There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat

[Michael Walton]

Right. Glad this thread helped you and you probably saw months ago I totally disagree with it.  Still do. He takes a shot in the throat, then the back shot lurches him forward.  That's what I see anyway. And Perry, who touch his body trying to save him, said the exact same thing. Here's a video I made about it:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc

I have to go by what I see and what Perry said.  He was a medical doctor who'd been around and seen many gunshot wounds. Plus the back wound terminated so they couldn't have lined up.  Thus, that's my conclusion.

Ashton was so ####ed at my rebuttal he threatened, like the XXXX he is, to sue the EF so they told me to leave him alone - ha.

[Michael Clark]

24 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Right. Glad this thread helped you and you probably saw months ago I totally disagree with it.  Still do. He takes a shot in the throat, then the back shot lurches him forward.  That's what I see anyway. And Perry, who touch his body trying to save him, said the exact same thing. Here's a video I made about it:

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc

I have to go by what I see and what Perry said.  He was a medical doctor who'd been around and seen many gunshot wounds. Plus the back wound terminated so they couldn't have lined up.  Thus, that's my conclusion.

Ashton was so ####ed at my rebuttal he threatened, like the XXXX he is, to sue the EF so they told me to leave him alone - ha.

I usually avoid bullets and photos because they become contentious. However, I always had a problem with how the perps could have fired a bullet through the windshield, the SS guy, Connally, and Hit JFK in the throat. And, I couldn't see how the perps would have planned to do so, and from where? And, unlike the TSBD or the GK, no one says a bullet came from there, nor did anyone see someone that could have. So, this worked for me.

Regarding Ashton, it's clear that he is not trying to make any on-line forum friends. I think that is unfortunate. But, I think that on-line relationships are relatively new, and we are all getting better at it. He is obviously an immensely skilled wordsmith, and intelligent. Perhaps the evolution of e-manners will allow him to feel safe trading in the quill-pen for a felt-tip.

Cheers,

Michael

[Michael Walton]

You might want to check out I think on Kennedys and King there's a story on there where they recreated and used a nighttime laser beam from the knoll area and it appears that the throat shot was likely.  I know what you mean about it possibly being impossible. But the shot had to have come from somewhere and there's no evidence of a shot hitting him in the lower part  of his rear skull and the bone or fragment breaking off and coming out of the throat.  To me that just seems way too implausible. Look at the back autopsy photo and his back neck and lower skull area are clean.

I know we have our own thoughts on this case.  For me I have to go with something that seems plausible.  Watching the Z film seems to do it for me as well as the medical doctor (Perry) who was right on top of him at the hospital.

As for Gray, you may want to read this. I don't agree with everything Speer writes but he's written some outstanding, well-thought-out pieces about the case where as Gray may not even be Gray but someone else entirely. Speer's writing on exposing Dale "Fred and Barney" Myers's fake JFK animation is one of my favorite pieces. Check it out if you have not done so already.

 

 

[Paul Brancato]

Did they recover the bullet that hit him in the throat?

Edited March 31, 2017 by Paul Brancato

[Michael Clark]

37 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

Right. Glad this thread helped you......

And, Michael, as a kind of psychology lesson / side-note, I found something that I could not see when I was previously so sure that JFK was putting his hands up to his throat. I asked myself: "Then, what the hell is he doing!". I then watched the Z film over and over and I discovered that, after he initially pulled his hands up, he tapped his right upper chest several times, before the head-shot.

Then my conspiratorial mind kicked in and determined that the perp-observers observed, and reported ahead, that JFK visibly reached for his throat. At that point, some throat wound was necessary and was duly provided. The "technicians"' and ultimately the WC had to work with all of that. This was the zygote of the SBT.

Cheers,

Michael

[Michael Clark]

1 hour ago, Michael Walton said:

You might want to check out I think on Kennedys and King there's a story on there where they recreated and used a nighttime laser beam from the knoll area and it appears that the throat shot was likely.  I know what you mean about it possibly being impossible. But the shot had to have come from somewhere and there's no evidence of a shot hitting him in the lower part  of his rear skull and the bone or fragment breaking off and coming out of the throat.  To me that just seems way too implausible. Look at the back autopsy photo and his back neck and lower skull area are clean.

I know we have our own thoughts on this case.  For me I have to go with something that seems plausible.  Watching the Z film seems to do it for me as well as the medical doctor (Perry) who was right on top of him at the hospital.

As for Gray, you may want to read this. I don't agree with everything Speer writes but he's written some outstanding, well-thought-out pieces about the case where as Gray may not even be Gray but someone else entirely. Speer's writing on exposing Dale "Fred and Barney" Myers's fake JFK animation is one of my favorite pieces. Check it out if you have not done so already.

 

 

Thanks Michael, I did read that. In fact, I am the last person to have posted to it.

Unfortunately, (and this is why I never did, nor will I, post some of my most basic questions) asking questions or countering basic precepts has a striating domino effect. 

Questioning the throat wound, and especially, questioning that there was one at all, puts not only the official story but all other alternative and connected ancillary theories and explanations in jeopardy. You send everyone scattering, even if none of them are in any kind of agreement. This is why, IMHO, you end up with a cadre or members who begin to cry fake!, foul!, stooge!, Disinformant!.

So, I give Ashton the benefit of the doubt, and cudos for courage, and lament the fact that a person has to steel himself so, against the throngs, to the point of isolation.

To be sure, I mentioned "the benefit of the doubt"; I do not, and have no reason, to doubt him. To be sure, I do not doubt his sincerity; his theory is a theory.

Cheers,

Michael

Edited March 31, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Sandy Larsen]

On 2/9/2016 at 1:36 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

Version: 4 Date: 2/9/16

Location of the Throat Wound -- Early Testimonies

Version: 5 Date: 4/25/17 (Changes shown in red.)

1. Behind the Tie Witnesses

Dr. Charles Carrico (WC Testimony)

DR. CARRICO: There was a small wound, 5- to 8-mm. in size, located in
the lower third of the neck, below the thyroid cartilage, the Adams apple.

MR. DULLES: Will you show us about where it was?

DR. CARRICO: Just about where your tie would be.

MR. DULLES: Where did it enter?

DR. CARRICO: It entered?

MR. DULLES: Yes.

DR. CARRICO: At the time we did not know --

MR. DULLES: I see.

DR. CARRICO: The entrance. All we knew this was a small wound here.

MR. DULLES: I see. And you put your hand right above where your tie is?

DR. CARRICO: Yes, sir; just where the tie...

MR. DULLES: A little bit to the left.

DR. CARRICO: To the right.

Carrico seems to be saying that the neck wound is behind the tie. And Dulles seems to be attempting to lead his testimony elsewhere... above the tie.

Dr. Kemp Clark (WC Testimony)

Mr. SPECTER. And let me read for the record and for you this excerpt.

"On his part according to the New York Times of November 27, 'Dr. Kemp Clark, who signed the Kennedy death certificate, declared that a bullet hit him right where the knot of his necktie was.' He added," apparently referring to you, " 'this bullet penetrated into his chest and did not come out'. The surgeon went on to say that .the second wound of the President was 'tangential' and that it had been caused by a bullet which hit 'the right side of his head' "

Dr. Clark, my first question is--what, if anything, did you say to a New York Times representative or anyone, for that matter, with respect to whether a bullet hit the President where the knot of his necktie was.

Dr. CLARK. I remember using the phrase to describe the location of a wound in the President's throat as being at the point of his knot of his necktie. I do not recall ever specifically stating that this was an entrance wound, as has been said before. I was not present when the President arrived and did not see this wound. If any statement regarding its entrance or exit was made by me, it was indicating that there was a small wound described there by the physicians who first saw the President.

So Dr. Clark was relying upon what he heard from the other doctors when he reported that the throat wound was behind the necktie's knot.

SSA Roy Kellerman (WC Testimony)

SPECTER: ...Did you observe any hole in the clothing of the President on the front part, in the shirt or tie area?

KELLERMAN: No, sir.

SPECTER: From your observation of the wound which you observed in the morgue which you have described as a tracheotomy, would that have been above or below the shirtline when the President was clothed?

KELLERMAN: It would have been below the shirtline, sir.

This testimony seems definitive. But could someone really be able to tell where the tracheotomy would be relative to a neck shirtline when there is no shirt in place? (If the death stare photo shows the true location of the tracheotomy, I would say yes.)

2. Above the Shirtline Witnesses

Currently there are no known early testimonies of the wound being above the shirtline.

 

 

Notes

Carrico's Later Reversal

Harold Weisberg on his Interview of Dr. Charles Carrico (Post Mortem, pp. 375-376)

"Carrico was the first doctor to see the President. He saw the anterior neck wound immediately. It was above the shirt collar. Carrico was definite on this. . . . when I asked if he saw any bullet holes in the shirt or tie, he was definite in saying ‘No.’ I asked if he recalled Dulles’s question and his own pointing to above his own shirt collar as the location of the bullet hole. He does remember this, and he does remember confirming that the hole was above the collar, a fact hidden with such care from the (Warren) Report."

This seems to contradict what Carrico stated before the WC (above). Could Carrico have changed his mind? (Note: The interview took place some time between 1967 and 1975.)

I checked to see if Carrico's testimony changed over the years regarding the gaping wound in the occipital region. I found that it did NOT change up through the HSCA hearings. But some time between then and 1981 it did change... dramatically. In a June 21, 1981 Boston Globe article, investigative reporter Ben Bradlee wrote, "Carrico was not Interviewed by The Globe, but in a letter sent in response to questions, he said the official tracing [i.e. the Ida Dox drawing] of the autopsy photograph showed "nothing incompatible" with what he remembered of the back of the head." I suspect he changed his testimony upon seeing the Ida Dox photo, which shows no gaping wound on the back of the head.

Because of Carrico's history regarding the rear gaping wound, we know that he was willing to change his testimony under the right circumstances. I suspect he changed his testimony about the location of the neck wound once he realized that the SBT could not have occurred unless the exit wound was above the tie and shirtline. Because he had seen no hole through the tie.

LATER ADDITION: One other thing about Dr. Carrico's testimony: James Gordon mentioned in another thread (Post 29) that Carrico was actually in Trauma Room 2 with Governor Connally when JFK arrived at Trauma Room 1 and began having his clothes removed by nurse Diane Bowran. So there is some doubt as to what he actually saw regarding the location of the throat wound. Note, however, that Tom Neal questions what Gordon said in that thread (Post 45).

 

[Sandy Larsen]

I currently have three documented cases of witnesses saying the throat wound was located behind the necktie. But none saying that the wound was above the shirtline. (I'm considering only early testimonies... WC era.)

I've been told that the following testified that the wound was above the shirtline. But so far nobody has provided references to back these up.

• Nurse Audrey Bell
• Nurse Margaret Henchliffe
• Nurse Diana Bowron

 

 

Edited April 26, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Version: 5  Date: 4/25/17

 

Location of the Throat Wound -- Early Testimonies

Version: 6  Date: 4/25/17 (Changes shown in red.)

1. Behind the Tie Witnesses

Dr. Charles Carrico (WC Testimony)

DR. CARRICO: There was a small wound, 5- to 8-mm. in size, located in
the lower third of the neck, below the thyroid cartilage, the Adams apple.

MR. DULLES: Will you show us about where it was?

DR. CARRICO: Just about where your tie would be.

MR. DULLES: Where did it enter?

DR. CARRICO: It entered?

MR. DULLES: Yes.

DR. CARRICO: At the time we did not know --

MR. DULLES: I see.

DR. CARRICO: The entrance. All we knew this was a small wound here.

MR. DULLES: I see. And you put your hand right above where your tie is?

DR. CARRICO: Yes, sir; just where the tie...

MR. DULLES: A little bit to the left.

DR. CARRICO: To the right.

Carrico seems to be saying that the neck wound is behind the tie. And Dulles seems to be attempting to lead his testimony elsewhere... above the tie.

Dr. Kemp Clark (WC Testimony)

Mr. SPECTER. And let me read for the record and for you this excerpt.

"On his part according to the New York Times of November 27, 'Dr. Kemp Clark, who signed the Kennedy death certificate, declared that a bullet hit him right where the knot of his necktie was.' He added," apparently referring to you, " 'this bullet penetrated into his chest and did not come out'. The surgeon went on to say that .the second wound of the President was 'tangential' and that it had been caused by a bullet which hit 'the right side of his head' "

Dr. Clark, my first question is--what, if anything, did you say to a New York Times representative or anyone, for that matter, with respect to whether a bullet hit the President where the knot of his necktie was.

Dr. CLARK. I remember using the phrase to describe the location of a wound in the President's throat as being at the point of his knot of his necktie. I do not recall ever specifically stating that this was an entrance wound, as has been said before. I was not present when the President arrived and did not see this wound. If any statement regarding its entrance or exit was made by me, it was indicating that there was a small wound described there by the physicians who first saw the President.

So Dr. Clark was relying upon what he heard from the other doctors when he reported that the throat wound was behind the necktie's knot.

SSA Roy Kellerman (WC Testimony)

SPECTER: ...Did you observe any hole in the clothing of the President on the front part, in the shirt or tie area?

KELLERMAN: No, sir.

SPECTER: From your observation of the wound which you observed in the morgue which you have described as a tracheotomy, would that have been above or below the shirtline when the President was clothed?

KELLERMAN: It would have been below the shirtline, sir.

This testimony seems definitive. But could someone really be able to tell where the tracheotomy would be relative to a neck shirtline when there is no shirt in place? (If the death stare photo shows the true location of the tracheotomy, I would say yes.)

2. Above the Shirtline Witnesses

Currently there are no known early testimonies of the wound being above the shirtline.

 

 

Notes

Dr. Carrico's Later Reversal

Harold Weisberg on his Interview of Dr. Charles Carrico (Post Mortem, pp. 375-376)

"Carrico was the first doctor to see the President. He saw the anterior neck wound immediately. It was above the shirt collar. Carrico was definite on this. . . . when I asked if he saw any bullet holes in the shirt or tie, he was definite in saying ‘No.’ I asked if he recalled Dulles’s question and his own pointing to above his own shirt collar as the location of the bullet hole. He does remember this, and he does remember confirming that the hole was above the collar, a fact hidden with such care from the (Warren) Report."

This seems to contradict what Carrico stated before the WC (above). Could Carrico have changed his mind? (Note: The interview took place some time between 1967 and 1975.)

I checked to see if Carrico's testimony changed over the years regarding the gaping wound in the occipital region. I found that it did NOT change up through the HSCA hearings. But some time between then and 1981 it did change... dramatically. In a June 21, 1981 Boston Globe article, investigative reporter Ben Bradlee wrote, "Carrico was not Interviewed by The Globe, but in a letter sent in response to questions, he said the official tracing [i.e. the Ida Dox drawing] of the autopsy photograph showed "nothing incompatible" with what he remembered of the back of the head." I suspect he changed his testimony upon seeing the Ida Dox photo, which shows no gaping wound on the back of the head.

Because of Carrico's history regarding the rear gaping wound, we know that he was willing to change his testimony under the right circumstances. I suspect he changed his testimony about the location of the neck wound once he realized that the SBT could not have occurred unless the exit wound was above the tie and shirtline. Because he had seen no hole through the tie.

LATER ADDITION: One other thing about Dr. Carrico's testimony: James Gordon mentioned in another thread (Post 29) that Carrico was actually in Trauma Room 2 with Governor Connally when JFK arrived at Trauma Room 1 and began having his clothes removed by nurse Diana Bowron. So there is some doubt as to what he actually saw regarding the location of the throat wound. Note, however, that Tom Neal questions what Gordon said in that thread (Post 45).

Nurse Diana Bowron's Later Testimony

A letter allegedly written in 1993 by Nurse Bowron to Harrison Livingstone is floating around the internet. In the letter Bowron says "I turned his head back and saw an entry wound in the front of the throat." This occurred in the limousine, prior to when Kennedy's shirt was opened up. This of course implies that the wound was above the shirtline.

However, it directly contradicts what Bowron said in her WC testimony:

Mr. SPECTER - And what, in a general way, did you observe with respect to President Kennedy's condition?
Miss BOWRON - He was very pale, he was lying across Mrs. Kennedy's knee and there seemed to be blood everywhere. When I went around to the other side of the car I saw the condition of his head.
Mr. SPECTER - You saw the condition of his what?
Miss BOWRON - The back of his head.
Mr. SPECTER - And what was that condition?
Miss BOWRON - Well, it was very bad---you know.
Mr. SPECTER - How many holes did you see?
Miss BOWRON - I just saw one large hole.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you see a small bullet hole beneath that one large hole?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you notice any other wound on the President's body?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.
   o
   o
   o
Mr. SPECTER - While the doctors were working on President Kennedy, did you ever have any opportunity to observe his neck?
Miss BOWRON - No; I didn't, until afterwards.
Mr. SPECTER - Until after what?
Miss BOWRON - Until after they had pronounced him dead and we cleaned up and removed the trach tube, and indeed we were really too shocked to really take much notice.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you ever see his neck prior to the time you removed the trach tube?
Miss BOWRON - No, sir.

 

[Ray Mitcham]

Neck does not equal throat. She may have thought he meant the back of th neck.

And why would Dulles want to show the wound above the tie ?

Edited April 26, 2017 by Ray Mitcham

[Michael Walton]

Larsen, does it really matter? Watch the Z film and decide for yourself.

It's  clear he reacts to a throat shot then lurches forward from the force of the back shot.

If we're  to  believe  the "flurry of shells" that the SS agent described, with dented chrome and cracked glass, then it's  certainly  plausible  the throat  wound was doable from the  front, despite  the ambiguity  of the witness statements.

Further his chest was facing  JBC but his neck was turned  to  the  right (look at Bronson photo  for proof). It doesn't  make  sense for a back wound to be bouncing  around  in his body and popping  out of his throat.

[Sandy Larsen]

10 hours ago, Michael Walton said:

Larsen, does it really matter?

It matters to those searching for the truth. Rather than believing what one wants to believe.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

14 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Neck does not equal throat. She may have thought he meant the back of the neck.

And why would Dulles want to show the wound above the tie ?

In American English, the neck is the part of a person's body connecting the head to the rest of the body.

Of course, it is possible that Nurse Bowron thought Specter meant the back of the neck. Or the sides. Or the front. Anything is possible. But I would think that, as a nurse, she would understand that the word "neck" refers to the whole structure.

But ultimately that is all irrelevant, as she also said she saw no other wound beside the large one on the head.

 

[Michael Walton]

Your version of the truth and my version will never reconcile.  So there's that. Aren't you the same "researcher" who believes in the ridiculous Harvey and Lee nonsense? And that you saw one of the old guys down on the steps holding a black pistol, but then tried to make it a joke to worm your way out of your nonsense? There's such a thing as plausible truth and "truther" truth and I know which one you fall under.

Edited April 26, 2017 by Michael Walton