JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[jargon buster]

As to the others, one question or challenge at a time, please.

When it suits hey?

 

[jargon buster]

We know he was a witness to a small entry wound in the right temple and a large blow-out in the back of K's head because his associate, Petty Officer Dennis David said they both witnessed it on the cryptic autopsy film they both viewed together.

Lol, so a person is a witness to something he gets told about by two other witnesses?
That makes me a witness myself, add me to the list of your 40+ medical witnesses please.
Come on Robert, must try harder.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Billy Harper is better than an eye-witness statement. He brought in the back of k"s skull. That's evidence of the blow-out. As to the others, one question or challenge at a time, please.

Nope. He is an eye witness. He is not the skull fragment he provided.

 

[Tomtomkent]

NO. Without the Rydberg drawings, the WC had nothing but words. With those drawings, they were able to illustrate to the themselves and to the public a false representation. The entire WC baloney rested upon those fictitious representations, and we have Rydberg's own affirmation of that fact.

Having available to them and choosing to distribute are different things. The choice to make the drawings available in public is not proof autopsy records, including photographs were not in existance.

They had available to them multiple medical witnesses who you claim are a slam dunk to validate the content of the drawing.


Can you name somebody else Robert Prey who is trying to use a drawing from a description after the fact to "prove" a possibly ficticious representation, who has been caught peddling provable lies, and who does not have available to him objective evidence?

One assumes you can supply an objective reason you are more reliable than the WC? Or doyou hold them to a double standard?

 

[HSienzant]

William Pitzer, head of the audio visual Dept.at Bethesda, didn't have to "say" anything. We know he was a witness to a small entry wound in the right temple and a large blow-out in the back of K's head because his associate, Petty Officer Dennis David said they both witnessed it on the cryptic autopsy film they both viewed together. But you can add Petty Officer Dennis David to the list of witnesses who observed the large blow-out in the back of K's head.

See The Men Who Killed Kennedy, at approximately 22:22.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI07govlUqI

Since Pitzer said nothing of the kind, please remove Pitzer from your list. We know now he doesn't belong.

Does Dennis David have a medical background?

This is supposedly a list of medical witnesses who gave statements attesting to a large wound in the back of the head, isn't it?

Hank

 

[JayUtah]

As to the others, one question or challenge at a time, please.

No, this forum has no such rule. But you may ignore whatever you want, to your detriment.

 

[HSienzant]

Billy Harper is better than an eye-witness statement. He brought in the back of k"s skull. That's evidence of the blow-out. As to the others, one question or challenge at a time, please.

Billy Harper never saw the wound, and never said the piece of skull he found was from the back of Kennedy's skull.

We know where Harper found the skull piece (forward of the limo at the time of the head shot) and we can see that piece of skull spiralling up and forward of Kennedy in Zapruder frame 313. It was found on the grassy median between Elm and Main street.

That piece of skull came from the top of Kennedy's head. Not the back of the head. If it came from the back of the head, how did it wind up forward of the car?

Note the diagram in the HSCA documents.

http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0068a.htm

The large piece on the top left of the image is the Harper fragment. It comes from the parietal bone.

The HSCA forensic panel's Dr. Angel determined it was parietal bone.

http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0120a.htm

Here's an article by Dr. Joseph Riley who identifies it as parietal bone.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/harper1.htm

Hank

 

[JayUtah]

NO. Without the Rydberg drawings, the WC had nothing but words.

No. You're inferring what someone must have done rather than pay attention to what actually was done. Can you tell the difference between inference and fact?

 

[HSienzant]

NO. Without the Rydberg drawings, the WC had nothing but words. With those drawings, they were able to illustrate to the themselves and to the public a false representation. The entire WC baloney rested upon those fictitious representations, and we have Rydberg's own affirmation of that fact.

Hello? The autopsists described the location and size of the wounds in their autopsy report. The Warren Commission relied on the autopsy report and the testimony of the autopsy doctors to determine that the shooter was located above and behind the president. The findings of the Warren Commission relied in *no* way on the Rydberg drawings, which were intended to be schematic in nature and illustrative of the general nature of the wounds only.

Since Rydberg had nothing to do with the Warren Commission deliberations or conclusions whatsoever (his drawings were admitted as Warren Commission documents, but Rydberg didn't testify about them in any manner, Dr. Humes did), Rydberg's statements 25 years later in his unsworn newspaper interview have no standing concerning the Warren Commission conclusions. He stated in that article -- falsely -- that the Warren Commission based the location of the wounds on his drawings and that is not true. You won't be able to cite anywhere in the Warren Report where they say that, you won't be able to cite any Warren Commissioner or WC senior or junior counsel saying that, all you have is a statement by a guy who drew a couple of pictures at Dr. Humes direction.

Your claims -- and Rydberg's -- are false.

Rydberg has no standing to be commenting on the Warren Commission deliberations or conclusions. Quoting his beliefs about the Warren Commission conclusions - and what they were supposedly based on - is meaningless. He had as much to do with those determinations as the custodian who emptied the Warren Commission trash daily. Quite simply, Rydberg was just inflating his own importance for that newspaper article, as I stated, and you ignored.

And of course, the HSCA did review the autopsy photos and x-rays, and did confirm the Commission got that right - the shooter that struck both men fired from behind and above the President and they confirm the Commission's conclusion that all those shots were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald from the sniper's nest window.

Hank

 

[BazBear]

And Robert, before you bring up Spector's memo again, you might want to remember that it was a memo written during the investigation (and one taken out of context of any other correspondence), not a finding of the commission, as a reading of the actual report makes plain.

The fact that the report relies on the expert testimony of the autopsy doctors...and not Rydberg's drawing...indicates to me that the concerns put forward in Spector's memo were taken seriously. Not that this has stopped the CT crowd from erroneously saying the commission relied on the drawing; ironically Spector hit the nail on the head with that concern.

 

[Robert Prey]

Hello? The autopsists described the location and size of the wounds in their autopsy report. The Warren Commission relied on the autopsy report and the testimony of the autopsy doctors to determine that the shooter was located above and behind the president. The findings of the Warren Commission relied in *no* way on the Rydberg drawings, which were intended to be schematic in nature and illustrative of the general nature of the wounds only.

Since Rydberg had nothing to do with the Warren Commission deliberations or conclusions whatsoever (his drawings were admitted as Warren Commission documents, but Rydberg didn't testify about them in any manner, Dr. Humes did), Rydberg's statements 25 years later in his unsworn newspaper interview have no standing concerning the Warren Commission conclusions. He stated in that article -- falsely -- that the Warren Commission based the location of the wounds on his drawings and that is not true. You won't be able to cite anywhere in the Warren Report where they say that, you won't be able to cite any Warren Commissioner or WC senior or junior counsel saying that, all you have is a statement by a guy who drew a couple of pictures at Dr. Humes direction.

Your claims -- and Rydberg's -- are false.

Rydberg has no standing to be commenting on the Warren Commission deliberations or conclusions. Quoting his beliefs about the Warren Commission conclusions - and what they were supposedly based on - is meaningless. He had as much to do with those determinations as the custodian who emptied the Warren Commission trash daily. Quite simply, Rydberg was just inflating his own importance for that newspaper article, as I stated, and you ignored.

And of course, the HSCA did review the autopsy photos and x-rays, and did confirm the Commission got that right - the shooter that struck both men fired from behind and above the President and they confirm the Commission's conclusion that all those shots were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald from the sniper's nest window.

Hank

Factually incorrect:

"The Committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that president John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy."

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm

 

[Robert Prey]

Billy Harper never saw the wound, and never said the piece of skull he found was from the back of Kennedy's skull.

We know where Harper found the skull piece (forward of the limo at the time of the head shot) and we can see that piece of skull spiralling up and forward of Kennedy in Zapruder frame 313. It was found on the grassy median between Elm and Main street.

That piece of skull came from the top of Kennedy's head. Not the back of the head. If it came from the back of the head, how did it wind up forward of the car?

Note the diagram in the HSCA documents.

http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0068a.htm

The large piece on the top left of the image is the Harper fragment. It comes from the parietal bone.

The HSCA forensic panel's Dr. Angel determined it was parietal bone.

http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0120a.htm

Here's an article by Dr. Joseph Riley who identifies it as parietal bone.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/harper1.htm

Hank

The first diagram mimics Ryberg's fictional drawing. The Harper Fragment, where ever someone claims it was found, was positively identified as coming from the back of K's head:

* Over and over again Dr. Boswell told HSCA investigators that BONE WAS MISSING FROM THE BACK OF THE HEAD. He added that they only had part of the rear entry wound until late in the night when pieces of skull arrived from Dallas and one of them was found to have the other part of the rear entry wound--IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD. om Dallas!

* The famous Harper fragment, which was blown from President Kennedy's skull during the shooting, was identified by at least two doctors soon after the assassination as occipital bone, i.e., as coming from the back of the head. Dr. Jack Harper, whose nephew found the fragment, told HSCA investigators that "the consensus of the doctors who viewed the skull fragment was that it was part of the occipital region." One of those doctors was the chief pathologist at Methodist Hospital, Dr. A. B. Cairns. Dr. Cairns firmly identified the fragment as occipital bone.

http://www.kenrahn.com/jfk/the_critics/griffith/Important_New_Disclosures.html

 

[A'isha]

Factually incorrect:

"The Committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that president John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy."

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm

Uh, no...completely factually correct.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm

"A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

1. President Kennedy was struck by two rifle shots fired from behind him.

2. The shots that struck President Kennedy from behind him were fired from the sixth floor window of the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository building.

3. Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle that was used to fire the shots from the sixth floor window of the southeast comer of the Texas School Book Depository building.

4. Lee Harvey Oswald, shortly before the assassination, had access to and was present on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building.

5. Lee Harvey Oswald's other actions tend to support the conclusion that he assassinated President Kennedy."

 

[Robert Prey]

Since Pitzer said nothing of the kind, please remove Pitzer from your list. We know now he doesn't belong.

Does Dennis David have a medical background?

This is supposedly a list of medical witnesses who gave statements attesting to a large wound in the back of the head, isn't it?

Hank

You are grasping for non-existent loopholes and parsing words. Pitzer shot the film that he viewed along with Dennis David. That's make him a witness to the large blow-out in the back of the head. Since Dennis David was his associate, that makes them both medical photographers and therefore, both belong on the list of witnesses with a medical background.

 

[Tomtomkent]

You are grasping for non-existent loopholes and parsing words. Pitzer shot the film that he viewed along with Dennis David. That's make him a witness to the large blow-out in the back of the head. Since Dennis David was his associate, that makes them both medical photographers and therefore, both belong on the list of witnesses with a medical background.

Can you provide him saying what he saw instead of what others say he saw? As at the moment you are providing assumption, not a witness.

Can you provide evidence of his medical qualifications, to show he has a medical background instead of being a photographer who happens to have photographed something for others to use in a medical field.

Indeed is he qualified to make any medical assessment at all?

Also: you will note once again the WC acknowledged a "blow out" at the rear of the head. Provide a reason to believe this is not what is described.

 

[Robert Prey]

Uh, no...completely factually correct.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm

"A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

1. President Kennedy was struck by two rifle shots fired from behind him.

2. The shots that struck President Kennedy from behind him were fired from the sixth floor window of the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository building.

3. Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle that was used to fire the shots from the sixth floor window of the southeast comer of the Texas School Book Depository building.

4. Lee Harvey Oswald, shortly before the assassination, had access to and was present on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building.

5. Lee Harvey Oswald's other actions tend to support the conclusion that he assassinated President Kennedy."

The HSCA also concluded a more than one gunman "conspiracy" as previously cited.

 

[HSienzant]

Factually incorrect:

"The Committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that president John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy."

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0005a.htm

They believed another gunman on the knoll shot at but missed the president. Their conclusions does not contradict what I wrote:

"And of course, the HSCA did review the autopsy photos and x-rays, and did confirm the Commission got that right - the shooter that struck both men fired from behind and above the President and they confirm[ed] the Commission's conclusion that all those shots were fired by Lee Harvey Oswald from the sniper's nest window."

My statements were not factually incorrect. They were absolutely correct, and you are just lying again, Robert.

Unless you are stating that what follows your "Factually incorrect:" is what is actually factually incorrect.

Then you're telling the truth, as there was no other gunman, and that HSCA conclusion was wrong.

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

You are grasping for non-existent loopholes and parsing words. Pitzer shot the film that he viewed along with Dennis David. That's make him a witness to the large blow-out in the back of the head. Since Dennis David was his associate, that makes them both medical photographers and therefore, both belong on the list of witnesses with a medical background.

Please post the evidence that Pitzer shot any film - still or motion - of the autopsy. I'm not aware he was even at the autopsy.

Ditto for Dennis David. What do you have that either - or both - of these men were at the autopsy other than the word of Dennis David?

Here's the most complete JFK autopsy listing I know:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy#Personnel_present_during_autopsy

What's your source for the claim these two men had anything to do with the autopsy?


Hank

 

[A'isha]

The HSCA also concluded a more than one gunman "conspiracy" as previously cited.

Who didn't manage to hit Kennedy. All the shots that hit Kennedy, as determined by the HSCA, came from behind and were most likely fired by Oswald from the 6th floor of the Book Depository.

 

[Wolrab]

The first diagram mimics Ryberg's fictional drawing. The Harper Fragment, where ever someone claims it was found, was positively identified as coming from the back of K's head:

* Over and over again Dr. Boswell told HSCA investigators that BONE WAS MISSING FROM THE BACK OF THE HEAD. He added that they only had part of the rear entry wound until late in the night when pieces of skull arrived from Dallas and one of them was found to have the other part of the rear entry wound--IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD. om Dallas!

* The famous Harper fragment, which was blown from President Kennedy's skull during the shooting, was identified by at least two doctors soon after the assassination as occipital bone, i.e., as coming from the back of the head. Dr. Jack Harper, whose nephew found the fragment, told HSCA investigators that "the consensus of the doctors who viewed the skull fragment was that it was part of the occipital region." One of those doctors was the chief pathologist at Methodist Hospital, Dr. A. B. Cairns. Dr. Cairns firmly identified the fragment as occipital bone.

http://www.kenrahn.com/jfk/the_critics/griffith/Important_New_Disclosures.html

Really? Do you read these things before posting?