Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

[Axxman300]

The autopsy results were that the small wound in the near the EOP had internal beveling and the large head wound in the skull had external beveling.

What is said was the LONE bullet entered through the rear of the skull (beveling inward), and exited out the right front of the skull fracturing the bone (beveling outward as the fragment passed).

One shot from behind and above.

 

[MicahJava]

Skeleton does not represent muscle structure or movement. All that x-ray shows is the path of the bullet from back to front.

All you've done is confirm Oswald did it.

The jacket bunched. The shirt bunched. The freaking muscle structure bunched. Don't you get tired of the obvious excuses? The dark cavity is going sharply up into the middle throat area right by the trachea. And it sharply deviates where it meets the first rib.

 

[RoboTimbo]

The jacket bunched. The shirt bunched. The freaking muscle structure bunched. Don't you get tired of the obvious excuses? The dark cavity is going sharply up into the middle throat area right by the trachea. And it sharply deviates where it meets the first rib.

Can you cite from the autopsy where it states that so we can be assured we aren't relying on a random layman opinion, which is worthless?

 

[MicahJava]

Can you cite from the autopsy where it states that so we can be assured we aren't relying on a random layman opinion, which is worthless?

Does that look like a high back wound to you? If you think so, take the mic.

 

[MicahJava]

MicahJava,

Was John Stringer qualified to take autopsy photographs?

Hank

Yes.

Are all the photographs he described taking in the official autopsy collection today? No.

Has John Stringer expressed a willingness to change his story when informed that his recollections don't match the official story before in the past? Yes.

Do I still trust most of what he says? Yes.

Your point?

 

[RoboTimbo]

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

Does that look like a high back wound to you? If you think so, take the mic.

You misunderstood, apparently deliberately.

I don't want your words, which are worthless. I want you to cite the autopsy report where the people who knew their ass from a hole in the ground say... whatever it is you think they said.

 

[HSienzant]

MicahJava,

Was John Stringer qualified to take autopsy photographs?

Hank

Yes. ... Your point?

That if he's qualified to take autopsy photographs, then the autopsy photo in question shows the bullet entry wound at the location you call 'the red spot' because it's:

(a) in focus
(b) in the relative center of the photo
(c) has the hair parted around it to apparently show it better
(d) has a ruler next to it
(e) is relatively elliptical, like the autopsy report described.

Hank

 

[MicahJava]

That if he's qualified to take autopsy photographs, then the autopsy photo in question shows the bullet entry wound at the location you call 'the red spot' because it's:

(a) in focus
(b) in the relative center of the photo
(c) has the hair parted around it to apparently show it better
(d) has a ruler next to it
(e) is relatively elliptical, like the autopsy report described.

Hank

Why don't you quote John Stringer's recollections on each type of photograph he took of the small head wound? Or his reaction upon seeing the existent back-of-head photographs and asked to identify an entry wound?

 

[RoboTimbo]

Why don't you quote John Stringer's recollections on each type of photograph he took of the small head wound? Or his reaction upon seeing the existent back-of-head photographs and asked to identify an entry wound?

You were asked several questions. Answer them.

 

[Wolverine]

You're just restarting your fringe reset and posting the same disproven arguments all over again.

Which makes me wonder, why even bother coming to a message board if one is not willing to engage? Might as well post all the unmitigated nonsense one wishes on a blog, somewhere.

 

[HSienzant]

Was John Stringer qualified to take autopsy photographs?

Yes. ...Your point?

That if he's qualified to take autopsy photographs, then the autopsy photo in question shows the bullet entry wound at the location you call 'the red spot' because it's:

(a) in focus
(b) in the relative center of the photo
(c) has the hair parted around it to apparently show it better
(d) has a ruler next to it
(e) is relatively elliptical, like the autopsy report described.

Why don't you quote John Stringer's recollections on each type of photograph he took of the small head wound? Or his reaction upon seeing the existent back-of-head photographs and asked to identify an entry wound?

Why don't you? We could use the laugh.

So your argument reduces to his recollection from decades after the fact is better than his medical photography skills?

You already admitted he was a qualified autopsy photographer. Remember?

Hank

 

[bknight]

There is no question about it. The dark squiggly line, which represents a cavity of air within the tissues, is going up into the middle throat area.

It's not as complicated as the skull X-rays.

And tell us of your training in X-ray interpretation. How many have your looked at and concluded a condition, other than what you read in CT book/webpages?

 

[Axxman300]

The jacket bunched.

Cool, did they X-ray it too?

The fibers show one bullet entering the back, the shirt shows matching entry in the back, and exiting the front, and the tie shows the same.

The freaking muscle structure bunched.

Uh, yeah, I'm going to need a citation showing an abnormal bunching of JFK's upper back and neck muscles before Oswald fired.

Don't you get tired of the obvious excuses?

Heh, no. I didn't get to necrosis, rigor mortis, and the fact that the line is so faint that NONE of the pathologist put two and two together until AFTER they called Parkland and learned the throat wound was a GSW.

The dark cavity is going sharply up into the middle throat area right by the trachea. And it sharply deviates where it meets the first rib.

To be clear, 4 pathologists - WHO WERE WORKING WITH THE BODY AND THE ORIGINAL X-RAYS - didn't see an obvious pathway from the 6.5x52mm round...but it's all clear to you...based on a low resolution reproduction of the x-ray...

 

[Axxman300]

Yes.

Based on what criteria? I have a Canon DSLR, and I'm looking for part-time work.

Are all the photographs he described taking in the official autopsy collection today? No.

Irrelevant, and also not true.

Has John Stringer expressed a willingness to change his story when informed that his recollections don't match the official story before in the past? Yes.

John Stringer is not on trial, nor has been accused of committing a crime. Memories fade over time - THIS IS A FACT. The only crime is CTists such as yourself reading malicious intent into the misrememberings of an honest man.

 

[MicahJava]

Since I do not believe in the occipital blowout, it's kind of a complicated subject, but look at this summary of statements by John Stringer in From Parkland To Bethesda:

https://books.google.com/books?id=cNwUCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT161&lpg=PT161&dq=%22%E2%80%9CCraig+Colgan+reported+Stringer%E2%80%99s+surprise+when+he+heard,+and+positively%22&source=bl&ots=WpANmoK7ZQ&sig=8-VOIVdAjEu6VK6Lj-8dFfKAY3Y&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIkcnBruDYAhVPdt8KHbqCBKIQ6AEIKTAA#v=onepage&q=%22%E2%80%9CCraig%20Colgan%20reported%20Stringer%E2%80%99s%20surprise%20when%20he%20heard%2C%20and%20positively%22&f=false

See how he appears to understand that he is deliberately contradicting himself in later interviews about where the large head wound was situated.

 

[RoboTimbo]

Since I do not believe in <snipped don't care>.

Your running away for a few days to avoid answering questions doesn't mean that everyone else forgot that you hadn't answered them. Answer them now.

 

[MicahJava]

What is said was the LONE bullet entered through the rear of the skull (beveling inward), and exited out the right front of the skull fracturing the bone (beveling outward as the fragment passed).

One shot from behind and above.

The autopsy report says "The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."

But this could just be the based on the shallow back wound which was angled 45-60 degrees downward. A contemporaneous description of the trajectory through the head is in the 2:00 AM Teletype from Sibert and O'Neill:

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md149/html/md149_0001a.htm

...

TOTAL BODY XRAY AND AUTOPSY REVEALED ONE BULLET ENTERED BACK OF HEAD AND THEREAFTER EMERGED THROUGH TOP OF SKULL.

...

Suggesting more of an upwards trajectory as if you connected the EOP wound to the top of the head.

 

[MicahJava]

Your running away for a few days to avoid answering questions doesn't mean that everyone else forgot that you hadn't answered them. Answer them now.

What?

 

[RoboTimbo]

What?

Nope, that doesn't answer any of the questions you've run away from. Try again.

 

[bknight]

The autopsy report says "The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."

But this could just be the based on the shallow back wound which was angled 45-60 degrees downward. A contemporaneous description of the trajectory through the head is in the 2:00 AM Teletype from Sibert and O'Neill:

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md149/html/md149_0001a.htm

...

TOTAL BODY XRAY AND AUTOPSY REVEALED ONE BULLET ENTERED BACK OF HEAD AND THEREAFTER EMERGED THROUGH TOP OF SKULL.

...

Suggesting more of an upwards trajectory as if you connected the EOP wound to the top of the head.

It has been pointed out to you numerous times that JFK was leaning over toward Jackie so that shot from the 6th floor of the TSBD lines up.