Jump to content
The Education Forum

Pat Speer

Moderators
  • Content Count

    5,755
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About Pat Speer

  • Rank
    Moderator

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

56,390 profile views
  1. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    To get back on topic, pretty much the only thing Jenkins has been consistent about over the years is that he saw the body brought in and that there was no "pre-autopsy" performed by Humes or anyone else. In this new book, moreover, he makes it clear that he thinks the back wound photo Cliff claims is fake is probably legit, but that the location of the wound is distorted by the position of the body. So that's two pet theories he puts out in the rain...
  2. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    Baloney, Cliff. No one on this forum has done more to expose the "location and nature of JFK's wounds" than I. I have long agreed with you that the clothing evidence disproves the single-bullet theory. But that's not enough for you. You insist that I also agree with you that the autopsy photos are fakes. This makes no sense to me. The photos are both consistent with the wounds described in the autopsy protocol, and proof of more than one shooter. While it's theoretically possible "they" would fake the photos in such a manner, it doesn't really make much sense that they would do so.
  3. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    It's appropriate that you use the word trump in that sentence, seeing as it is an alternative fact made up to support an untenable position. It is a fact fact that doctors as a rule defer to the findings of pathologists, and that pathologists as a rule rely upon autopsy photos, and that autopsy photos are considered legit if the man ordering them (Humes) and/or the man taking them (Stringer) say they represent the body as they recall seeing it. It is also a fact fact that no court of law in the history of the country has ever held up a report written by a sometimes observer of an autopsy (such as Burkley) over that of the doctors actually performing the autopsy. As far as my "assumptions" I read Rush to Judgment in the 80's, and became a "conspiracy theorist". I watched Stone's JFK a few times when it came out, and pretty much believed it. I bought The Killing of the President in '93 or so. Years passed. I then stumbled across a CD-Rom with the Zapruder film, the Warren Report and Crossfire on it. This re-ignited my interest. This led me, then, to read High Treason 1 and 2, and Best Evidence. I was at this time (2003 or so) a dyed-in-the-wool CT, who thought a lot of the evidence was fake. But which evidence? Groden thought the photos were faked. Lifton thought the body had been altered. There was no consensus. I then read Case Closed and spent a few weeks wondering if it was really just Oswald, after all. I started spending a lot of time online, reading articles on McAdams site and following the arguments on websites such as aaj, Lancer, and this one. I had a strong feeling there was something wrong with the official story, but was uncertain whether the medical evidence was fake or not. This led me then--after being a CT for the better part of 20 years or more--to take a step back, and wonder..."supposin' the evidence is legit--what does it actually show--NOT what people claim it shows? What does it actually truly show? According to the textbooks and medical journals? I then spent roughly three years FULL TIME and another five years or so part-time reading every bit of testimony related to the medical evidence, and every relevant article I could find online, or at the UCLA Bio-med Library that could help shed a light on what happened. And this led me to conclude...that it's not really that complicated. The eyewitness evidence, medical evidence and photographic evidence clearly suggests there was more than one shooter. Proves it, even.
  4. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    What? In The Men Who Killed Kennedy, he depicts the wound as residing at the top right side of his head above his ear. The drawings, however, depict the wound at the level of the ear on the far back of the head. That's apples and oranges, dogs and cats, The White House and The Statue of Liberty. That's about as inconsistent as one can be. As far as the throat wound...I write about this in detail on my website. The Parkland doctors all thought the wound looked like an entrance. But emergency room doctors are trained to withhold judgement on these things, as there are circumstances in which an exit can look like an entrance.
  5. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    Thanks for helping me make my point about McClelland, Cory. Here's McClelland in 1988, in The Men Who Killed Kennedy, depicting the location of the large head wound. It was on the top right side of the head, and barely overlaps, if it does indeed overlap, with the wound location depicted in his more recent drawings. The man is inconsistent, at best.
  6. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    No, he didn't. The historical record is all we have, Sandy, and it is quite clear in that McClelland initially said the wound was of the temple, and that there was nothing about it to suggest the shot came from the front. Like it or not, this is a major blow to the widespread belief there was a "blow-out" wound low on the back of Kennedy's head.
  7. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    Nonsense, Cliff. For years, I thought the back of the head photo was faked in some way to hide that there was a wound low on the back of the head. I did so UNTIL I began researching the case full-time and realized the irrefutable fact that many if not most of the conspiracy theorists to write about the medical evidence have grossly misrepresented the statements and/or credibility of the so-called Parkland witnesses, and have pretended these witnesses supported the accuracy of the so-called McClelland drawing, when they actually did not. To bring this back to topic, moreover, it should be noted that, with his new book, James Jenkins has changed his recollections of the head wound location to a more agreeable location to these conspiracy theorists.
  8. Pat Speer

    James C Jenkins - JFK Autopsy Pathologist

    McClelland did not fill out a death certificate. But he has said an awful lot of stuff at odds with what most CTs presume he has said. And in this regard, he's not unlike Jenkins, who moved the large head wound to the back of the head for his book. From Chapter 18d at patspeer.com. The McClelland Dilemma PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL ADMISSION NOTE DATE AND HOUR Nov. 22, 1963 4:45 P.M. DOCTOR: Robert N. McClelland Statement Regarding Assassination of President Kennedy At approximately 12:45 PM on the above date I was called from the second floor of Parkland Hospital and went immediately to the Emergency Operating Room. When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea. An endotracheal tube and assisted respiration was started immediately by Dr. Carrico on Duty in the EOR when the President arrived. Drs. Perry, Baxter, and I then performed a tracheotomy for respiratory distress and tracheal injury and Dr. Jones and Paul Peters inserted bilateral anterior chest tubes for pneumothoracis secondary to the tracheomediastinal injury. Simultaneously Dr. Jones had started 3 cut-downs giving blood and fluids immediately, In spite of this, at 12:55 he was pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark the neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery who arrived immediately after I did. The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. He was pronounced dead after external cardiac message failed and ECG activity was gone. Robert N. McClelland M.D. Asst. Prof. of Surgery Southwestern Med. School of Univ of Tex. Dallas, Texas (Note: in this, his earliest statement on the assassination, Dr. McClelland reveals that he was easily confused and prone to speculation. First of all, he gets himself all turned around and mistakenly says there was a wound in the left temple. He says nothing of a wound on the back of the head or behind the ear. As but one head wound was noted at Parkland, and as no competent doctor would mention a wound he did not see while failing to mention the one he did, it seems probable McClelland meant to say this wound was of the right temple, not left. Now, hold it right there, some might be thinking. How do we know McClelland didn't see a small wound on the left temple? Well, first, there are his subsequent statements. And second, there are the words of Parkland nurse Diana Bowron, who told Harrison Livingstone in 1993: "When we prepared the body, I washed as much blood as I could from the hair; while doing this, I did not see any other wound either in the temples or in other parts of the head." Well, there it is. NO small entrance wound was noted by the doctors or nurses at Parkland. In light of the fact many conspiracy theorists cite McClelland as the most reliable of the Parkland witnesses, McClelland's next statements are even more intriguing. McClelland was the prime source for the 12-18-63 article by Richard Dudman published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, in which the Secret Service's visit to the Parkland doctors, and its attempt to get them to agree Kennedy's throat wound was an exit, was first revealed. And yet McClelland told Dudman that after being told of the wound on Kennedy's back "he and Dr. Perry fully accept the Navy Hospital’s explanation of the course of the bullets." And yet he told Dudman "I am fully satisfied that the two bullets that hit him were from behind." And yet he told Dudman "As far as I am concerned, there is no reason to suspect that any shots came from the front." Repeat...NO reason to suspect any shots came from the front... That's right...in the very article most conspiracy theorists believe first exposed the government's cover-up of Kennedy's wounds, Dr. McClelland, the man they consider the most credible of the Parkland witnesses, spelled out--and made CRYSTAL CLEAR--that he did not think the large head wound he observed was an exit wound on the far back of the head. This is confirmed yet again by the first article on the wounds published in a medical journal. Three Patients at Parkland, published in the January 1964 Texas State Journal of Medicine, was based upon the Parkland doctors' 11-22 reports, and repeated their descriptions of Kennedy's wounds and treatment word for word. Well, almost. In one of its few deviations, it changed Dr. McClelland's initial claim Kennedy was pronounced dead "at 12:55" to his being "pronounced dead at 1:00." This was an obvious correction of an innocent mistake. In what one can only assume was another correction of an innocent mistake, moreover, it re-routed Dr. McClelland's initial claim "The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple" to the more acceptable "The cause of death, according to Dr. McClelland was the massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the right side of the head." Right side of the head. Not back of the head. While some might wish to believe the writer and/or editor of this article took it upon himself to make this change without consulting Dr. McClelland, and that he'd changed it to fit the "official" story, the fact of the matter is there was NO official story on the head wounds at this point, beyond the descriptions of the wound in the reports of McClelland's colleagues published elsewhere in the article. And these, in sum, described a wound on the back of the head. It seems likely, then, that McClelland himself was responsible for this change. In any event, on March 21, 1964, Dr. McClelland testified before the Warren Commission. In contrast to his earlier statements, he now claimed: “As I took the position at the head of the table that l have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered ... the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out.” Note that McClelland specifies both that he was at the head of the table helping out with the tracheotomy when he examined Kennedy's head wound, and that this put him in position to closely examine the wound. Here is Figure PR10.1, "Position for Tracheotomy", from the textbook Emergency Medicine (edited by Harold May, 1984): This closely mirrors the position on the slide above. Note that in order to expose the neck the head is tilted sharply backwards in the tracheotomy position. So how in the heck could McClelland 1) closely examine a wound low on the back of Kennedy's head while Kennedy was in such a position and he (McClelland) was standing at the head of the table? and 2) claim his standing at the head of the table put him in "such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound"? McClelland's words only make sense if the wound he was observing was on the front half of Kennedy's head. It seems likely then that McClelland, as Clark, was confused by the rotation of Kennedy’s head. And it seems just as likely McClelland is not the man many if not most conspiracy theorists assume him to be. Notes on a 12-1-71 interview of McClelland by researcher Harold Weisberg reveal that McClelland "volunteered at some length about Garrison's men, describing Garrison as a psychopath, and seemed proud that he had talked them out of calling him as a witness...McC was quite bitter about Garrison and Lane, but he was without complaint about Specter and the Warren Commission..." So there it is. Dr. Robert McClelland--whom many conspiracy theorists believe an unshakeable truth-teller--was a supporter of the Warren Commission's for years and years after the assassination--to such an extent even that he refused to cooperate with Jim Garrison's attempts to re-open the case. Well, is it any wonder then that McClelland, while continuing to insist he saw a wound on the back of Kennedy's head, repeatedly defended the legitimacy of the autopsy photos? And that he told the producers of the television show Nova in 1988 that "I find no discrepancy between the wounds as they're shown very vividly in these photographs and what I remember very vividly?" And is it any wonder then that in both his Nova appearance and ARRB testimony McClelland ventured that the back of the head photo depicts sagging scalp pulled over a large occipito-parietal wound? Now this is strange indeed. Scalp overlying explosive wounds to the skull does not stretch and sag, it tears. No such tears were noted on the back of Kennedy's head at autopsy, and none are shown in the autopsy photos whose legitimacy McClelland defends. And it's not as if NOVA was the end of McClelland's strange ride...in which he defended the authenticity of the autopsy photos, while describing wounds at odds with the autopsy photos. A May 19, 1992 Newsday article by Steve Wick for which Dr. Humes was interviewed--and in which Humes claimed there was no conspiracy and all the shots came from the rear--also featured some quotes from McClelland, in which he similarly argued those claiming there was an exit wound on the back of Kennedy's head were mistaken. McClelland told Newsday: "I saw the wound more closely than anybody...There was a massive wound on the back rear portion of his head. There's no way you can tell, based on a wound that size, which way he was shot." I mean, McClelland is as erratic as can be. Where he once assured journalists suspecting shots came from the front that "there is no reason to suspect that any shots came from the front," and where he later told researchers he'd created a drawing in which an exit wound behind Kennedy's right ear was depicted, he now tells crowds --such at that at the 2013 Wecht conference--that 1) "the whole right side of his skull was gone;" 2) the appearance of this wound--and not its location--suggested it was an exit wound; 3) it was Kennedy's response to this shot in the Zapruder film that convinced him the shot came from the front...and 4) he'd never been pressured into lying about Kennedy's wounds! The man's recollections are just not reliable.
  9. Pat Speer

    Jim Garrison vs Fred Litwin

    Don't be silly, David. IF the red splotch by the cowlick on the BOH photo was an obvious entrance wound, it would have been identified as such by the autopsy doctors in their reviews of the photos, and by the doctors viewing the photos over the last 25 years. But no, instead, virtually everyone to view the photos of late, including your fellow LNs Zimmerman, Sturdivan, Lattimer, and Cummings, has sided with the original observations of the autopsy doctors, i.e., that the entrance wound was near the EOP. So why the change by the Clark Panel and HSCA FPP? When you study their statements, it's clear they couldn't find a path through the brain connecting the EOP and the top of the head, and reasoned therefore that the entrance must have actually been at the top of the head, where they found a red splotch on the photos. The problem, of course, was that this splotch was neither "slightly above" the EOP, nor 1 inch to the right of the EOP, as measured at autopsy. Oh well, we can always claim they were incompetent...better that than, gulp, admit what the Justice Dept. has hired us to refute--that the evidence suggests more than one headshot.
  10. Pat Speer

    Jim Garrison vs Fred Litwin

    Wrong. When you actually read the statements and testimony of men like Clark, Spitz, Petty and Baden, it's clear they believed the brain photos proved a bullet hadn't entered near the EOP and exited from the top of the head. And that this led them to conclude the bullet exiting high must have entered high. Well, think about it. They realized the evidence suggested more than one head shot, and opted to claim the autopsy doctors were mistaken about the EOP entry, rather than admit this fact.
  11. Does anyone know if this will be put up online? I have been unable to attend any events this year due to a fractured kneecap.
  12. Pat Speer

    More truths that are forever quashed!

    It's a conspiracy myth that Powers changed his statements at the request of the FBI. O'Donnell probably. But Powers no. I compiled quote after quote on this matter on my website. From patspeer.com, chapter 5b. Kenneth O’Donnell, a Kennedy assistant, rode in the back-up car in the middle seat behind the driver. (5-4-64, 6-4-64, 8-6-64, and 11-23-64 interviews with William Manchester, as represented in The Death of a President, 1967) (Manchester's narration for the aftermath of the shooting) "In the jumps seats, Ken O'Donnell and Dave Powers have heard the sickening impact of the fatal bullet, and Dave has seen it. O'Donnell crosses himself. Powers whispers 'Jesus, Mary, and Joseph...'" (5-4-64, 6-4-64, 8-6-64, and 11-23-64 interviews with William Manchester, regarding the possibility Kennedy was killed by Texas oilmen, as represented in The Death of Lancer, the original draft of The Death of a President, as quoted in an article by Edward Jay Epstein in the July 1967 issue of Commentary Magazine) "They did it. I always knew they'd do it. You couldn't expect anything else from them. They finally made it." (5-18-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 7H440-457) “We turned—I remember the overpass. And then the shots occurred--which, at that time, I did not know were shots. My first impression was it was a firecracker. And then either somebody said “He has been hit,” or I noticed the slump—he had been waving out the right side of the car and I noticed him slump over toward Mrs. Kennedy, and I realized then that they had been shots. But as fast as that realization occurred, I saw the third shot hit.” (When asked how close the back-up car was to the limousine) “My guess would be 5 to 8 feet…I would presume they were just about turning to step up the speed a little bit, because there would be no crowds from there. (When asked if the Secret Service car had completed its turn onto Elm Street) “My recollection is they had, just about. I don’t recollect a separation of this nature. It was a slight sloping turn, as I remember, and I thought we were right together.” (When asked what Kennedy was doing with his hands prior to the time of the shooting) “He was waving. We had just left the mass of crowds. But as we turned on the grass plot, there were four or five people there, and I believe he waved to them.” (When asked how many shots he heard) “Three” (When asked the time span of the shots) “I would say 5-6 seconds.” (When asked if the shots came in a pattern) “Yes. The first 2 came almost simultaneously, came one right after the other. There was a slight hesitation, then the third one.” (Asked his reaction) “My reaction is in part a reconstruction and is that they came from the right rear. That would be my best judgment.” (When asked how others reacted) “The agents all turned to the rear…I would think watching the President when the shot—the first shots hit—that it would be automatic it would have to have come from the rear. (When asked again about the agents’ reactions) “The reaction I note would be right rear. And again, looking at the manner of the President’s movement I would think you would have to feel the thrust of the shot was from the right rear…He was leaning out waving. He may have just been withdrawing his hand. And the shot hit him, and threw him to the left. He slumped on Mrs. Kennedy. (When asked which shot this was) “It was not the third shot. Whether it was the first or second, I would not know…If I had to pick one of the two, I think it might have been the second shot.” (A 1968 conversation with Congressman Tip O'Neill, as recounted in O’Neill’s autobiography Man of the House, 1987) “I was surprised to hear O’Donnell say that he was sure he had heard two shots that came from behind the fence. 'That's not what you told the Warren Commission,' I said. 'You're right,' he replied. “I told the FBI what I had heard, but they said it couldn't have happened that way and that I must have been imagining things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn't want to stir up any more pain and trouble for the family…The family--everybody wanted this thing behind them.” (Johnny We Hardly Knew Ye, co-written with Dave Powers, published 1972) "I had just finished speaking when we heard shots, two close together and then a third one. There must have been an interval of at least five seconds before the third and last shot because, after the second shot, Dave said to me, "Kenny, I think the President's been shot." I made a quick sign of the cross and said "What makes you think that?" "Look at him!" Dave said. "He was over on the right, with his arm stretched out. Now he's slumped over toward Jackie, holding his throat." While we both stared at the President, the third shot took the side of his head off. We saw pieces of bone and brain tissue and bits of his reddish hair flying through the air...I said to Dave, "He's dead." (6-15-75 article in the Chicago Tribune. This article reported that a source within the CIA had told the Church Committee that Kennedy aides Kenneth O'Donnell and David Powers had been pressured by the FBI into leaving their suspicions that shots came from the front out of their statements. It also quoted O'Donnell's response to this allegation.) "The story is an absolute lie," O'Donnell declared in a phone interview. "I'm not accusing the reporter, but whoever gave that story is lying. It's an absolute, outright lie." (Later in the article) "I spent four hours before the commission and my testimony is quite clear," O'Donnell said in the phone interview. "I told them exactly what I saw. I was in charge of the whole operation so I know what happened. I arranged the whole trip..."I testified under oath and I stand by it." O'Donnell recalled he told the Warren Commission he heard two shots, the first of which he initially thought was a firecracker. Both came from behind, he said. And Powers, O'Donnell said, recalled hearing three shots, all from the same direction. He denied that either he or Powers ever had suspicions that the shots came from anywhere but the depository. Further, O'Donnell asserted he was never pressured or asked to change or omit anything from his testimony, either by the FBI or CIA. "I met with them every day (while working for President Johnson on the investigation)" O'Donnell said. "Not one of them ever even raised the question.They worked for me. I didn't work for them." (Interview with O'Donnell's son, Kenneth O'Donnell, Jr. by David Talbot, as reported in Brothers, published 2007) (On the source of the shots heard by his father) "He said there was fire from two different directions." (Quoting his father on his father's impressions of the Warren Commission) "I'll tell you this right now, they didn't want to know"...(It was) "the most pointless investigation I've ever seen." Analysis: from his jumping to the third shot in his testimony, it seems likely that O’Donnell decided that the “firecracker” he heard was in fact two separate shots. His subsequent statements that the first two shots rang out "simultaneously" and "one after another," and that there was a space of five seconds before the head shot, confirm this suspicion. That the quickness of these first two shots troubled O'Donnell, furthermore, is suggested by his subsequent recollection that he'd only testified to hearing two shots.His testimony that he thought Kennedy may have been hit by the second shot--a shot fired only a split second after the first shot, mind you--is therefore of little help to the LPM scenario. It is, in fact, an argument against it. More concretely, O'Donnell's recollection that Kennedy was waving to a small group of people at the time he was hit, and that this happened near a "grass plot," suggests the first shot was heard around frame 190. Since Powers later confirmed O'Neill's recollection about O'Donnell's impression of the source of the shots, moreover, we should suspect O'Donnell's denial of this to the Chicago Tribune in 1975 was, in fact, a lie. His misrepresentation of Powers' impression of the shots--that they all came from behind, when Powers from the earliest claimed he'd had an impression the final shot came from the front--suggests, unfortunately, that he was not above such behavior. First shot hit 190. First two shots may have been bunched. David Powers, another Kennedy assistant, rode in the middle seat to the right of O’Donnell. (4-8-64, 8-10-64, 10-21-64, 3-17-65, and 5-24-65 interviews with William Manchester, as reported in the TV documentary "The Kennedy Assassination: 24 Hours After," 2009) "I am looking at the Presidential car. His hand was waving and now he put his hands slowly to his throat and slumps towards Jackie. And I say to Kenny 'I think the President's been hit.' Kenny and I not only saw the next one we heard it. We just saw that handsome head get blown off. We heard the shot and we heard the impact of the shot. It was the most sickening thing--like a grapefruit being thrown against a brick wall...At Parkland, I ran up to the Presidential car. His eyes were open. I opened the door and said 'Oh, my God, Mr. President!' I almost expected him to say 'I'm alright' because he never complained. A fragment of the bullet had come out of his forehead. I still get an ache in my head like a toothache where he was hit. I suppose it's just nerves." (4-8-64, 8-10-64, 10-21-64, 3-17-65, and 5-24-65 interviews with William Manchester, as represented in The Death of a President, 1967) (On his response to the first shot) "Powers, in Halfback's right-hand jump seat, shouted at O'Donnell, 'I think the President's been hit!'" (Manchester's narration for the aftermath of the shooting) "In the jumps seats, Ken O'Donnell and Dave Powers have heard the sickening impact of the fatal bullet, and Dave has seen it. O'Donnell crosses himself. Powers whispers 'Jesus, Mary, and Joseph...'" (On whether or not Rufus Youngblood actually climbed into the back seat of LBJ's car, or simply turned around, as purported by Senator Ralph Yarborough) "Dave Powers, who glanced back, confirms the Senator." (5-18-64 affidavit, 7H472-474): “the first shot went off and it sounded to me as if it were a firecracker. I noticed then that the President moved quite far to his left after the shot from the extreme right hand side where he had been sitting. There was a second shot and Governor Connally disappeared from sight and then there was a third shot which took off the top of the President’s head and had the sickening sound of a grapefruit splattering against a wall…My first impression was that the shots came from the right and overhead, but I also had a fleeting impression that the noise appeared to come from the front in the area of the triple overpass.” (A 1968 conversation between Ken O'Donnell and Tip O’Neill recounted in O'Neill's memoir Man of the House, 1987) “I was surprised to hear O’Donnell say that he was sure he had heard two shots that came from behind the fence. 'That's not what you told the Warren Commission,' I said. 'You're right,' he replied. 'I told the FBI what I had heard, but they said it couldn't have happened that way and that I must have been imagining things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn't want to stir up any more pain and trouble for the family…The family--everybody wanted this thing behind them.' Dave Powers was with us at dinner that night, and his recollection of the shots was the same as O’Donnell’s. Kenny O'Donnell is no longer alive, but during the writing of this book I checked with Dave Powers. As they say in the news business, he stands by his story.” (5-13-76 interview on WGBH TV, as quoted in L.A. Free Press Special Report Number 1: JFK Murder Solved, published 1976) "If the bullet that wounded the President was not the same bullet that wounded John Connally, and I testified that it wasn't, and John Connally testified that it wasn't, then there would have had to be more than one assassin." (11-19-78 UPI article found in the Reading Eagle) "'I was in the Secret Service car,' said Powers, 'Me and Kenny O'Donnell. When I saw the first bullet hit him as he was waving, I turned to Kenny and said 'My God, they've shot our president.' Kenny blessed himself. Then I saw the second bullet hit the back of his head...' and the voice trails off into silence. Then, very softly, Powers adds, 'Every day I think about it. Every day I get a pain in the back of my head where I saw the president get hit.'" (A 1980 conversation with Gary Mack, as recounted in a series of emails from Mack to John McAdams, posted online by John McAdams, 4-9-03) "Powers told me he and O'Donnell both thought one of the shots might have come from the front. When they told the FBI, the agents didn't take them seriously. Dave was quite insistent on that." (In a follow-up email posted by McAdams at the same time, Mack clarified) "Powers may have told me one or two of the shots might have come from the front--my note to you was not taken from any notes I took at the time. This was a long conversation we had by phone around 1980. Powers told me they didn't know that shots came from the front, just that they thought one or two might have. He never said or hinted they were intimidated to change their story or to keep quiet. But they were disappointed that no one they told the story to seemed very interested in what they thought." (11-20-83 article by Thomas Farragher on Powers found in the New London, Connecticut Day) "The time the first shot was fired, I was 7 yards away from the President. I'm looking at the President. The Secret Service are trained to look elsewhere. And he had been waving to the people on the right side. His hand was way over. And I saw him bring his hand in and then fall toward Jackie. Now a bullet travels faster than the speed of sound. So I saw this happening and then I heard that noise at the same time that I would have thought was a firecracker. But I didn't see the President react that way and I turned to Ken O'Donell (another JFK aide). He's in the jump seat beside me. And I said 'Ken, our President has been shot.' And I remember Kenny made the sign of the cross. I believe that the second shot hit John Connally, and then while we're riding, we're praying. 'You see it's happening behind the agent driving the car--Bill Greer. Great guy. Loved the President. And we're doing about 12 mph but it's happening behind him and he's not aware of it. It seemed to me it was about five seconds from the shot that wounded the President and the one that killed him.'" (5-30-87 AP article featuring an interview with Powers found in The Evening News) "On November 22, 1963, Powers was in the car directly behind Kennedy's when he heard two shots ring out in succession and saw the President slump down. Then, a few moments later, a third shot ripped open the President's head." (8-31-87 AP article by Christopher Callahan on Tip O'Neill's just published claims about O'Donnell and Powers, found in the New London, Connecticut paper The Day) "Powers, in a telephone interview last week, said O'Neill's version is incorrect. Powers, curator of the JFK Library in Boston, said he did not want to address O'Neill's points directly. 'It's too painful to talk about,' said Powers." (Interview in 1988 TV documentary JFK: The Day The Nation Cried) "Coming down from that short flight from Fort Worth to Dallas, I'm talking to the President and Jackie in the back of the plane and I said 'Mr. President, you wave to the Texans on the right, and Jackie'll wave to the ones on the left.' And this is exactly what's happening when the first shot was fired... I had heard the noise. I'm looking at the President at the same time, and he had pulled his hand up toward his throat and he fell over toward Jackie. There's a second shot, and now Governor Connally is out of sight. The first two sort of came close together, but now we're riding and praying. And now we see the shot that hit the President in the head." (Interview with Charles Kuralt broadcast on CBS, November 1988) (When asked if President Kennedy would still be alive if Bill Greer put the limo's pedal to the floor after the first two shots) "Yes, the President would be alive today, and he would be 71 years old, and he'd be a director here" (meaning the JFK Library). (6-5-91 interview with Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann, as recounted in Ultimate Sacrifice, 2005) "We were shocked when Dave Powers, head of the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library in Boston and a close aide to JFK, vividly described seeing the shots from the 'grassy knoll.' Powers said he and fellow JFK aide Kenneth O'Donnell clearly saw the shots, since they were in the limo right behind JFK. Powers said they felt they were 'riding into an ambush'-- explaining for the first time why the driver of JFK's limo slowed after the first shot. Powers also described how he was pressured to change his story for the Warren Commission." (11-7-91 article in the L.A. Times) "I heard the first shot, positively above and behind me," says Powers, who was riding behind Kennedy's car. 'I'm looking at the President like I always did, and I saw him bring his hand in and kind of fall toward Jackie. I said 'Our President's been shot!' and now I see that terrible thing that hit the President on the head, and you never talk about it,' he says, his voice tightening. 'And now the car begins to accelerate.'" (Interview broadcast in CBS program Who Killed JFK: the Final Chapter?, 11-19-93) "I looked at my watch and it was exactly 12:30 Texas time... And then I heard the first shot... I'm looking right at the President and he had his right hand out waving to the people, and now he had pulled it in and it's up around his neck, and he had fallen toward Jackie. And I said "I think our President's been shot." Analysis: as the leftward shift of the President noted by Powers as a response to the first shot occurred just after frame 190, it is clear he felt the first shot occurred at this time and that it struck Kennedy. His appraisal of the second shot is far less clear. While he indicated this shot came shortly after the first, he also claimed the gap between the first and third shots was but five seconds and that he'd talked to O'Donnell just after the first shot. O'Donnell, as we've seen, heard no shots between Powers' comments on the first "firecracker" sound, and the head shot. This suggests that Powers was talking to O'Donnell when he thinks the second shot was fired, and that he didn't actually hear this shot. His statements to Manchester certainly suggest as much, for there he described but two bursts of gunfire. Powers' associating the second shot with Connally's disappearing from sight, which did not occur till just before the head shot, moreover, suggests that he wasn't sure when he heard a third shot, and only tried to make sense of it later. Since Powers associated the second shot with an occurrence just before the head shot, moreover, he may also have heard the last two shots bunched together, and then moved the second shot closer to the first so he could correlate his recollections with O'Donnell's. Although O'Donnell clearly lied about his own impression of the shots, that Powers' original statement suggests there may have been a shot from the front, suggests that neither of them were actually pressured to change their impression. It seems likely then that O'Donnell changed his story on his own, for reasons all his own. That Powers told Waldron he'd been pressured into changing his story as well, however--when his story doesn't appear to have actually been changed--outside his addition of a shot that hit Connally--is indeed a bit curious. Perhaps he'd said they were uninterested in what he had to say, and Waldron had misinterpreted or misrepresented his words. Or perhaps Powers was simply exaggerating. First shot hit 190-224. Possibly heard but two shots. Last two shots possibly bunched together.
  13. Pat Speer

    Where is the exit?

    If it's her, there's a problem. When interviewed by the sixth floor museum, Calloway told a quite different story. I'm sorry I missed you at Lancer. You've shared a lot of material with others over the years. And it's much appreciated.
  14. Pat Speer

    Where is the exit?

    I'm fairly certain that's not a 12 inch ruler.
  15. Pat Speer

    Where is the exit?

    Thanks for proving my point, Sandy. Aguilar's list is grossly misleading. Dr. Jenkins, Dr. Carrico and Dr. Perry would come to claim they'd been mistaken about seeing cerebellar tissue. While Dr. Clark never admitted he was mistaken, he befriended single-assassin theorists such as Lattimer, and complained to the press about conspiracy theorists. This makes it hard to believe he felt sure there was a huge blowout on the back of the head. This brings us to McClelland, whose initial statement claimed the wound was "of the left temple." It's not a mistake that Gary skipped over this statement. Gary was compiling statements at odds with the official story, yes, but he gave the mistaken impression these statements were consistent and suggested a wound low on the back of the head. When asked to point out the location of this wound, however, very few of the witnesses pointed to a wound low on the back of the head. It didn't add up. This led me to take a closer look, and eventually write the chapters on my webpage which blew up this myth (the myth of a blow-out wound low on the back of the headl.
×