Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

[MicahJava]

So nothing you can quote about Burkley thinking two shots hit the head. You are *presuming* what you need to prove.

Only somebody intentionally ignoring the obvious would choose to ignore the powerful statement of "I would not like to be quoted on that", in response to being asked "Do you agree with the Warren Report on the number of bullets that entered the President's body?". Normal people go 'well, that on Earth is that supposed to mean? are you holding back something?".

So only a hearsay report once removed of what Sprague was told - not by Burkley - but by another person (Illig) who is at best presumably accurately reporting what Burkley told him, and then Sprague is persumably accurately reporting what Illig said.

Note what Illig doesn't say Burkley said. He doesn't say two or more people took part in the shooting. He only claims Burkley has information "indicating that others besides Oswald must have participated" in the assassination. This information could be nothing more than someone encouraging Oswald. It doesn't mean two shots to the head, and it doesn't mean two or more shooters. Once more, you are *presuming* what you need to prove.

While the letter clearly says that "He (Burkley) has information in the Kennedy assassination indicating that others besides Oswald must have participated", implying that this is a matter of the wounds to his body, we do have this hearsay excerpt from Paul L. Hoch's newsletter Echoes Of Conspiracy, Vol. 9, No. 1, 5/31/1987:

"Dr. Burkley's comments to Hurt may well not have been based on what he knew about the medical evidence, according to information recently provided to me. William Manchester, who interviewed Dr. Burkley five times from April 1964 through July 1966, told me that at that time Dr. Burkley said he did not believe in a conspiracy theory, and was emphatic on that point.

Also, Dr. Burkley recently told a relative of his that he did think that Oswald must have been part of a conspiracy, because the way he and his family lived and traveled was indicative of financial support. (This suspicion has been voiced by many people over the years, and the Warren Commission attempted to rebut in in Appendix XIV of the Report.) This relative also asked Dr. Burkley about Lifton's book when it was published; Dr. Burkley did not provide any clarification of the issues involved, nor did he indicate that he agreed
with any of Lifton's analysis.

If there is more information to be obtained about what Dr. Burkley knew, it will probably have to come from existing documents, or as the result of an official inquiry by the Justice Department."

So we have some indication that Burkley may have been interested in conspiracy theorizing beyond issues concerning the wounds to Kennedy's body, but the previous point stands.

An affidavit signed by Burkley, the sole first-person statement by Burkley you cite. In it, he states two shots to the brain would have been *eliminated* if he had testified. Please look up the meaning of the word *eliminated*. It does not mean what you appear to think it means. This calls into question the other statements attributed to Burkley via hearsay, and shows why hearsay statements generally aren't admissible in court.

Hank, if you are smart enough to distort quotes like that, you are smart enough to know what they actually say. Here, Burkley is saying that we would know whether it was one or two bullets if the brain had been sectioned.

Burkley's beliefs are not pertinent here. They do not rise to the level of evidence. Once more, you are *presuming* what you need to prove. Burkley did state: "I saw President Kennedy's wounds at Parkland Hospital and during the autopsy at the Bethesda Naval Hospital. There was no difference in the nature of the wounds I saw at Parkland Hospital and those I observed at the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital", which pretty much destroys any claims of body alteration.[/B]

So are you saying that Burkley saw the original throat wound?

 

[sackett]

Micah me bhoy, you still haven't explained why anybody should any longer give a **** who killed Cock Robin, excuse me, JFK.

 

[Axxman300]

Only somebody intentionally ignoring the obvious would choose to ignore the powerful statement of "I would not like to be quoted on that", in response to being asked "Do you agree with the Warren Report on the number of bullets that entered the President's body?". Normal people go 'well, that on Earth is that supposed to mean? are you holding back something?".

My guess is that, unlike some people we know, he didn't want to talk out of his butt. Humes and Finck did the work.

Also, normal people have better sentence construction.

While the letter clearly says that "He (Burkley) has information in the Kennedy assassination indicating that others besides Oswald must have participated", implying that this is a matter of the wounds to his body, we do have this hearsay excerpt from Paul L. Hoch's newsletter Echoes Of Conspiracy, Vol. 9, No. 1, 5/31/1987:

He wasn't in Dealey Plaza, so what could he know.

CT newsletters are like used toilet paper.

"Dr. Burkley's comments to Hurt may well not have been based on what he knew about the medical evidence, according to information recently provided to me. William Manchester, who interviewed Dr. Burkley five times from April 1964 through July 1966, told me that at that time Dr. Burkley said he did not believe in a conspiracy theory, and was emphatic on that point.

Then you post a reference that he didn't believe in conspiracy, and said so five times.

Also, Dr. Burkley recently told a relative of his that he did think that Oswald must have been part of a conspiracy, because the way he and his family lived and traveled was indicative of financial support. (This suspicion has been voiced by many people over the years, and the Warren Commission attempted to rebut in in Appendix XIV of the Report.) This relative also asked Dr. Burkley about Lifton's book when it was published; Dr. Burkley did not provide any clarification of the issues involved, nor did he indicate that he agreed
with any of Lifton's analysis.

1. Name the relative. If you can't it didn't happen.

2. Oswald and his family didn't live all that well, and by 11.22.63 Oswald was living in a rooming house. It's a non-issue.

3. Nobody agrees with Lifton.

If there is more information to be obtained about what Dr. Burkley knew, it will probably have to come from existing documents, or as the result of an official inquiry by the Justice Department.

He didn't know anything.

All of the documents will be public by October, and a bunch are out now. Where's the evidence?

So we have some indication that Burkley may have been interested in conspiracy theorizing beyond issues concerning the wounds to Kennedy's body, but the previous point stands.

Meaningless point is meaningless.

Hank, if you are smart enough to distort quotes like that, you are smart enough to know what they actually say. Here, Burkley is saying that we would know whether it was one or two bullets if the brain had been sectioned.

Yeah, Hank, I mean it's not like you can count bullet holes in the skull during the autopsy or see them in X-rays...oh wait, yes you can...my bad...

 

[MicahJava]

The wound to the brain is all cavitation:

https://www.hornady.com/team-hornady/ballistic-calculators/ballistic-resources/terminal-ballistics

The key part being:

In essence, a bullet going through soft tissue has the same effect as dropping a stone into a pail of water - if the stone (bullet) enters the water slowly, the water (tissue) displacement is so gradual that is has little effect on the surrounding molecules. If the stone (bullet) enters the water (tissue) with a lot of momentum, however, the surrounding molecules have to act a lot more quickly and violently, resulting in a splash (temporary cavity). Temporary cavitation is important because it can be a tremendous wounding mechanism.

Both permanent and temporary cavities are greatly affected by a bullet’s design, sectional density, and velocity at the time of impact.

The Carcano round was 160 grains, the rifle barrel had a 1:8 twist ratio, and when each round struck they were still accelerating.

At 300 feet, the range of the final head shot, the trajectory of the 6.5x52mm round is a straight line.

What you see with the head wound is a big, fast bullet striking at 2,700 feet per second passing easily through bone, and encountering the soft, spongy tissue of the brain, and blasting through the other side of the skull.

This is exactly what to expect from this kind of round as is the the first one passing through Kennedy's body, and causing the extensive damage to Connally via the over stabilization of the Carcano round.

"Cavitation" is the volume of air inside of a bullet wound. "Deflection" is when a bullet meets an obstacle that causes it to DEFLECT. The area around the EOP is a curved portion of the skull, and when a bullet enters a curved portion of the skull, it will usually deflect.

 

[MicahJava]

They could be right or wrong, and those that came along behind them could be right or wrong, and the hobbyists trying to play pin-the-headwound in 2017 w/o any training or experience in the subject matter are more likely to be wrong than anyone else.

To be accurate, you regurgitate someone other CTist's opinion, graphics and animated gifs etc.

You must be confused. Here is a picture of a model skull which was marked by the doctors (lower area) showing where they recalled seeing the entry wound. The upper mark is where the pet theorists wanted the entry wound to be.

 

[MicahJava]

Now you're going back to Burkley? We've covered this, and you persuaded no one the last time you dragged him into the discussion. He wasn't a forensic pathologist, and, as you note, he witnessed but did not perform the autopsy. What he "suspected" or "believed" has no evidentiary value. None.

Burkley was a line of communication between the Kennedy family and the autopsy pathologists, so he made some decisions. In his HSCA interview report, he described his role as "more or less supervising the autopsy". So this is a person who payed close attention to what was going on with the body.

 

[MicahJava]

Those wonderful guys at Lew Rockwell have done it again.

Here's Jacob Hornberger, who presents his complete analysis of the situation: LHO was a CIA asset, sent to infiltrate the Communist movement, who was framed by the CIA in order to cover up their assassination of the president.

Part 1:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/08/jacob-hornberger/figuring-kennedy-assassination/

Part 2:
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/08/jacob-hornberger/figuring-jfk-murder-coup/

He explains things in a way that would do some people proud. Thus, for example, the wound on the back of the President's head was actually an exit wound, as Sandra Spencer said from her memory of developing the autopsy pictures, and the pictures released as the autopsy pictures were not the ones she had developed.

But wait! There's more!

Finian Cunningham explains that LHO was actually an informant for the FBI, trying to warn them about the plot, while "There seems little doubt that Kennedy was “taken out” by executive action, a term used by the CIA and its Deep States operatives, including the numerous hit men that triangulated the ambush on JFK’s motorcade on that fateful day in Dealey Plaza, Dallas."

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2017/08/no_author/lies-jfk-killers/

Aren't you glad there are such well-informed, thoughtful, skeptical people out there?

Didn't Saundra Spencer only describe photographs of the body when it was completely prepared for funeral? In that case, there was a hole in the occipital area about the size of a small orange, but that was from the reconstruction of the head and was subsequently covered with a patch of rubber.

 

[Elagabalus]

Big picture, time! Why did LHO kill Tippit?

 

[Axxman300]

"Cavitation" is the volume of air inside of a bullet wound. "Deflection" is when a bullet meets an obstacle that causes it to DEFLECT. The area around the EOP is a curved portion of the skull, and when a bullet enters a curved portion of the skull, it will usually deflect.

Source?

I'm going to need to see a specific reference to a 6.5x52mm round "deflecting" due to the curvature of a skull upon impact from 300 feet.

I posted my source, which is solid BTW.

 

[Axxman300]

Burkley was a line of communication between the Kennedy family and the autopsy pathologists, so he made some decisions. In his HSCA interview report, he described his role as "more or less supervising the autopsy". So this is a person who payed close attention to what was going on with the body.

We have already laid the basic qualifications one needs to become a Pathologist. Regular doctors are not qualified to make judgments about cause of death, hence Pathologists.

So if he's not a Pathologist he's just another schmuck with an opinion.

 

[Axxman300]

You must be confused. Here is a picture of a model skull which was marked by the doctors (lower area) showing where they recalled seeing the entry wound. The upper mark is where the pet theorists wanted the entry wound to be.

The upper mark is where you can see the bullet strike JFK in the Zapruder Film so there you go.

 

[MicahJava]

Source?

I'm going to need to see a specific reference to a 6.5x52mm round "deflecting" due to the curvature of a skull upon impact from 300 feet.

I posted my source, which is solid BTW.

In the theoretical EOP-throat connection, the bullet would probably be low-velocity and would have to deflect sharply.

But also, if a Carcano round entered the cowlick at z313, it would have to deflect to the right or it would exit the face. The Moorman photograph shows that Kennedy was not facing as far to the left as the HSCA trajectory analysis wanted.

 

[MicahJava]

The upper mark is where you can see the bullet strike JFK in the Zapruder Film so there you go.

Can you draw a circle or an arrow showing what you're talking about when you say that?

 

[RoboTimbo]

In the theoretical EOP-throat connection, the bullet would probably be low-velocity and would have to deflect sharply.

But also, if a Carcano round entered the cowlick at z313, it would have to deflect to the right or it would exit the face. The Moorman photograph shows that Kennedy was not facing as far to the left as the HSCA trajectory analysis wanted.

Where do all CTists think the shot came from then?

LOL

 

[HSienzant]

The area around the EOP is a curved portion of the skull, and when a bullet enters a curved portion of the skull, it will usually deflect.

Source? I'm going to need to see a specific reference to a 6.5x52mm round "deflecting" due to the curvature of a skull upon impact from 300 feet.

In the theoretical EOP-throat connection, the bullet would probably be low-velocity and would have to deflect sharply.

So, since there's no evidence of a low-velocity bullet and no evidence of a deflection, your conjectured result never happened. You also only claim the bullet will USUALLY (but not always) deflect. Thank you for that admission.

But also, if a Carcano round entered the cowlick at z313, it would have to deflect to the right or it would exit the face.

False. The HSCA trajectory analysis shows JFK's head is canted approximately 17 degrees to the left of the centerline of the limousine at the time of the head shot. The limousine itself was determined to be moving almost directly away from the Depository's sixth floor south-east corner window at the time of that head shot:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/infojfk/jfk2/2p166f138.gif
That means a bullet striking the middle of the back of the head will exit approximately 17 degrees to the right of center of JFK's head, assuming a straight-line path and no deflection. Thomas Canning performed this analysis and he is qualified to determine this trajectory:
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol2/pdf/HSCA_Vol2_0912_3_Canning.pdf
"Mr. Canning received a B.S., cum laude, in mechanical engineering and an M.S. in aeronautics from Stanford University. Since joining NASA in 1943 as an aeronautical research scientist, he has been the Branch Chief of the Hypersonic Free-Flight Branch, Group Leader of the Probes System Group of Pioneer-Venus Mission, and currently he is Staff Engineer of the Space Projects Division. Mr. Canning received the NASA Medal for Exceptional Scientific Achievement for his work in atmosphere entry body research for Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo. During his 23 years of work with the Hypersonic Free-flight Branch he has conducted and supervised research in the flight trajectory and stability of high speed projectiles and missiles. He has published numerous papers in that field.

Please read the analysis linked above and tell me specifically what is wrong with it.

The Moorman photograph shows that Kennedy was not facing as far to the left as the HSCA trajectory analysis wanted.

According to WHOSE expert analysis exactly?

You keep mistaking assertions with evidence. They are not the same. The testimony of an expert is evidence. The assertions of a conspiracy theorist are not evidence. Your claims here are not evidence. Cite your evidence.

Also, please note you were asked previously by Axxman for your source for your contentions about the conjectured deflection. You still haven't cited anything but your own opinion.

Just to be clear, once more, your opinion, and that of other non-expert conspiracy theorists, is meaningless. Cite the expert opinion.

Hank

 

[bknight]

"Cavitation" is the volume of air inside of a bullet wound. "Deflection" is when a bullet meets an obstacle that causes it to DEFLECT. The area around the EOP is a curved portion of the skull, and when a bullet enters a curved portion of the skull, it will usually deflect.

And yet you continue to post links where bullet fragments on the X-ray images of the skull are located in the upper portion of the skull. You can't have it both ways. The bullet may/may not have deflected after entry into the skull. Bullet fragments show a trajectory from the entry point at the back of the skull, exiting the top right, leaving those fragments. These are the concepts you linked, so you have proved the entry from the rear of the skull exiting the top right. You don't seem to be able to piece together the evidence.

 

[HSienzant]

You must be confused. Here is a picture of a model skull which was marked by the doctors (lower area) showing where they recalled seeing the entry wound. The upper mark is where the pet theorists wanted the entry wound to be.

I was unaware any veterinarians examined the autopsy evidence, or testified to the HSCA or Warren Commission. The pathologists who examined the body and the extant autopsy evidence are far more qualified than your attempt to diminish their expertise by calling them 'pet theorists'.

We're on to you.

What part of "In each instance, they identified the approximate location of the entry wound on a human skull and within the photographs as being in a position perceived by the panel to be below that described in the autopsy report" did you not understand?

Their marks are too low compared to the autopsy report they themselves prepared. Their memories of the wound location don't replace the actual autopsy report prepared on the weekend of the assassination.

Those marking they made 15 years after the assassination that you cite are simply wrong.

Hank

 

[bknight]

In the theoretical EOP-throat connection, the bullet would probably be low-velocity and would have to deflect sharply.

But also, if a Carcano round entered the cowlick at z313, it would have to deflect to the right or it would exit the face. The Moorman photograph shows that Kennedy was not facing as far to the left as the HSCA trajectory analysis wanted.

Look at the Zapruder video, taken from the right of the president, Moorman was on the left and JFK was partially obscured by Jackie. Moorman is trumped by Zapruder.

 

[HSienzant]

Didn't Saundra Spencer only describe photographs of the body when it was completely prepared for funeral? In that case, there was a hole in the occipital area about the size of a small orange, but that was from the reconstruction of the head and was subsequently covered with a patch of rubber.

That's YOUR interpretation of her testimony, right?

Now show the evidence she actually saw any photos of JFK's autopsy, ever.

Hint: It's not her testimony. That would be circular reasoning. "She said she saw it, therefore she did" is not exactly up there with Descartes in terms of philosophical ideas.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

The autopsy doctors weren't wrong/incorrect/inept(except for the lack of training in autopsy procedures)...

No. I should caution you against accepting conspiracy theorist claims at face value. I know that CTs have insisted for nearly six decades now that Humes, Finck and Boswell weren't qualified to perform autopsies, but that is nonsense. The three men who performed the autopsy on JFK were eminently qualified to perform that autopsy.

Here's Finck's qualifications:
Mr. SPECTER - Would you state your full name for the record, please?
Colonel FINCK - My first name is Pierre. My middle initial is "A". My last name is Finck.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your profession, sir?
Colonel FINCK - I am a physician.
Mr. SPECTER - And by whom are you employed?
Colonel FINCK - By the United States Army.
Mr. SPECTER - And what is your rank?
Colonel FINCK - I am a lieutenant colonel in the Medical Corps.
Mr. SPECTER - Where did you obtain your medical degree?
Colonel FINCK - At the University of Geneva Medical School in Switzerland.
Mr. SPECTER - And in what year did you obtain that degree?
Colonel FINCK - In 1948.
Mr. SPECTER - What has your experience been in the medical profession subsequent to obtaining that degree?
Colonel FINCK - I had 4 years of training in pathology after my internship, 2 years, including 2 years of pathology at the University Institute of Pathology in Geneva, Switzerland, and 2 years at the University of Tennessee Institute of Pathology in Memphis, Tenn.
Mr. SPECTER - And how long have you been in the United States Army?
Colonel FINCK - Since 1955.
Mr. SPECTER - And what have your duties consisted of in the Army?
Colonel FINCK - From 1955 to 1958 I performed approximately 200 autopsies, many of them pertaining to trauma including missile wounds, stationed at Frankfort, Germany as pathologist of the. United States Army Hospital in Frankfurt, Germany.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you had any additional, special training or experience in missile wounds?
Colonel FINCK - For the past 3 years I was Chief of the Wound Ballistics Pathology Branch of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and in that capacity I reviewed personally all the cases forwarded to us by the Armed Forces, and some civilian cases from the United States and our forces overseas. The number of these cases amounts to approximately 400 cases. I was called as a consultant in the field of missile wounds for this particular case, and also last year in February 1963, the Surgeon General of the Army sent me to Vietnam for a wound ballistics mission, I had to testify in a murder trial involving a 30/30 rifle in the first week of March this year, and I came back yesterday after one week in Panama where I had to testify. I was sent to Panama by the Secretary of the Army regarding the fatalities of the events of 9-10 in January of 1964.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you been certified by the American Board of Pathology, Doctor Finck?
Colonel FINCK - I was certified in pathology anatomy by the American Board of Pathology in 1956, and by the same American Board of Pathology in the field of forensic pathology in 1961.

Humes' qualifications:
Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Humes, will you state your full name for the record, please?
Commander HUMES - James Joseph Humes.
Mr. SPECTER - And what is your profession or occupation, please?
Commander HUMES - I am a physician and employed by the Medical Department of the United States Navy.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your rank in the Navy?
Commander HUMES - Commander, Medical Corps. United States Navy.
Mr. SPECTER - Where did you receive your education, Commander Humes, please.
Commander HUMES - I had my undergraduate training at St. Joseph's College at Villanova University in Philadelphia. I received my medical degree in 1948 from the Jefferson Medical College of Philadelphia.
I received my internship and my postgraduate training in my special field of interest in Pathology in various Naval hospitals, and at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology at Walter Reed in Washington, D.C.
Mr. SPECTER - What do your current duties involve?
Commander HUMES - My current title is Director of Laboratories of the Naval Medical School at Naval Medical Center at Bethesda. I am charged with the responsibility of the overall supervision of all of the laboratory operations in the Naval medical center, two broad areas, one in the field of anatomic pathology which comprises examining surgical specimens and postmortem examinations and then the rather large field of clinical pathology which takes in examination of the blood and various body fluids.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you been certified by the American Board of Pathology?
Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; both in anatomic pathology and in clinical pathology in 1955.
Mr. SPECTER - What specific experience have you had, if any, with respect to gunshot wounds?
Commander HUMES - My type of practice, which fortunately has been in peacetime endeavor to a great extent, has been more extensive in the field of natural disease than violence. However, on several occasions in various places where I have been employed, I have had to deal with violent death, accidents, suicides, and so forth. Also I have had training at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, I have completed a course in forensic pathology there as part of my training in the overall field of pathology.

Boswell's qualifications:
Mr. SPECTER - Will you state your full name for the record, please?
Commander BOSWELL - J. Thornton Boswell, Commander, Medical Corps, U.S. Navy.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your profession?
Commander BOSWELL - Physician.
Mr. SPECTER - And where did you obtain your medical degree, please?
Commander BOSWELL - At the College of Medicine, Ohio State University.
Mr. SPECTER - And what experience have you had in your professional line subsequent to obtaining that degree?
Commander BOSWELL - I interned in the Navy and took my pathology training at St. Albans Naval Hospital in New York. I was certified by the American Board of Pathology in both clinical and pathological anatomy in 1957 and 1958.
Mr. SPECTER - And what is your duty assignment at the present time?
Commander BOSWELL - I am the Chief of Pathology at the National Naval Medical School.