Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

[HSienzant]

If you want to think everybody's memory changed in the same way, you must only do so after reading the important statements from the people who were there.

Then you cite a bunch of people who were all over the map, and you have to argue with and against to fit your theory.

Is the name of that dead horse you're beating "Gish Gallop" by any chance?

Giddyup.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

I shouldn't have to re-state what position I am arguing for, but here it goes:

1. At 11:30 the Gawler's funeral home guys arrived at the morgue. The FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil presumed that this marked the near completion of the autopsy, and that nothing else of value would be learned. So, they departed at around this time with their report only referring to the throat wound as a tracheotomy.

2. The autopsy doctors had the Gawler's people wait, and they continued to examine the body for some time after. Around midnight, Dr. Humes called Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas and learned about the original small throat wound that Perry and others saw.

3. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck discussed this during the autopsy in front of witnesses. Witness statements indicate that they physically investigated the throat wound as a bullet hole via probing, etc.

4. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck may have determined that the throat wound represented something incompatible with the official story. So later they concocted a story about the phone call to Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas happening long after Kennedy's body was inaccessible, after the autopsy and after the mortician's work was completed, later in the morning hours of 11/23.

 

[HSienzant]

I shouldn't have to re-state what position I am arguing for, but here it goes:

1. At 11:30 the Gawler's funeral home guys arrived at the morgue. The FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil presumed that this marked the near completion of the autopsy, and that nothing else of value would be learned. So, they departed at around this time with their report only referring to the throat wound as a tracheotomy.

2. The autopsy doctors had the Gawler's people wait, and they continued to examine the body for some time after. Around midnight, Dr. Humes called Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas and learned about the original small throat wound that Perry and others saw.

3. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck discussed this during the autopsy in front of witnesses. Witness statements indicate that they physically investigated the throat wound as a bullet hole via probing, etc.

4. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck may have determined that the throat wound represented something incompatible with the official story. So later they concocted a story about the phone call to Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas happening long after Kennedy's body was inaccessible, after the autopsy and after the mortician's work was completed, later in the morning hours of 11/23.

Now you just have to establish points 1 through 4 without the use of speculation, hearsay, supposition, recollections from 15 or 33 years after the fact, and conjecture.

You know, using *evidence*.

Good luck with that. So far you've failed miserably.

Start with this 'minor' point:

Given there was no 'official story' by the end of Friday, 11/22/63 (the suspect Oswald was in the hands of Dallas Police, it was a local crime, and there was every reason to believe a trial would follow), what possible reason was there for Humes, Boswell & Finck to lie about anything? The Warren Commission wouldn't even be formed until another week had passed and Oswald had been killed by Jack Ruby during the abortive transfer.

What official story were they trying to uphold, and why would they lie?

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

1. Although some might consider George Barnum's 11/29/1963 diary hearsay, it describes a verbal exchange with the President's personal physician Dr. Burkley which included him as an active role in the conversation.

From BEST EVIDENCE:

In his November 29, 1963 account, Coast Guardsman George Barnum wrote that as the men were having sandwhiches and coffee sometime after midnight, Admiral Burkley came in and talked to them, and said three shots had been fired, that the President had been hit by the first and third, and he described the trajectories of the two that struck:

"The first striking him in the lower neck and coming out near the throat. The second shot striking him above and to the rear of the right ear, this shot not coming out...."

2.How is Dr. Perry's original recollection of a Friday night phone call (and a second call never mentioned by Humes) to the Warren Commission hearsay? He was on the other end of the conversation. Even when being interviewed by the HSCA, he said that this was still his recollection.

3. The 11/25/1966 Baltimore Sun article which contains an interview with Dr. Boswell himself, states "The pathologists who had already been told of the probable extent of the injuries and what had been done by physicians in Dallas."; "'The wound in the throat was not immediately evident at the autopsy,' Dr. Boswell said, 'because of the tracheotomy performed in Dallas... We concluded that night that the bullet had, in fact, entered in the back of the neck, transversed the neck and exited anteriorly.'"

4. While the 1/10/1967 CBS memo by Bob Richter, reporting executive Jim Snyder's story is hearsay, it's still from the 1960's and keep in mind that people in the media generally understand that you should avoid distorting a story. Richter reported that Jim Snyder personally knew Dr. Humes, and that Dr. Humes told him an X-ray was taken during the autopsy of a probe going from the back wound to the throat wound in an irregular path. Again, Jim Snyder was describing a verbal exchange with himself on the other end of the conversation.

5. William Manchester's book The Death of a President states the following:

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.

Since the book continues on to quote Joe Hagan of Gawler's funeral home, I presume that the "shortly after midnight" passage originates from him.

There, all of the evidence I posted above comes from the 1960's. Nothing fifteen or thirty years after the fact.

As Doug Horne pointed out, the original official story may have been that the throat wound was a fragment of bullet or bone from the large head shot, but then people in the investigation started realizing that the Zapruder film shows Kennedy reacting to frontal stimuli way before the large head shot at frame 313.

 

[MicahJava]

Then you cite a bunch of people who were all over the map, and you have to argue with and against to fit your theory.

Is the name of that dead horse you're beating "Gish Gallop" by any chance?

Giddyup.

Hank

All over the map? Not only did Dr. Perry tell the Warren Commission and HSCA that he recalled his first contact with Humes happened Friday night, but another Parkland hospital doctor, Paul Peters, made the following statements to Boston Globe journalist Ben Bradlee on 5/1/1981:

A. Alright, now. Just a second. See, part of that is what Mr. Lifton or whatever his name is, is saying, but what I thought that he was referring to was the neck wound at that time. You see, we did find out almost immediately after President Kennedy was taken to Bethesda that there was a hole in the neck that we had not seen at the time. Now Dr. Jenkins, I believe, has said later that he did see it. But I did not know that it was there at the time that we resuscitated President Kennedy. There is therefore, there are two wounds that we didn't know about at the time. The one in the neck posteriorly and then what was subsequenttly found underneath the hair, the wound of entry in the occipital area on the right side.

...

A. What I thought at the time was, as I told you, that he had been shot in the neck. See, it was only, it was going to be a few hours before I would know that the bullets were fired from behind. I thought, seeing the patient, if I had just walked in now and saw a patient like that who had a small hole in his neck and a large wound in the back of his head, I would have thought the bullet had entered here and exited through the back of his head. That's what I thought at the time. But then we began to get more information, that there was a wound in the back of the neck, and also a second hole was found in the skull, and I learned the President had been shot twice. Why, there were other explanations that appeared more rational.

...

A. Yeah, but with the high velocity of the missile striking, you'd think it would just go right on through. But bullets, when they're coming in at high velocities get deflected in strange ways, sometime. I've seen them deflected internally into blood vessels in the body. And zip right down the blood vessel once the pathway was started. But that's what we thought at the time, see? Plunk, plunk. But it was only a few hours later when we began to get calls back from Bethesda, that we learned that there was a wound in the back of the neck that had gone through, see? And that he had been hit twice, and of course the Zapruder film subsequently showed that.

http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/PETERS_P.TXT, https://archive.org/stream/nsia-LivingstoneHarrisonEdward/nsia-LivingstoneHarrisonEdward/Livingstone%20Harrison%20Edward%20023#page/n21/mode/2up

Autopsy witnesses Joe Hagan, John Stringer, and John Ebersole all specifically stated that they recalled the first contact with Dallas happening midnight.

Dr. Robert Karnei told Harrison Livingstone the same thing on 8/27/1991, but he himself contradicted that in other interviews on 8/23/1977 to the HSCA and 3/10/1997 to the ARRB, saying that he did not know the tracheotomy was made over a bullet wound at that time.

That's not including the other witnesses who made statements indicating that the autopsy pathologists discussed the throat wound as a bullet hole, probed it, etc.

 

[MicahJava]

The whole story from Dr. Humes et. al just sounds dubious.

They somehow learned about the bullet discovered on the stretcher without also learning about the original small throat wound? Everybody at the autopsy attested how puzzled they were at the lack of any bullet found in the body, it would only make sense they they would try getting information from Dallas while they were still examining the body.

 

[abaddon]

If they knew about the original small throat wound during the autopsy, but lied and said they only learned about it the next day when the body was inaccessible, then that indicates they were trying to cover something up.

If you believe that then they are all, in your view, unreliable witnesses and cannot be cited as evidence of anything at all.

 

[MicahJava]

If you believe that then they are all, in your view, unreliable witnesses and cannot be cited as evidence of anything at all.

What's wrong with corroboration? I accept that there was a small wound near the EOP, and that it probably had internal beveling indicating an entrance for a projectile as the autopsy doctors always said, because there's a lot of corroboration for it.

 

[HSienzant]

There, all of the evidence I posted above comes from the 1960's. Nothing fifteen or thirty years after the fact.

What part of "Now you just have to establish points 1 through 4 without the use of speculation, hearsay, supposition, recollections from 15 or 33 years after the fact, and conjecture" did you not understand?

1. In his November 29, 1963 account, Coast Guardsman George Barnum wrote that as the men were having sandwhiches and coffee sometime after midnight, Admiral Burkley came in and talked to them...

Hearsay.


2.How is Dr. Perry's original recollection of a Friday night phone call (and a second call never mentioned by Humes) to the Warren Commission hearsay? He was on the other end of the conversation. Even when being interviewed by the HSCA, he said that this was still his recollection.

Asked and answered. The autopsy finished about 11pm, per Humes. That's 10pm Dallas time. The call to Perry could have come as much as two hours after the autopsy and still been Friday night Dallas time.


3. The 11/25/1966 Baltimore Sun article...

Hearsay.


4. While the 1/10/1967 CBS memo by Bob Richter, reporting executive Jim Snyder's story is hearsay...

Yes. Hearsay.


5. William Manchester's book The Death of a President states

Hearsay.

You are still failing to post any evidence. Above you provided five examples of hearsay, admitting to one.

Whining that all you have is hearsay and it should be acceptable isn't helping your cause any.

 

[abaddon]

What's wrong with corroboration? I accept that there was a small wound near the EOP, and that it probably had internal beveling indicating an entrance for a projectile as the autopsy doctors always said, because there's a lot of corroboration for it.

Because if, as you claim that they have intentionally lied on any part of their evidence, then you must reject all of their evidence as tainted.

 

[HSienzant]

All over the map? Not only did Dr. Perry tell the Warren Commission and HSCA that he recalled his first contact with Humes happened Friday night...

Asked and answered. That could make it as late as nearly 1:00am Washington time ("early Saturday morning", according to Humes), about two hours after the estimated completion of the autopsy.

but another Parkland hospital doctor, Paul Peters, made the following statements to Boston Globe journalist Ben Bradlee on 5/1/1981:

...You see, we did find out almost immediately after President Kennedy was taken to Bethesda that there was a hole in the neck that we had not seen at the time.

My goodness, you would not recognize hearsay and recollection if you tripped over it?

First, 1981 is 18 years after the event.

Who is 'we' in the above? Did he speak directly with Humes? No, Dr. Perry did. Not only is this a newspaper article, unsworn, where people can make all sorts of statements while suffering no problems with the judicial system for perjury, it's clear Peters is simply referencing something he heard at some point later from Perry. That's not independent corroboration. That's very dependent on what Peters heard from Perry. That's hearsay.

Now Dr. Jenkins, I believe, has said later that he did see it. But I did not know that it was there at the time that we resuscitated President Kennedy.

Say what? The Parkland doctors resuscitated President Kennedy? No, they didn't. Not according to Dr. Perry's sworn testimony to the Warren Commission.

Dr. PERRY - Dr. Clark's arrival was first noted to me after the completion of the tracheotomy, and at this point, the cardiotachyscope had been attached to Mr. Kennedy to detect any electrical activity and although I did not note any, being occupied, it was related to me there was initially evidence of a spontaneous electrical activity in the President's heart.
However, at the completion of the tracheotomy and the institution of the sealed tube drainage of the chest, Dr. Clark and I began external cardiac massage. This was monitored by Dr. Jenkins and Dr. Giesecke who informed us we were obtaining a satisfactory carotid pulse in the neck, and someone whose name I do not know at this time, said they could also feel a femoral pulse in the leg. We continued external cardiac massage, I continued it as Dr. Clark examined the head wound and observed the cardiotachyscope. The exact time interval that this took I cannot tell you. I continued it until Dr. Jenkins and Dr. Clark informed me there was no activity at all, in the cardiotachyscope and that there had been no neurological or muscular response to our resuscitative effort at all and that the wound which the President sustained of his head was a mortal wound, and at that point we determined that he had expired and we abandoned efforts of resuscitation.

There was an attempt at resuscitation. It failed.

People may speak less carefully in casual conversations than under oath. That's just one example. But if you wished, you could conjecture Kennedy was resuscitated, and said "Jackie did it" before expiring.

There is therefore, there are two wounds that we didn't know about at the time. The one in the neck posteriorly and then what was subsequenttly found underneath the hair, the wound of entry in the occipital area on the right side.

Here's Peter's sworn testimony on the wound he said he saw in the occiput:
Dr. PETERS - Well, as I mentioned, the neck wound had already been interfered with by the tracheotomy at the time I got there, but I noticed the head wound, and as I remember--I noticed that there was a large defect in the occiput.
Mr. SPECTER - What did you notice in the occiput?
Dr. PETERS - It seemed to me that in the right occipitalparietal area that there was a large defect. There appeared to be bone loss and brain loss in the area.

So his recollection has clearly changed from 1964 when he testified to the Warren Commission and 1981 when he spoke with Ben Bradlee.

Now, we can establish that change in recollection. What you seem unconcerned about is the other changes in recollection that make relying on recollections from 15, 18, or 33 years after the fact extremely tenuous.


A. What I thought at the time was, as I told you, that he had been shot in the neck. See, it was only, it was going to be a few hours before I would know that the bullets were fired from behind. I thought, seeing the patient, if I had just walked in now and saw a patient like that who had a small hole in his neck and a large wound in the back of his head, I would have thought the bullet had entered here and exited through the back of his head. That's what I thought at the time. But then we began to get more information, that there was a wound in the back of the neck, and also a second hole was found in the skull, and I learned the President had been shot twice. Why, there were other explanations that appeared more rational.

He's saying two entry wounds in the back of the body and two exit wounds out the front make more sense than a bullet in the neck and out of the head. Or even, I suppose, in the back of the head and out the neck (your theory).


A. Yeah, but with the high velocity of the missile striking, you'd think it would just go right on through. But bullets, when they're coming in at high velocities get deflected in strange ways, sometime. I've seen them deflected internally into blood vessels in the body. And zip right down the blood vessel once the pathway was started. But that's what we thought at the time, see? Plunk, plunk. But it was only a few hours later when we began to get calls back from Bethesda, that we learned that there was a wound in the back of the neck that had gone through, see? And that he had been hit twice, and of course the Zapruder film subsequently showed that.

Who is 'we' and when did Peters actually here it? Days later back at the hospital when he ran across Dr. Perry, or do you suggest that Perry got on the phone at midnight Dallas time and started calling all the doctors involved in JFK's Parkland treatment to relate the story?

Or do you think Dr. Peters actually read something in the paper and created a false memory of hearing about it before everyone else? It wouldn't be the first time someone inflated their involvement in this case or simply confused details decades after the fact.

Autopsy witnesses Joe Hagan, John Stringer, and John Ebersole all specifically stated that they recalled the first contact with Dallas happening midnight.

And that would still be an hour after the autopsy concluded, according to Humes.

Dr. Robert Karnei told Harrison Livingstone the same thing on 8/27/1991, but he himself contradicted that in other interviews on 8/23/1977 to the HSCA and 3/10/1997 to the ARRB, saying that he did not know the tracheotomy was made over a bullet wound at that time.

So a flip-flopping witness who you admit contradicted himself is part of your Gish Gallop. Interesting.

I'm not concerned about why you accept it (you'll apparently accept anything that points to a conspiracy), but I'd like to know why you think we should accept this.

That's not including the other witnesses who made statements indicating that the autopsy pathologists discussed the throat wound as a bullet hole, probed it, etc.

Yawn. We've gone through all those months ago. They were likewise recollections from 15 or more likely, 33 years after the event.

Trying for yet another fringe reset, I see.

Sorry. But no.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

The autopsy did not end at 11 PM. They were still examining the body by then. Witness statements indicate that the morticians were waiting on the autopsy doctors as they were taking their time finishing their work.

For contemporary documentation listing the approximate times, see here:

Gawler's Funeral Home "First Call Sheet" which records events of November 22-23,1963

Arrangements:-When 11 P.M.

...

CASKET DELIVERY DETAILS

Date 11-23-1963 Time 2 A.M.


https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md129/html/md129_0001a.htm

Gawler's after-action report titled: "Funeral Arrangements for John Fitzgerald Kennedy--events of November 22,23,24, and 25 are recounted.

LATE EVENING MESSRS. O'LEARY, O'DONNEL, O'BRIEN AND POWERS (KENNEDY'S STAFF) ARRIVED TO SELECT THE CASKET FROM GAWLER'S SELECTION ROOM. (THE CASKET THE PRESIDENT ARRIVED IN FROM DALLAS WAS DAMAGED - FROM THE HANDLING ON THE AIRPLANE - AND THE AMBULANCE). THEY SELECTED A MARSELLUS 710 SOLID MAHOGANY AND A WILBERT TRIUNE/COPPER LINED VAULT.

JOSEPH GAWLER IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO THE NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER FOR MEETINGS WITH MDW OFFICIALS, SECRET SERVICE, FBI AND HOSPITAL STAFF. JOSEPH HAGAN RESPONDED TO THE CENTER WITH THE EMBALMING TEAM - JOHN VAN HOESEN, EDWIN STROBLE AND THOMAS ROBINSON.

GAWLER AND HAGAN CONTINUED MEETINGS WITH MDW, HOSPITAL STAFF, SECRET SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, ETC. AT THIS MEETING WE WERE INFORMED TO STANDBY, UNTIL ALL EXAMINATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT'S BODY, WERE COMPLETED.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md134/html/md134_0001a.htm

... page 2:

CLEARANCE WAS RECIEVED TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION AFTER 11 P.M., NOVEMBER 22, 1963. UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF MR. HAGAN, THE EMBALMING, COSMETICS, RESTORATION (EXTENSIVE CRANIAL DAMAGE), DRESSING AND CASKETING WAS COMPLETED BY 4 A.M. ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1963.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md134/html/md134_0002a.htm

For what it's worth, I overlooked two ARRB interviews with Joe Hagan:

ARRB Meeting Report Summarizing 5/17/1996 In-Person Interview of Joseph E. Hagan

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md182/html/md182_0003a.htm

ARRB Call Report Summarizing 6/11/1996 Brief Telephonic Interview of Joe Hagan

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md182/html/md182_0007a.htm

Joe Hagan's 30-year-old memory couldn't give accurate times in terms of digits, but his message is clear: he arrived along with the mahogany casket to the morgue, and after that he had to wait about 20 minutes on the bleachers for the autopsy to really complete. Contemporary documentation indicates this casket arrived at 2 AM, contrary to his personal recollection that he arrived around midnight. So this is one of many good basis for saying that the autopsy didn't really end until around 2:30 AM. So about 3 1/2 hours of wiggle room for the autopsy doctors to discover and investigate the throat wound as a bullet hole, after the FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil left with their report which considered the back wound shallow and the throat wound a tracheotomy.

 

[HSienzant]

The whole story from Dr. Humes et. al just sounds dubious.

Oh. So you don't have any evidence it's dubious. You just doubt it because you doubt it.

They somehow learned about the bullet discovered on the stretcher without also learning about the original small throat wound?

Yes. The bullet arrived in Washington courtesy of the Secret Service Chief, James Rowley. While discovered in Parkland, it had a separate line of transmission of information that didn't start and stop with the Parkland doctors, who weren't involved in it's discovery whatsoever. We discussed the bullet in detail with Robert Prey, among others. Maybe even yourself about a year ago. You were advised when you first got here to read the discussion prior to your arrival so as to familiarize yourself with what transpired already. Did you ever do that?

Everybody at the autopsy attested how puzzled they were at the lack of any bullet found in the body, it would only make sense they they would try getting information from Dallas while they were still examining the body.

I'm sorry. You've conducted how many autopsies where you reached out to witnesses or treating physicians to ascertain the facts? Tell us again how much you know about how to conduct an autopsy, from your vast experience on this subject.

Hank

 

[Tomtomkent]

What about Joe Hagen suggests his memories will be any more accurate or reliable than anybody else’s?
Why should we believe the details that are convenient to MicahJava are any more accurate in this case, than we would expect from any other witness whose memory had thirty years to fool him?

 

[MicahJava]

What about Joe Hagen suggests his memories will be any more accurate or reliable than anybody else’s?
Why should we believe the details that are convenient to MicahJava are any more accurate in this case, than we would expect from any other witness whose memory had thirty years to fool him?

So you think Hagan completely fabricated his memory of him and Joe Gawler helping Kennedy's aides to select a mahogany casket, and then personally transporting it to Bethesda?

 

[MicahJava]

Oh. So you don't have any evidence it's dubious. You just doubt it because you doubt it.




Yes. The bullet arrived in Washington courtesy of the Secret Service Chief, James Rowley. While discovered in Parkland, it had a separate line of transmission of information that didn't start and stop with the Parkland doctors, who weren't involved in it's discovery whatsoever. We discussed the bullet in detail with Robert Prey, among others. Maybe even yourself about a year ago. You were advised when you first got here to read the discussion prior to your arrival so as to familiarize yourself with what transpired already. Did you ever do that?




I'm sorry. You've conducted how many autopsies where you reached out to witnesses or treating physicians to ascertain the facts? Tell us again how much you know about how to conduct an autopsy, from your vast experience on this subject.

Hank

The shooting happened at Dallas, the doctors had a mysterious missing bullet they had to figure out, and they were specifically told try to find an assassin's bullet in his body. It would only be logical to call Dallas while the body was still being examined.

 

[MicahJava]

I can understand why single-assassin theorists would think that the occam's razor evidence just shows a two-hit scenario to explain Kennedy's wounds. But then there's stuff like this that wakes you up and makes you realize that the Kennedy case probably does involve serious mysteries like shallow back wounds, tiny throat wounds, EOPs, etc.

 

[HSienzant]

CLEARANCE WAS RECIEVED TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION AFTER 11 P.M., NOVEMBER 22, 1963.

So 11:00 pm is about the time of the completion of the autopsy, contemporaneous corroboration for Humes' 11:00 pm estimate in his Warren Commission testimony.

For what it's worth, I overlooked a 5/17/1996 ARRB interview with Joe Hagan:

For what it's worth, it's still a 33-year later recollection and - dare I suggest it? - totally worthless.

Joe Hagan's 3330-year-old memory couldn't give accurate times

Fixed that for you. Ask me how I know you're wrong in your time estimate.
You can't give accurate times with numbers before you. So let's not criticize Hagan's 33-year after the fact recollection all that much.

... in terms of digits, but his message is clear: he arrived along with the mahogany casket to the morgue, and after that he had to wait about 20 minutes on the bleachers for the autopsy to really complete. Contemporary documentation indicates this casket arrived at 2 AM, contrary to his personal recollection that he arrived around midnight. So this is one of many good basis for saying that the autopsy didn't really end until around 2:30 AM.

You don't even realize how you're picking and choosing parts from his recollection and from the documented record to build your argument.

But we do.

The casket arriving at 2pm has nothing to do with when the autopsy completed. The contemporaneous documentation (which you cite for the casket but ignore for the autopsy completion) says the autopsy ended about 11pm.
CLEARANCE WAS RECIEVED TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION AFTER 11 P.M., NOVEMBER 22, 1963.

... So about 3 1/2 hours of wiggle room for the autopsy doctors to discover and investigate the throat wound as a bullet hole, after the FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil left with their report which considered the back wound shallow and the throat wound a tracheotomy.

The 'wiggle room' is a figment of your imagination and it's not for the autopsy doctors. It's for MicahJava to build a false argument of the autopsy ending about 3.5 hours later than it really did.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

The shooting happened at Dallas, the doctors had a mysterious missing bullet they had to figure out, and they were specifically told try to find an assassin's bullet in his body. It would only be logical to call Dallas while the body was still being examined.

Why? Is that what you routinely do in the numerous autopsies you've conducted?

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

I think the "11:00 PM" motif from the documents, Dr. Humes to the WC, and Dr. Hagan to the ARRB, comes from the fact that some of the embalming team arrived at the autopsy by 11:00 PM.