Wait, you DO think that dark squiggly line on the X-ray is probably a bullet track, but you think is connects to the BACK? I have a pair of eyes, I can see that dark spot very well, thank you very much. The dark line goes from down the neck, off the first rib, then to the throat. Lipsey's Do you think the back wound was higher than the throat wound?
Your questions about what I think I see are meaningless. I don't have the background by training, experience, or education to read x-rays. And after all your huffing and puffing about how Dr. Lattimer thought the shot went through the brain and out the neck, it turns out that's merely
your own uneducated opinion. I thought as much, which is why I asked you for your source. You cannot cite anything except your own opinion. Sorry, for the reasons gone into at great length here in the past, your non-expert opinion is not convincing.
The autopsy doctors had eyes too.
"
MR. STRINGER recalled conversation about the pathway through the neck and specifically discussion about air in the throat."
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=600#relPageId=13&tab=page
You say the autopsy doctors had eyes, but then don't quote anything said or written or testified to by the autopsy doctors that the doctors said they saw. Instead, you quote a
Instead, you quote a 14-year after the fact hearsay recollection by a non-medical person. You might as well say, "a photographer had a 14-year later recollection of something the doctors said they saw".
Not. Very. Impressive. At. All.
And then we have Lipsey and Robinson's recollections about the doctors discussing a bullet track from the back of the head to the throat, and pushing a probe into the back of the head and having it come out of the throat.
And there you're back to referencing recollections from 33 years after the fact.
Still. Not. Very. Impressive. At. All.
Apparently you also need sources that cerebellar damage can cause loss of motor skills below the head.
"...
damage to the flocculus, nodulus, and uvula result in a pronounced loss in equilibrium, including truncal ataxia..." (Impairment of the ability to perform smoothly coordinated voluntary movements)
"
There is an inability to incorporate vestibular information with body and eye movements."
https://books.google.com/books?id=sor_roKluskC&pg=PA241&lpg=PA241&dq=damage+to+the+flocculus,+nodulus,+and+uvula+result+in+a+pronounced+loss+in+equilibrium,+including+truncal+ataxia&source=bl&ots=JaL5m0zlkz&sig=OUrA0PxhW6HgbFls_FE2F4dI97Y&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQ3JfU8szSAhUJJiYKHYVKDxoQ6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&q=damage%20to%20the%20flocculus%2C%20nodulus%2C%20and%20uvula%20result%20in%20a%20pronounced%20loss%20in%20equilibrium%2C%20including%20truncal%20ataxia&f=false
"
Damage to sections of the cerebellum makes normal movement difficult. Patients who have experienced trauma to this section of brain may have trouble walking, talking, judging distance and balancing. Damage to the flocculus can cause jerky eye movements and difficulty maintaining balance."
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-flocculus.htm
Not my question. I asked where's the evidence a bullet taking out the cerebellum could do this, and allow JFK to sit upright and continue to point to his throat for five seconds. I also asked where's the evidence in the Z-film of a bullet strike to the back of JFK's head exiting his throat? I also asked for the evidence there was a second strike to the rear of the head, and how come not only the autopsy doctors, but all the forensic pathologists who reviewed the extant autopsy materials all missed this bullet wound you appear to favor. You have provided nothing that remotely comes close to proving your contentions.
About the Thorburn position, here's well-known neuropathologist Dr. Jan Leestma's response:
In my conversation with Dr. Leestma, he adamantly stated that Thorburn's position does not seem a viable outcome of Kennedy's injury. Dr. Leestma says that when a sudden injury, such as a bullet wound, is withstood by a victim, the nerve cells and fibers go into neural shock. The nerves are immediately traumatized; they literally turn off and result in slumping of the victim. He adds "when you physically shock any nerve, the last thing it does is fire. It classically becomes electrically silent. Whether the spinal cord is directly hit or grazed, the nerve cords extending beyond the actual spine would be affected and fall silent." When presented with what Lattimer contended occurred during Thorburn's reaction, Dr. Leestma said "it seems to me a reaction as such would just never occur. I don't care if the sixth cervical segment was severed or just touched, the nerves in that area would not go into an immediate neurological reaction with arms flying up, they would fall limp." Dr. Leestma placed C-6 at the base of the neck, just above the hump at the bottom of the neck.
http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/JLDUNN.TXT
You're not quoting anything any doctor said. You're quoting a second-hand claim by a known conspiracy theorist of what the doctor supposedly said. That's hearsay. You understand the difference between first-hand and second-hand information, or do you not?
Nobody cares what Julie Dunn says she was told in a private conversation. You also don't know if Dunn went "forum shopping", asking 20 or more doctors for their opinion before she got one she cared to cite.
Moreover, it appears the doctor quoted is a conspiracy theorist himself, repeating some of the common mythology of the JFK case:
Incidently, Dr. Leestma said that he knew many of the doctors involved in the Kennedy case. He said that had a forensic pathologist been on the autopsy scene in Bethesda, the throat wound would have been obvious and there would have been no question as to where the back wound was or how shallow it was. He said "the military is crazy- ranking dictates everything. I think there is a lot of covering up going on since no real doctors were there. Those were military doctors, they hadn't performed autopsies in years, that isn't their job. That body never should have left Dallas."
Can a doctor who is a professed conspiracy theorist offer an unbiased opinion about the case?
We do have the first person opinion of Dr. Lattimer, and nothing Dunn says Dr. Leestma says overturns that.
Moreover, as I've pointed out, there are instances on the football field of players falling to the ground and adopting the Thorburn position after a hard hit and a compression of the spine. If the good doctor was correct, we would never see instances of that.
Why are you never citing any evidence, only hearsay?
Hank
