Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
bknight said:
Cite that any photographs, skull fragments and evidence is missing. Not from a CT source but somewhere that has credibility.
Click to expand...

Autopsy participant statements indicate that missing photographs include images of the bruise on the right lung, a close-up of the entry wound in the scalp and/or skull, the interior body, views of the body after it had been prepared for funeral, to name a few. Another oddity of the JFK case is that there is no photograph showing the inside of the large head wound, brain damage and all.

The Harper fragment was last known to be with Dr. Burkley, not with the body as it was being reconstructed for the funeral.

And there's the Secret Service memo which describes "Fragments of bone and hair", and "a quantity of brain tissue" among the blood in the Limousine as it sat in storage: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10482#relPageId=4&tab=page

And, of course, it is just obvious that at least some minute fragments of skull bone got lost in Dealey Plaza or somewhere in the subsequent rides back and forth after the shooting.
 
Last edited:
bknight said:
Cite that any photographs, skull fragments and evidence is missing. Not from a CT source but somewhere that has credibility.
Click to expand...


I always love when CT's trot out the "evidence is missing!!1111!!!" excuse to explain why there's no evidence of their fantasies, especially for the medical evidence.

So, MicahJava, are you going to come right out and accuse Robert Kennedy of being a member of "THEY', or just insinuate it like the rest of the CT's regarding the medical evidence?
 
cmikes said:
I always love when CT's trot out the "evidence is missing!!1111!!!" excuse to explain why there's no evidence of their fantasies, especially for the medical evidence.

So, MicahJava, are you going to come right out and accuse Robert Kennedy of being a member of "THEY', or just insinuate it like the rest of the CT's regarding the medical evidence?
Click to expand...

Um, cmikes, Robert Kennedy never had access to skull fragments. He just could have had access to the brain and some tissue slides. And the only citation for him wanting to dispose of those are the statements of Burke Marshall.

Around the 50th anniversary in 2013, a butchered version of this story made the rounds on just about every major news outlet advertising James Swanson's book End of Days: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy. The book itself is a mediocre Dollar Store re-telling of the official story with a single vague paragraph dedicated to what happened to the brain, none of which mentions the name of Burke Marshall. Weird.
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
Autopsy participant statements indicate that missing photographs include images of the bruise on the right lung, a close-up of the entry wound in the scalp and/or skull, the interior body, views of the body after it had been prepared for funeral, to name a few. Another oddity of the JFK case is that there is no photograph showing the inside of the large head wound, brain damage and all.
Click to expand...

They never photographed the interior of the body. The doctors said they did, but no photographs were ever logged by either photographer. The photographs and x-rays were reviewed again in 1965, they are:

Black and White and Colored Prints and transparencies

Head viewed from above

#5(9JB), 8(7JB), 13(6JB), 16(10JB), 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37

Head viewed from right and above to include part of face, neck,
shoulder and upper chest

#3(14JB), 4(13JB), 11(6JB), 12(5JB), 26, 27, 28, 40, 41

Head and neck viewed from left side
#6(3JB), 15(4JB), 17(2JB), 18(1JB), 29, 30, 31

Head viewed from behind
#7(16JB), 14(15JB), 42, 43

Cranial cavity with brain removed viewed from above and in front
#1(18JB), 2(17JB), 44, 45

Back of body including neck
#9(11JB), 10(12JB), 38, 39

Brain viewed from above
#50, 51, 52

brain viewed from below
#46, 47, 48, 49

The black and white and color negatives corresponding to the
above were present and there were also seven black and white
negatives of the brain without corresponding prints. These were
numbered 19 through 25(JTB) and appeared to represent the same
views as #46 through 52. All of the above were listed in a
memorandum of transfer, located in the National Archives, and
dated Apr. 26, 1965.
Click to expand...

They were still there in 2015 when Randolph Robertson M.D gained access to review them.

Should add that NOBODY in the CT community has ever seen any of these pictures or x-rays.:thumbsup:
 
Axxman300 said:
They never photographed the interior of the body. The doctors said they did, but no photographs were ever logged by either photographer. The photographs and x-rays were reviewed again in 1965, they are:



They were still there in 2015 when Randolph Robertson M.D gained access to review them.

Should add that NOBODY in the CT community has ever seen any of these pictures or x-rays.:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

You are either confused or are trying to confuse others. A: The other autopsy photographs would have been seized before they were catalogued. B: There are no "views" from the official autopsy photograph collection that the public can not see today published as lower quality versions. At least one of every "view" has been leaked to the public. This is excluding the brain photographs and the full X-ray collection.

EDIT: Oh, by the way, a few people in the "CT Community" have indeed seen the full collection, including Cyril Wecht, David Mantik, and Doug Horne.
 
Last edited:
MicahJava said:
Autopsy participant statements indicate that missing photographs include images of the bruise on the right lung, a close-up of the entry wound in the scalp and/or skull, the interior body, views of the body after it had been prepared for funeral, to name a few. Another oddity of the JFK case is that there is no photograph showing the inside of the large head wound, brain damage and all.
Click to expand...

No citations just generic statements. No good.
The Harper fragment was last known to be with Dr. Burkley, not with the body as it was being reconstructed for the funeral.
Click to expand...

If the fragment was in Burkley's possession, then it is not lost. I haven't looked but I suspect this piece was reunited with the body on RFK's instructions.
And there's the Secret Service memo which describes "Fragments of bone and hair", and "a quantity of brain tissue" among the blood in the Limousine as it sat in storage: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10482#relPageId=4&tab=page
Click to expand...

The document indicates pieces of skull and tissue were found in the limo plus additional material not found that caused a decaying odor in the car. Half credit.
And, of course, it is just obvious that at least some minute fragments of skull bone got lost in Dealey Plaza or somewhere in the subsequent rides back and forth after the shooting.
Click to expand...
Possibly, however obvious is not necessarily the adverb I would choose. You did not do to well with your post. You switched tactics in these two post that has not gone unnoticed. First you state that they are missing and then missing from the autopsy. The pieces were examined so yes there were missing from the autopsy, but not from analysis.
 
MicahJava said:
You are either confused or are trying to confuse others. A: The other autopsy photographs would have been seized before they were catalogued.
Click to expand...

No. There was an incident involving a Secret Service agent confiscating a roll of 126 film from someone taking photos who was not authorized to do so. The film was exposed and destroyed on the spot in front of everyone.

I posted the list of photographs, they cover all the damage, and still exist, so even if there were any additional pictures they would be redundant.

B: There are no "views" from the official autopsy photograph collection that the public can not see today published as lower quality versions. At least one of every "view" has been leaked to the public. This is excluding the brain photographs and the full X-ray collection.
Click to expand...

Post all 40 of them here, or post the link to the collection.

Just kidding, you can't.

90% of the autopsy photos and x-rays have not been seen by the public.

EDIT: Oh, by the way, a few people in the "CT Community" have indeed seen the full collection, including Cyril Wecht, David Mantik, and Doug Horne.
Click to expand...

People who make a living peddling CT. Since the photos are confidential we have to take their word for it...or we can take the word of the larger number of experts who found the photos support the truth of Oswald's guilt.:thumbsup:
 
Axxman300 - You are apparently trying to implicitly argue that if only I was an expert who could examine the entire collection of photographs and X-rays, I would think that the official evidence indicates the cowlick entry theory is true. Not true. Forensic pathologist Peter Cummings had access to view the entire autopsy collection, and he thinks the official evidence can be compatible with an entry near the EOP without anything being faked. Peter Cummings also believes that a single shot entered near the EOP and exited the top of the head, but that's another story. The best I can do here, as a non-expert in anything, is establish that the EOP wound existed. I would rather a team of forensic radiologists examine the official X-rays to establish the validity of the cowlick entry theory (although I would tend to think the EOP would existed no matter what, just based on the witness statements, including the problems with the brain removal).
 
MicahJava said:
Axxman300 - You are apparently trying to implicitly argue that if only I was an expert who could examine the entire collection of photographs and X-rays, I would think that the official evidence indicates the cowlick entry theory is true. Not true. Forensic pathologist Peter Cummings had access to view the entire autopsy collection, and he thinks the official evidence can be compatible with an entry near the EOP without anything being faked. Peter Cummings also believes that a single shot entered near the EOP and exited the top of the head, but that's another story. The best I can do here, as a non-expert in anything, is establish that the EOP wound existed. I would rather a team of forensic radiologists examine the official X-rays to establish the validity of the cowlick entry theory (although I would tend to think the EOP would existed no matter what, just based on the witness statements, including the problems with the brain removal).
Click to expand...

None of that matters.

One guy makes a judgement call, so what?

What's the first rule of medicine? Get a second opinion, or a third, or a fourth. There is literally a pathologist for every branch of CT related to this case. Not one was in the room with the body.

What you have yet to do is rule out the 6.5x52mm round as the sole actor, and you can't, and won't.:thumbsup:
 
MicahJava said:
Forensic pathologist Peter Cummings had access to view the entire autopsy collection, and he thinks the official evidence can be compatible with an entry near the EOP without anything being faked. Peter Cummings also believes that a single shot entered near the EOP and exited the top of the head, but that's another story.
Click to expand...

So you're arguing that, despite your lack of expertise, your two-bullet theory is tenable under expert scrutiny, and your sole support for this is an expert who fundamentally disagrees with your two-bullet theory. Do you even realise that quoting authorities who completely disagree with you is not evidence in favour of your arguments?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
So you're arguing that, despite your lack of expertise, your two-bullet theory is tenable under expert scrutiny, and your sole support for this is an expert who fundamentally disagrees with your two-bullet theory. Do you even realise that quoting authorities who completely disagree with you is not evidence in favour of your arguments?

Dave
Click to expand...

Do you think your single bullet entered near the cowlick or near the EOP?
 
Axxman300 said:
None of that matters.

One guy makes a judgement call, so what?

What's the first rule of medicine? Get a second opinion, or a third, or a fourth. There is literally a pathologist for every branch of CT related to this case. Not one was in the room with the body.

What you have yet to do is rule out the 6.5x52mm round as the sole actor, and you can't, and won't.:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

The doctors who were there with the body examined the autopsy collection many times and thought that the photographs and x-rays could be compatible with the EOP wound.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Non-responsive, move to strike. You've quoted an expert opinion that a single bullet entered the skull to try and support your uninformed theory that two bullets entered the skull. It's laughable.

Dave
Click to expand...

Dr. Cummings only based his opinion on the pattern of fractures on the skull apparent on the X-rays. Not on the pattern of fragments, or the brain damage. He also gives no explination behind that trajectory besides saying "bullets deflect upon hitting bone".

So, not sure what you're trying to do by pointing out that Cummings believes it still could've been a single bullet with an entry near the EOP. There's a world of difference between the two locations for the entry wound. EOP has all of the evidence.
 
MicahJava said:
So, not sure what you're trying to do by pointing out that Cummings believes it still could've been a single bullet with an entry near the EOP.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to make you realize that citing an expert who disagrees with you on the most fundamental part of your theory - to wit, the number of bullets that struck Kennedy's skull - doesn't support your argument that your theory is what an expert would be expected to come up with. I can't really see how this is anything but obvious.

Dave
 
MicahJava said:
Dr. Cummings only based his opinion on the pattern of fractures on the skull apparent on the X-rays. Not on the pattern of fragments, or the brain damage. He also gives no explination behind that trajectory besides saying "bullets deflect upon hitting bone".

So, not sure what you're trying to do by pointing out that Cummings believes it still could've been a single bullet with an entry near the EOP. There's a world of difference between the two locations for the entry wound. EOP has all of the evidence.
Click to expand...

Do you have any idea where you were going with your earlier arguments about the difficulty of a head shot then?
 
Dave Rogers said:
I'm trying to make you realize that citing an expert who disagrees with you on the most fundamental part of your theory - to wit, the number of bullets that struck Kennedy's skull - doesn't support your argument that your theory is what an expert would be expected to come up with. I can't really see how this is anything but obvious.

Dave
Click to expand...

Where do you think this single head shot entered?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom