• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes his decoder ring leads him to believe there are two entry head wounds, but as we all know the autopsy record has only one and every commission, agency, panel, committee has agreed to that fact. He fails miserably on that point, time to buy a new cereal box.

1. Photographs and X-rays of the Harper fragment are all we have left. The Harper fragment has gone missing, so the photographs and X-rays are due to be re-examined for any evidence of a tangential wound.

2. There doesn't need to be proof of inward beveling in the skull to prove a separate shot to the head, especially in a case where large portions of skull bone went missing.

3. The autopsy doctors could simply be dishonest about what they saw. Richard Lipsey described the autopsy doctors discussing more than one gunshot to the head, with one entering the EOP and the second tangentially striking the right side of the head.
 
2. There doesn't need to be proof of inward beveling in the skull to prove a separate shot to the head, especially in a case where large portions of skull bone went missing.

No. But there does need to be proof of a second shot. Which you don't have, and have not yet supplied.

3. The autopsy doctors could simply be dishonest about what they saw.

But unless you care to show full and compelling evidence for this, we are going to assume they aren't.

Richard Lipsey described the autopsy doctors discussing more than one gunshot to the head, with one entering the EOP and the second tangentially striking the right side of the head.

My GOD! You just blew the whole case wide open! Do you know what this hearsay evidence suggests?

That the doctors present at the autopsy discussed potential causes of the wounds, from their first impressions, to their conclusions, revised and refined as they made a full and thorough survey of the wounds, to find out which possibilities were supported, and which were discounted by further discoveries (such as that there was another wound obscured by the tracheoctomy).

It's almost as if... THEY DID THEIR JOB!
 
1. Photographs and X-rays of the Harper fragment are all we have left. The Harper fragment has gone missing, so the photographs and X-rays are due to be re-examined for any evidence of a tangential wound.

Due when?
Examined by whom?
Please supply a link to this study.
 
Snipped

3. The autopsy doctors could simply be dishonest about what they saw. .

Or it could be that the sources you cite are dishonest or incompetent and it could be that your lack of any experience in the disciplines involved lead you to believe falsehoods.
 
2. There doesn't need to be proof of inward beveling in the skull to prove a separate shot to the head, especially in a case where large portions of skull bone went missing.

Guess what? The bone fragments that may or may not be missing are from the top front of the skull, not the back of the head - WHERE YOU CLAIM YOUR FANTASY BULLET STRUCK. They examined the inside of the skull for 40 minutes, they would have noticed a second hole.
 
Guess what? The bone fragments that may or may not be missing are from the top front of the skull, not the back of the head - WHERE YOU CLAIM YOUR FANTASY BULLET STRUCK. They examined the inside of the skull for 40 minutes, they would have noticed a second hole.

Perhaps just as pertinently: They are NOT from the bottom of the skull, where he needs to show something missing, to explain how his "EOP" bullet could have left the throat.
 
sigh...
Quote:
Joe Gawler and Joe Hagan, his chief assistant, supervised the loading of the coffin in a hearse, or, as Hagan preferred to call it, a “funeral coach.” The firm’s young cosmetician accompanied them to Bethesda. The two caskets, Oneal’s and Gawler’s, lay side by side for a while in the morgue anteroom; then Oneal’s was removed for storage and the undertakers, Irishmen, and George Thomas were admitted to the main room. The autopsy team had finished its work, a grueling, three-hour task, interrupted by the arrival of a fragment of skull which had been retrieved on Elm Street and flown east by federal agents. The nature of the two wounds and the presence of metal fragments in the President’s head had been verified; the metal from Oswald’s bullet was turned over to the FBI. Bethesda’s physicians anticipated that their findings would later be subjected to the most searching scrutiny. They had heard reports of Mac Perry’s medical briefing for the press, and to their dismay they had discovered that all evidence of what was being called an entrance wound in the throat had been removed by Perry’s tracheostomy. Unlike the physicians at Parkland, they had turned the President over and seen the smaller hole in the back of his neck. They were positive that Perry had seen an exit wound. The deleterious effects of confusion were already evident. Commander James J. Humes, Bethesda’s chief of pathology, telephoned Perry in Dallas shortly after midnight, and clinical photographs were taken to satisfy all the Texas doctors who had been in Trauma Room No. 1.


-The Death of a President by William Manchester, 1967

See, since Sibert and O'Neil left around 11:30 PM because they assumed the autopsy was finishing up once the funeral home people, it would make sense if the autopsy doctors only then telephoned Dr. Perry and learned of the throat wound.

I'm confused. Were you citing this as support for your case that there were multiple shooters? Because the highlighted seems to contradict that idea. There seems to be an acceptance of Oswald's guilt here.
 
1. Photographs and X-rays of the Harper fragment are all we have left. The Harper fragment has gone missing, so the photographs and X-rays are due to be re-examined for any evidence of a tangential wound.

You keep insisting that evidentiary parts of the assassination have gone missing, and yet you continue to provide no support of these allegations, why?
No CT citing would be sufficient to prove your case a non-CT source would be fine.
2. There doesn't need to be proof of inward beveling in the skull to prove a separate shot to the head, especially in a case where large portions of skull bone went missing.
You continue to infer another shot that magically/coincidently entered the area blow out by the Carcano entrance from the back. However, this would require firing at almost the same instant as the Carcano round. However possible, it is highly unlikely that a second shot would occur. In addition there is no backward explosion of tissue to the rear contained in the Zapurder video, negating your hypnosis.
3. The autopsy doctors could simply be dishonest about what they saw. Richard Lipsey described the autopsy doctors discussing more than one gunshot to the head, with one entering the EOP and the second tangentially striking the right side of the head.

Again you infer that all the doctors colluded to lie about their findings. Yet all the investigations that followed concluded the autopsy information was correct with the small exception of the precise entrance wound location in the back of the head. This in no way supports your allegation of another GSW to the head, nor a conspiracy. Just logical fallacies and fantasies that CTs propose.
 
Cite evidence where the x-rays have been altered, and not just the CT wackos out to sell books.

Substitute brain, now there is a newbie for me unless you attempted to bring it out months ago. Where did you come up with that one? Cite evidence for such assertions.

Typical CT nonsense. Any evidence that doesn't support your conspiracy theory has been faked somehow.
 
Couple of points from the Dr. Humes deposition:

1. RFK and Jackie flipped out when they saw pictures being taken of the body. This was Dr. Humes' idea because he knew he'd have limited time with the body, and would need visual reference for later when he and the others wrote up the final report. They were not authorized in advance by his command.

2. At least one roll of film was destroyed ONE THE SPOT in the autopsy room by a Secret Service agent who was directed to do so from the Kennedy people. This was not the designated photographer but a bystander, and the film was yanked out and exposed, and ruined, and tossed in the trash.

3. The film was monitored closely by JFK's people and as soon as the Pathologists were done the pictures and negatives and x-rays were collected by JFK's personal physician, and whisked away.

At this point the Kennedy family could have destroyed all of the pictures had they chosen to do so. This is a key fact MJ and all CTists ignore. The pictures were sitting in a government file somewhere with easy access by black ops types. Had the family destroyed the photos it is doubtful that anyone would have raised a fuss about it, evidence or not. In 1964 the nation bent over backwards for the Kennedys after JFK's death.

That the photographs and x-rays exist to this day speaks to the character of the Kennedy family, but if any pictures are missing it is because they were never turned over to the National Archives in the first place. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Guess what? The bone fragments that may or may not be missing are from the top front of the skull, not the back of the head - WHERE YOU CLAIM YOUR FANTASY BULLET STRUCK. They examined the inside of the skull for 40 minutes, they would have noticed a second hole.

Nobody in the history of the JFK Case has tried saying that the Harper fragment is frontal bone. The harper fragment is from the large skull defect, which officially involved parietal and temporal bone. It has gone missing, and there is no way that the Kennedy family could have taken it. We only have two photographs and and X-ray that could show us the nature of the beveling.
 
Last edited:
Couple of points from the Dr. Humes deposition:

1. RFK and Jackie flipped out when they saw pictures being taken of the body. This was Dr. Humes' idea because he knew he'd have limited time with the body, and would need visual reference for later when he and the others wrote up the final report. They were not authorized in advance by his command.

I don't know what you're talking about. Photographs are required to be taken at an autopsy just as much as X-rays are.

What's your point? We know from the vivid testimonies of the Dr.'s and photographer that photographs were taken of a bruise on Kennedy's right lung and close-up views of a small wound on the back of the head, in the scalp and the outer/inner surfaces of the skull.

2. At least one roll of film was destroyed ONE THE SPOT in the autopsy room by a Secret Service agent who was directed to do so from the Kennedy people. This was not the designated photographer but a bystander, and the film was yanked out and exposed, and ruined, and tossed in the trash.

I think you're a little lost. You must be thinking of Floyd Riebe, who was taking photographs of the crowd gathered to view the autopsy and not the body itself. He did not take any photographs of the body and he was not the official autopsy photographer. The official autopsy photographer was John Stringer.

3. The film was monitored closely by JFK's people and as soon as the Pathologists were done the pictures and negatives and x-rays were collected by JFK's personal physician, and whisked away.

What is this strange concept that lone nutters have that the Kennedy family could have had the jurisdiction to literally destroyed any trace of the some of the most valuable evidence in the murder case of a President?

At this point the Kennedy family could have destroyed all of the pictures had they chosen to do so. This is a key fact MJ and all CTists ignore. The pictures were sitting in a government file somewhere with easy access by black ops types. Had the family destroyed the photos it is doubtful that anyone would have raised a fuss about it, evidence or not. In 1964 the nation bent over backwards for the Kennedys after JFK's death.

That the photographs and x-rays exist to this day speaks to the character of the Kennedy family, but if any pictures are missing it is because they were never turned over to the National Archives in the first place. :thumbsup:

Yeah, you're beyond strike three at this point. The Kennedy family did not have the jurisdiction to destroy the original autopsy films. Nobody's going to let valuable evidence be destroyed in the murder case of a President because his family doesn't like it. Where do you get your information, newsfordummies.com?
 
Typical CT nonsense. Any evidence that doesn't support your conspiracy theory has been faked somehow.

Where did I say that I believed the X-rays are altered? I did not. The official evidence is compatible with the EOP wound under certain parameters. I just said that there's so much evidence that even if the photographs and X-rays didn't show it, I would then believe them to be faked because there's too much evidence for the EOP wound to ignore. I mean, where do you go when there's the world's fattest contradiction between the autopsy participants and it's official conclusions? Do you plug your ears and yell "but the government autopsy concluded one gunshot to the head"?
 
Last edited:
You keep insisting that evidentiary parts of the assassination have gone missing, and yet you continue to provide no support of these allegations, why?
No CT citing would be sufficient to prove your case a non-CT source would be fine.

Literally go to the testimonies of Humes, Boswell, Finck, and John Stringer, then look for any time they're talking about taking photographs. They described taking a few photographs which aren't in the official collection now.

You continue to infer another shot that magically/coincidently entered the area blow out by the Carcano entrance from the back. However, this would require firing at almost the same instant as the Carcano round. However possible, it is highly unlikely that a second shot would occur. In addition there is no backward explosion of tissue to the rear contained in the Zapurder video, negating your hypnosis.

Oh no, no backward explosion in the Zapurder video? And that negates my hypnosis? Even if it was spelled right, your comment makes literally no sense. You should have a grasp of the things I talk about by now. The EOP bullet wound to the head did not have to be created at z313, it could have been created as early as z190-224. Volley fire is not necessary.

Again you infer that all the doctors colluded to lie about their findings. Yet all the investigations that followed concluded the autopsy information was correct with the small exception of the precise entrance wound location in the back of the head. This in no way supports your allegation of another GSW to the head, nor a conspiracy. Just logical fallacies and fantasies that CTs propose.

Every time there is a new "investigation", it uncovers plenty of evidence for conspiracy. Not just the EOP wound location (which is undeniable at this point).
 
I'm confused. Were you citing this as support for your case that there were multiple shooters? Because the highlighted seems to contradict that idea. There seems to be an acceptance of Oswald's guilt here.

What does a second shooter making the EOP bullet wound have to do with the fragments which officially caused the large head wound? Even the fragments in evidence could have created a tangential wound on the side of Kennedy's head which had no relation to the EOP wound. There were trace amounts of human skin identified on one of the fragments, and human skin is very unlikely except in cases of tangential wounds.

That's a hypothetical where nothing is faked. As soon as I started looking at the forensic evidence, I was attracted to the idea of reconciling the official evidence with the case for conspiracy.
 
What is this strange concept that lone nutters have that the Kennedy family could have had the jurisdiction to literally destroyed any trace of the some of the most valuable evidence in the murder case of a President?

Remind us what position RFK held in the government and what his powers were in that role. Some here may have forgotten.

Hank
 
Where did I say that I believed the X-rays are altered? I did not.

Hilarious. It's time to give up when you can't even remember your own arguments from a few days previous. You certainly suggested they could be:

Serious question: If it were ever proven that the official photographs and x-rays are incompatible with the existence of a small bullet hole resembling an entry wound near the external occipital protuberance, why should any rational person then not then logically conclude that they are faked?

Hank
 
Literally go to the testimonies of Humes, Boswell, Finck, and John Stringer, then look for any time they're talking about taking photographs. They described taking a few photographs which aren't in the official collection now.

Wait, what?

You mean you've citing Humes, Boswell, Finck after suggesting they might have lied or erred in their interpretation? What, you forgot you wrote this:
If you refuse to accept the possibility that the three main autopsy doctors are lying about a few things, then there is also the "accidental misinterpretation" possibility...
And wrote this:

The autopsy doctors could simply be dishonest about what they saw.

Once you've questioned their credibility, you don't get to turn around and reference something they said because you believe it supports your argument. You already told us they weren't credible. So why are you citing them?


Every time there is a new "investigation", it uncovers plenty of evidence for conspiracy. Not just the EOP wound location (which is undeniable at this point).

More accurately, it puts a lot of hearsay and faulty recollections into the record, which are then data-mined for their usage to exclude the hard evidence by pretending that hearsay and those faulty recollections somehow take precedence over the actual evidence like the records made at the autopsy (radiographs and photographs).

Your "evidence for conspiracy" is a bunch of statements either taken out context, or recollections from decades after the fact, hearsay, speculation, conjecture, and innuendo.

And, oh yeah, offering yourself as an expert witness and simply ignoring or dismissing what the actual expert witnesses said.

Hank
 
Last edited:
What does a second shooter making the EOP bullet wound have to do with the fragments which officially caused the large head wound? Even the fragments in evidence could have created a tangential wound on the side of Kennedy's head which had no relation to the EOP wound.

No. The fragments (which you previously questioned the legitimacy of) were found forward of the President AND are traceable to Oswald's weapon to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world. Those fragments can't be linked to any hypothetical second shooter in front of the President, because they are in the wrong place based on the physical laws of the universe and are also linked indubitably to Oswald's rifle.


That's a hypothetical where nothing is faked. As soon as I started looking at the forensic evidence, I was attracted to the idea of reconciling the official evidence with the case for conspiracy.

Let us know when you make some headway. Thus far you haven't reconciled any official evidence with a case for conspiracy.

Hank
 
Last edited:
Apples and oranges.

Comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges is perfectly allowable.


1. Lattimer has been known to stretch his interpretation of the back wound photograph so he can place it on the base of the neck and match it with the dark air cavity on the lower-right side of Kennedy's neck on the X-rays. So he is more or less a spokesman for the official story. He then later conceded that the original EOP entry location was true, even though he had spent years of his life saying that the cowlick entry theory was true.

You're back to questioning someone's credibility then turning around and citing something they said as evidence for your arguments.

You still don't have the hang of this "legitimate argument" thingy yet?

You can't come down on one foot on each side of that fence.

2. The original autopsy doctors said that the outward beveling on the right side of the head could only be seen when previously-missing skull bone was shipped back from Dallas. They did not recognize the beveled "exit" on the open-cranium photographs theorized by the HSCA to be located in the frontal-parietal area.

I thought they said the fragment made it more obvious. I'd ask you to cite for your claim (and provide a link) but we both know you won't do either.


3. The HSCA's interpretation of the photographs is unsupported...

Except by every forensic pathologist to examine the extant autopsy materials.


...and their interpretation was denied by the autopsy doctors who always said that there was no beveling on the skull bone they examined at the beginning of the autopsy.

Citation for that?

And now you're back to contrasting the HSCA forensic panel's conclusions with the three autopsy doctors conclusions. But let's not forget, there's one place they all agreed, the bullet that struck the back of the head exited the top right of the skull.

So it's your argument that Lattimer, the autopsists, AND the HSCA forensic pathology panel all got this wound wrong and you're right.

Uh-huh.

Hank
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom