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

[Mark Stapleton]

Manchester writes (p.267) "The throat wound--which was then assumed to be an entry wound, because there was no time to turn him over--was small, and it exuded blood but slowly."

So, in order to narrow down the time at which the throat wound was sustained (assuming Ashton is right about the piercing needle/dart), then it is necessary to determine whether the shirt collar and tie were bloodstained (stains on other parts of JFK's shirt notwithstanding). I point out here that I don't know, but I would assume/hope Ashton, Pat or other experts would know.

In the absence of bloodstains on the relevant parts of the collar and tie, it could be reasonably assumed that the throat wound was sustained after JFK's clothes had been removed-- "it exuded blood but slowly". Looking again at the photo of JFK which Ashton provided in post #100 and in particular its location vis-a-vis the collar and tie (despite the fact that it shows the wound after Dr. Perry's incisions), it seems most likely to me that blood from the wound would have stained those items of clothing.

*********************

Mark:.....

Here are some photos for you....

Also Dr.Burkley arrived five minutes after the President ..in his own words....and no he never mentions a frontal or

neck wound...

It had to disappear....from what I have read...it had to be a particle from the rear, not a frontal shot...

that would have meant a conspiracy......of course.......He wrote this up on the 23rd....

B.....

Bernice,

Thanks for those photos. Too much blood, of course. I thought an absence of staining around the necktie and collar area may have lent efficacy to the premise that any wound sustained by JFK a la Ashton's theory may have been sustained after removal of his clothes.

The nick in the tie and the slits in the shirt are interesting.

[Mark Stapleton]

Which begs the question of personnel overlap in the JFK and LHO treatment procedures -- including, in the latter's case, first responders within reach of the target during its transit from police HQ to Parkland.

The fact that LHO received intense physical manipulation en route -- an ostensibly resuscitative effort that resulted in the exacerbation of internal bleeding -- is widely known.

Charles

Indeed.

One of the alluring things about this thread is that it invites the reader to think like a conspirator rather than an outsider trying to solve the unsolvable.

I've always believed the master plan was to get both assassin and assassinated on a slab ASAP. The way LHO was killed might have been a hastily contrived backup plan, but they were going to gun him down whether it was at the Texas Theatre, in custody or while he was on the run on the streets of Dallas. Having a person on standby at Parkland to deliver the coup de gras in both cases would be a necessary precaution when one considers the enormous stakes involved here.

Members should recognise the distinct possibilty that there was something rotten in Parkland, even though it may take time for the picture to become clearer.

Re Burkley, I remain a little skeptical of his witting complicity. At this point, I'm more inclined to agree with the idea that he recognised early on that something was amiss, and concluded that forces far more powerful than himself were involved. Silence, at least publicly, was the most prudent course to follow in the interests of himself and his family.

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton, While I don't find your posts without merit, and I also suspect, strongly, some hanky-panky was going on in the variants of the small bullet entry/small traechotomy in the exact location/gaping chain-saw-cut (both seen and talked-about), etc. However, if one wanted to deliver a coup de grace [which I could EASILY envision] there would be far more subtile and less visible means via injection or addition to IV fluids, etc.

I've considered just such possibilities, Peter. I personally believe that if any such coup de grace were contemplated and effected and it involved the administration of a powerful and fast-acting toxin, those kinds of traditional delivery systems would have been ruled out for a variety of reasons that I'll go into if they don't become apparent by thinking them through.

Why such an obvious 'butchers' method" While I can easily accept [in fact think] a few at Parkland were complicit, NOT ALL were!...and this whatever had to be explained-away in some reasonable way to them.

I agree with your whole sentence. Of course not all could have been complicit. As far as explaining the wound away, if in fact it was made by hand with a piercing implement, it intentionally was made in a way to be consistent enough with bullet wounds that it could be mistaken for one by the few people who got a brief look at it before Perry sliced through it. It was designed to be explained away exactly the way it has been explained away. Its very existence was withheld from the autopsy personnel until it was too late for them to do anything about determining whether it actually was a bullet wound or not.

It does seem to me that the large gaping wound was not administered right away.

No, and I haven't suggested it was. The large gaping wound is the tracheostomy incision that eradicated the evidence of the small round wound that could have been made with a piercing implement, but that has been attributed—falsely—to a bullet or other projectile. I demonstrated in the first post in this thread that the hole could not possibly have been made by a bullet or other projectile, so there certainly has to be some other explanation. I believe that some sort of small round piercing implement is consistent with the facts, and such a device could have been used to deliver a toxin to ensure Kennedy's death.

If, in fact, a tracheal tube was inserted, as I assume it was, the cut would not have killed, I think.

Yes, a tracheal tube was inserted, but I don't quite understand your point. I've never suggested that a cut of any description killed Kennedy. I've said that a small round piercing implement of a size that could have created the original small round throat wound—before the tracheostomy was performed—conceivably could have been used as a method of rapidly injecting a large amount of toxin into Kennedy, while also producing a wound that could be "explained" away as having been a bullet wound.

Ashton

[Ashton Gray]

Ashton,

Are you familiar with George Michael Evica's in-depth investigation of the chest tube issue and the nature of the alleged cut-downs on JFK's torso?

I've read about it but never been able to locate a copy of it, Charles. If you know of its availability, please PM me.

Ashton

[Bill Miller]

This already was demonstrated at the beginning of this year with this animation:

I have one question ... why does the animation bring the suit over JFK's left shoulder over the top of the shadow and not his actual skin which is about 2" lower? Does that not give a false impression as to where the tie would come on neck?

And are there not ample images of JFK's tie in relation to his neck in the motorcade films as he passes by movie cameras and such.

Bill Miller

Edited November 2, 2007 by Bill Miller

[Tim Gratz]

While I certainly find Mr. Gray's scenario fascinating and worthy of examination, I do not THINK my question has been addressed:

The limousine comes to a stop. Half of JFK's head is blown away. It's obvious to anyone that it would take God himself to his life (and despite what they claim, doctors are not gods). So what is the conspirators' plan? They decide to POISON HIM so they stick a small device into his throat that will look like a bullet hole of entrance, thus fueling conspiracy theories for decades.

Now I guess I have to admit: that is a plan so cock-eyed it MUST have been CIA generated!

But I submit: no conspirator smart enough to frame LHO as the patsy would create a scheme which would immediately ruin their lone shooter scenario!

[Chuck Robbins]

Given that the premise of this thread includes, of necessity, the possibility that medical personnel at Parkland hospital may have been witting conspirators in the assassination, and even that one of them might have inflicted the throat wound at Parkland Hospital as a coup de grace to ensure the death of the President and therefore the success of the assassination, I felt it appropriate at this time to post here briefly a list of doctors who worked on both Kennedy and Oswald at Parkland. I am listing them here in the order in which they arrived in Trauma Room One when Kennedy was being treated:

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins (anesthesiologist)

Dr. Malcolm O. Perry

Dr. Charles Rufus Baxter

Dr. Gene Coleman Akin

This list is inclusive, not exclusive.

I place it here because if there were, in fact, witting conspirators among the medical personnel at Parkland to guarantee the death of the President, it stands to reason that just such a guarantee would be needed also for the death of the patsy.

I will mention that in addition to Marion Thomas Jenkins having arrived in Trauma Room One before Perry during the treatment of Kennedy, Jenkins is the sole source of the blatant falsehood of a bullet wound to Kennedy's left temple. Jenkins told Dr. McClelland in Trauma Room One, falsely, that there was such a wound, and McClelland then wrote that into his report later that afternoon without ever having seen such a wound. McClelland later recanted what he had written in that report and admitted that he never had seen any such wound. Jenkins later testified that he only thought there was such a wound. I've covered this with the relevant testimony in a separate thread.

I don't raise this point here to invite dicussion of head wounds in this thread, and I will not respond to discussion of head wounds in this thread. If the reason I raise it here isn't apparent to anyone, I also won't explain to them why I consider it entirely germane to this thread, because they wouldn't get it even if I did.

Ashton

Ashton, is there any information available about prior Military Service for any of these persons?

If so, what branches did they serve in?

Patriotic duty has always been a strong motivational factor when asking, or ordering, someone to "do their duty".

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Very interesting.

EBC

[Tim Gratz]

It can never be one's "patriotic duty" to cover up the murder of a President.

UNLESS, perhaps, the motivation is to prevent a nuclear exchange.

I believe the spectre of Soviet involvement may very well have been a "poison pill" employed by the plotters.

Edited November 2, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[Ashton Gray]

Given that the premise of this thread includes, of necessity, the possibility that medical personnel at Parkland hospital may have been witting conspirators in the assassination, and even that one of them might have inflicted the throat wound at Parkland Hospital as a coup de grace to ensure the death of the President and therefore the success of the assassination, I felt it appropriate at this time to post here briefly a list of doctors who worked on both Kennedy and Oswald at Parkland. I am listing them here in the order in which they arrived in Trauma Room One when Kennedy was being treated:

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins (anesthesiologist)

Dr. Malcolm O. Perry

Dr. Charles Rufus Baxter

Dr. Gene Coleman Akin

This list is inclusive, not exclusive.

I place it here because if there were, in fact, witting conspirators among the medical personnel at Parkland to guarantee the death of the President, it stands to reason that just such a guarantee would be needed also for the death of the patsy.

I will mention that in addition to Marion Thomas Jenkins having arrived in Trauma Room One before Perry during the treatment of Kennedy, Jenkins is the sole source of the blatant falsehood of a bullet wound to Kennedy's left temple. Jenkins told Dr. McClelland in Trauma Room One, falsely, that there was such a wound, and McClelland then wrote that into his report later that afternoon without ever having seen such a wound. McClelland later recanted what he had written in that report and admitted that he never had seen any such wound. Jenkins later testified that he only thought there was such a wound. I've covered this with the relevant testimony in a separate thread.

I don't raise this point here to invite dicussion of head wounds in this thread, and I will not respond to discussion of head wounds in this thread. If the reason I raise it here isn't apparent to anyone, I also won't explain to them why I consider it entirely germane to this thread, because they wouldn't get it even if I did.

Ashton

Ashton, is there any information available about prior Military Service for any of these persons?

If so, what branches did they serve in?

Patriotic duty has always been a strong motivational factor when asking, or ordering, someone to "do their duty".

You ask a very good and pertinent question, Chuck, but I'm woefully short on worthwhile answers.

Perry, after he became a doctor in 1955, spent a year as an intern at Letterman Hospital in San Francisco, then was in the Air Force for two years, sometime in the years 1957 and 1958, stationed in Spokane, Washington. When he got out of the Air Force he went to Parkland Hospital and was there for four years as a general surgeon.

I posted some number of months ago mention of an event that I found at least of some interest regarding Perry, and it piqued my interest primarily because of its time relationship to the "Jolly" West murder-by-LSD of Tusko the elephant—3 August 1962—and the assassination of JFK. In brief, Perry left Parkland about a month after the Tusko event, in September 1962, and went to the University of California at San Francisco for a year to study vascular surgery. He returned to Parkland in September 1963, around the same time that Nurse Diana Bowron—who unquestionably lied about the throat wound—arrived at Parkland from England, purportedly from an employment ad she had found.

The information on Perry comes from the Wikipedia page on him, so you can take it on a "whatever it's worth" basis.

I'd certainly like to see more developed on the backgrounds of these medical personnel, especially, but not limited to, the ones who tended to both Kennedy and Oswald. I don't know when I might get to it, and hope some of the excellent researchers here can add to the storehouse of knowledge on this point.

Ashton

Edited November 2, 2007 by Ashton Gray

[Ashton Gray]

Patriotic duty has always been a strong motivational factor when asking, or ordering, someone to "do their duty".

Chuck, I'm back for a second run at responding to this interesting point you raise, because I believe there are other, more personal methods of "persuasion" that cannot be discounted—especially when considering the possibility of involvement behind the scenes by such amoral scum as CIA operatives (but I repeat myself).

What I'm about to say is nothing but grandly circumstantial, but I still feel it should be taken into account for context:

In 1962—when Perry went to San Francisco—just one of CIA's secret domestic atrocities was the George Hunter White black operation called "Operation Midnight Climax," which had been running in San Francisco since having been moved there from Greenwich Village in 1955.

In this delightful setup, White had a CIA "safe house" operation equipped with one-way mirrors and surveillance gadgets under the aegis of MKULTRA and Dr. Sidney Gottlieb. "Safe houses" had been established around San Francisco, and White had a stable of prostitute drug addicts who would lure men from bars back to the safe houses after their drinks had been spiked with LSD. White then would film the events that ensued. The purported purpose of these "national security brothels" was to enable the CIA to "experiment with the act of lovemaking for extracting information from men." Doncha' know.

If you haven't run off to the loo to puke, I just thought this should be put here as merely one example of the kinds of control operations the criminal cruds at CIA had at their disposal (your tax dollars at work, kids) at relevant times—this one just happening to be running in San Francisco, where Perry was for a year prior to the assassination.

Some other ancillary information that admittedly is a grab-bag, but related to LSD, is that on 23 March 1963, U.S. Patent 2,438,259 for LSD expired, making the formula no longer a secret of Sandoz, Ltd. in Fribourg, Switzerland. Up until that date, CIA had enjoyed something of a functional monopoly on LSD for black ops.

And wouldn't you just know it: very shortly after this patent expiration, the Inspector General of CIA suddenly got a blinding flash of religion, and "discovered" <SPIT!> that [GASP!] some naughty CIA people had been using LSD in unwitting experimentation on humans—but just for "interrogation methods." Doncha' know. <SPIT!>

Of course the rest of the world didn't find out about the CIA Inspector General's grippe of holy morality until much later indeed.

So all the above is dropped into the FWIW* bin. I felt it needed to be said here in relation to possible motive (read: "blackmail") of individuals.

Ashton

*For What It's Worth

Edited November 2, 2007 by Ashton Gray

[Paul Rigby]

I cannot express my contempt for your jejune attempt to hijack this thread…

Dreadful diction: One hijacks planes or treasure, not sinking ships or dreck. And so wildly, characteristically, over-the-top. I simply exposed your claim for the obvious nonsense it was, and is.

…particularly after I've already decimated the bulk of the idiocy you've now spewed here by appropriately replying in the thread you started to peddle your favorite myth…

What a pity you don’t understand the meaning of the verb “to decimate” – then again, only one in ten do.

Or the meaning of hypocrisy.

—in an educational forum—as though it were "fact." <SPIT!>

Now this is a real curiosity, this obsession with expectoration – in an education forum, too. A primitive expression of the will to dominate and/or an expression of contempt, I suppose. It just goes to show, even here, spit happens.

(Oscar Wilde: “In America, life is one long expectoration.” So it would appear.)

I gently tried to bring you to your senses on this issue in that thread, where it was on-topic and appropriate, and I won't stoop to your miserable, pathetic, unprincipled hijacking tactics…

It’s called debate. Get used to it. You’re not in Congress. Or an echo chamber.

And we all know what an Ashton promise is worth…

…but know this: I'll soon be returning to that thread you started, and this time I'm going to finish the job.

Don’t forget your catapult, a decent dictionary, and, most pressingly of all, an adult. You’ll need all three.

Gird your loins, boy. I just took the gloves off.

Surgical or velvet?

P.S. If there's a moderator with integrity, I request that you appropriately move Rigby's grossly off-topic spew* out of this thread and into his thread, where it belongs. Of course I won't be holding my breath.

You don’t say.

*”Spew,” again. All very…oral. Is there a shrink in the house?

[Ashton Gray]

I cannot express my contempt for your jejune attempt to hijack this thread…

Dreadful diction: One hijacks planes or treasure

My dictionary defines "Thread Hijacking" as "the act of trying to steer a web forum discussion thread off topic by discussing a subject entirely unrelated to the subject at hand."

Of course, anyone with a modicum of common sense and decency understands this and doesn't do it. I suppose that's why it's necessary to explain it to you.

Then again, without guttersnipes, we might lose sight of why we attempt to have a civilization at all. But do you get it now? Or would you like me to dumb it down even more and explain it to you publically again? I'll be happy to oblige you.

…particularly after I've already decimated the bulk of the idiocy you've now spewed here by appropriately replying in the thread you started to peddle your favorite myth…

What a pity you don’t understand the meaning of the verb “to decimate” – then again, only one in ten do.

My dictionary defines "decimate" in its first definition as "to destroy a great number or proportion of." What a pity you find yourself amongst the nine out of ten who—according to you—don't understand the meaning of the word. Let's see now: so far that's two terms of common usage that you don't know the meaning of, while assaying to lecture me on them. It seems almost hypocritical.

It's precisely because I've decimated your Fabulous Fable of the Moving Head-Hole in the appropriate thread that you're back over here petulantly attempting—again—to hijack this thread. I notice you haven't responded there, where it would be appropriate and on-topic. I have to assume you haven't because I proved conclusively there to anyone with a central nervous system just how ludicrous the fiction you tried to peddle as "fact" really is, and you have no valid answer, so your only option is to attempt to disrupt this thread as much as you possibly can with another little hijacking tantrum.

Or the meaning of hypocrisy.

My dictionary says: "HYPOCRISY: Paul Rigby." Works for me.

Ashton Gray

[Ashton Gray]

I'm am updating the list of doctors at Parkland hospital who worked on both John F. Kennedy and on Lee Harvey Oswald to include Dr. Ronald Coy Jones. As before, I am listing the doctors in the order they arrived in Trauma Room One the day they worked on Kennedy. Jones arrived with Perry so those two are merely in alphabetical order:

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins (anesthesiologist)

Dr. Ronald Coy Jones

Dr. Malcolm O. Perry

Dr. Charles Rufus Baxter

Dr. Gene Coleman Akin

As before, this list is inclusive, not exclusive.

This list has become of further interest in relation to the thread started by Charles Drago on the chest tubes and cut-downs, so I also am posting it there.

I'll remark in passing that I find it somewhat perplexing that there seems to have been, to date, so little attention given to this question of doctors common to the treatment of both Kennedy and Oswald.

There's more to come on the subject in this thread on the throat wound and in the thread on the chest tubes.

Ashton

[Ashton Gray]

I'm posting yet another update the list of doctors at Parkland hospital who worked on both John F. Kennedy and on Lee Harvey Oswald to include, this time, Dr. Paul Conrad Peters. As before, I am listing the doctors in the order they arrived in Trauma Room One the day they worked on Kennedy. Jones arrived with Perry so those two are merely in alphabetical order:

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins (anesthesiologist)

Dr. Ronald Coy Jones

Dr. Malcolm O. Perry

Dr. Charles Rufus Baxter

Dr. Paul Conrad Peters

Dr. Gene Coleman Akin

As before, this list is inclusive, not exclusive.

Peters says the following in an interview that appeared in the January 1997 issue of JFK/Deep Politics Quarterly:

DR. PAUL PETERS:

[On Sunday, 24 November 1963] I was home, but I was coming out to the school (Medical Center), and so I turned the radio on in my home. About then Dr. Shires, who was professor of surgery, zoomed past my house. I then heard that Oswald had been shot, so I went out to the hospital. I went right into the operating room and stood behind Tom [shires] while he was operating on Oswald. Oswald had what we call a smorgasbord injury. The bullet that killed him hit all the major organs. While they worked on him, no anesthesia was given, but he was unconscious. Oswald started to come around and by then he had been given 14 or 15 units of blood. He begn to move his arm up towards his chest. Secret Service men, dressed in green surgical gowns to mix with the surgeons, were shouting in his ear, "Did you do it, did you do it?" hoping to get him to nod his head or something. But his blood pressure gave way and he died. ...I must have taken 15 or 20 pictures of Tom [shires] operating on Lee Harvey Oswald and a guy came up and identified himself and said, "I'll take the camera." I told him the camera was not mine, that it belonged to the Radiology Department. He said he was going to take it and he said he would give it back. ...I never got the camera back, or the film.

Now, thee and me have no way of knowing whether or not Paul Peters actually spent his time there strolling around capturing Kodak moments, because of course the purported photos became a no-see-um, but I will say this: this list now has become downright spooky (take that any way you want) in relation to the who-and-what of the throat wound discussed in this thread and in relation to research now almost compiled on the who-and-what of the thread started by Charles Drago on the chest tubes and cut-downs, so I also am posting it there.

I find it altogether fitting that this list of doctors who worked on both Kennedy and Oswald was begun on All Hallows Eve.

Ashton