will be restricted.

My guess is those will be the autopsy photos and x-rays.

As I understand it, the National Archives have no say in releasing the photos and x-rays from the autopsy. Those have always been controlled by the Kennedy family. First by Robert Kennedy, then by Teddy. I actually have no idea what the line of succession with the the Kennedy family is, so I don't know who would have the say in whether or not to release them now.

That's always been one of areas where conspiracy believers look foolish. When they're railing that releasing the autopsy materials would "totally expose the evil forces of THEY!", until a few years ago, they were accusing Ted Kennedy of being in on the conspiracy that killed his brother.

 

[cmikes]

MichaJava, I posted this question a while ago, but you chose not to answer it. Obviously, you're under no obligation to me for anything, but if you really want to prove a conspiracy, you must have an answer to this question.

This is a list of every pathologist that has examined either JFK's body or the photos and x-rays of his autopsy.

Dr. James Humes
Dr. J. Thornton Boswell
Dr. Pierre Finck
Dr. John Coe
Dr. Joseph Davis
Dr. George Loquvam
Dr. Charles Petty
Dr. Earl Rose
Dr. Werner Spitz
Dr. Cyril Wecht
Dr. James Weston
Dr. William Carnes
Dr. Russell Fisher
Dr. Russell Morgan
Dr. Alan Mortiz
Dr. Robert McMeekin
Dr. Richard Lindenberg
Dr. Fred Hodges

Every single one of these doctors, who collectively have over a hundred years of experience in pathology, have found that all the damage to JFK's head was caused by one bullet that traveled from the rear to the right front of JFK's head.

Do you have any evidence that disputes that? Any evidence that every doctor on this list is either completely incompetent, being blackmailed or forced in some way, or a member of the evil forces of THEY?

 

[traxy]

It would be a simple mistake for some to assume that the small and large head wounds were created by the same bullet. We're also assuming that Finck is admitting everything he knew.

Would it be a simple mistake to not mention the second wound at all? Is that something an experienced guy like Finck would do.

You seem willing to tar Finck as completely incompetent, but for some reason that incompetence doesn't extend to him possibly misremembering the exact location of the entrance wound years after the fact.

Traxy, that's a total red herring. There is no way to have this situation without the bullet smashing against the cerebellum and base of the skull. From what I understand, there's no evidence of anything that could be construed as an entry in the occipital lobe on the brain photographs or X-rays, either.

You're the one posting a grossly inaccurate drawing of a head in an attempt to prove your flawed position and you're accusing me of using red herrings. That's rich.

I'm just here to correct your false statements and misinformation.