Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
James DiEugenio

Chesser/Mantik cut from Mock Trial

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, Chris Davidson said:

Or,

You could show someone filming from the side, someone getting shot from the front and watch the brain matter exit the rear. Which we fail to see on the extant Z film.

 www.flickr.com/photos/83590696@N06/24895373188/in/shares-DH7266

Thank you, Chris.

The way these people are carrying on about Chesser/Mantik you'd think there was never a case for conspiracy until now.

The clothing evidence and the FBI report on the autopsy prove a conspiracy that Lee Oswald and the MC were not part of.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that you mention it, James, I think the video was part of Robertson's presentation.   I was confusing it with the Chesser  preso. But both maintained it was two head shots I believe. And the Robertson video was the most persuasive evidence I've ever seen on a shot from the front. 

Edited by Mike Kilroy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Mr. Kilroy:

Thanks for those comments.  That was the first Lancer Conference I have missed in several years.

Really glad to hear your reaction.  It was an informational seminar.  

Jenkins is always interesting isn't he?  What a gutsy guy.  If only the other side could shut him up.  I think he is such good witness to all the obstruction in the autopsy room.

Yeah, James, my friends and family were looking for a report on all the "conspiracy nuts" at the conference.  Told them there weren't any.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jenkins was scheduled to appear along with Mike however he had airline problems on the day of the flight and was unable to rebook to make it and ended up not coming...he passed on his apologies for not being able to make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Mike:

Was Jenkins there? Speer says he was a no show.

I think I came in late for the introductions so it may have been Chesser?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks for that.

I always got the impression that Jenkins really liked coming to these conferences.  

Too bad he could not attend. He is always interesting and open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The medical evidence in the JFK murder case is simple to explain.

There are two types of JFK medical material: that which was prepared/maintained/recorded according to proper autopsy protocols.

Then there is evidence which was not prepared according to proper autopsy protocols.

The former we weigh, the latter we dismiss.

Protocol-proper evidence includes: the clothing, Burkley's death certificate signed off as verified, the portion of the autopsy face sheet filled out in pencil and signed off as verified, the neck x-ray, the contemporaneous notes of the Parkland doctors, and the FBI report on the autopsy.

In the FBI report there was an indication of pre-autopsy surgery to the head -- renders all the head wound/s evidence irrelevant since the possibility of pre-autopsy surgery cannot be discounted.

The evidence not prepared/maintained/recorded according to proper autopsy protocol are: the autopsy photos (which have no chain of possession, to boot), the measurements written in pen on the autopsy face sheet, the description of the back wound location in the final autopsy report.

So we can throw out everything related to the head wound/s and the autopsy photos.

It's long past time to cut to the chase, folks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

At the Houston mock trial, the prosecution was allowed to repeat two mantras to impact the jury:

1.) There was no evidence of any other weapons in Dealey Plaza except the MC bolt action rifle.

2.) There was no hard evidence of any shots from the front.

Anyone with the rudimentary facts of the case could demolish these claims.

Charles Barkley once said of basketball beat writers -- "The more they watch the game the less they understand it."

Same goes for JFK assassination researchers -- the more they study the case the less they understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blah, blah blah Cliff.

 Ice bullet and shallow back wound.

 Yawn.

This is your idea of "demolishing" those points.  The prosecution would have had a lot of fun with those points.

Did you plan of showing "The Matrix"? Which is what you have tried to pass off on forums as evidence.

How about subpoenaing Keanu Reaves as an expert witness?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, one of the really neat things about the JFK community is how they openly welcome new and, in some ways, revolutionary evidence :P.

Mike Chesser is a neurologist who has visited the Archives and studied the X rays at length.  He has been practicing for a number of years.

I opened up this thread to discuss his new work.

But there are people who are so intent on grinding their own ancient axes that they appear  to resent new work like Chesser's.  Have these people been to NARA?  Have they written Paul Kirk?  Have they taken detailed notes on what is there?  Do they have the training and background to do a study like Mike did?

As far as I can see the answers to those questions are: no, no, no, and no.  In other words they have no first person experience to comment on Mike's work, pro or con.  So their comments are really a distraction or diversion from the main point.

From the field that I come from, historical study, I was taught to always value new discoveries and research. Test it yes, but after that value it.  This kind of work usually weighed more than what we call interpretive studies. The latter was usually done without benefit of new facts or evidence. The best work, of course, was that which combined both. But the revision was reliant upon  the new evidence or facts.  This is how we know today, for one example, that JFK was not going into Vietnam. 

Chesser's work is too new to set as that kind of milestone. It needs informed comment from people in that field or related fields.  Hopefully that will happen.  For certain personal agenda reasons, some people do not want it to happen here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Blah, blah blah Cliff.

 Ice bullet and shallow back wound.

 Yawn.

How is a shallow back wound a yawn?

It exonerates Oswald, since such a wound couldn't have been caused by a 6.5mm FMJ

 

49 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is your idea of "demolishing" those points.  The prosecution would have had a lot of fun with those points.

Like how?

All of the properly prepared evidence is consistent with that conclusion -- it is massively corroborated.

49 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Did you plan of showing "The Matrix"? Which is what you have tried to pass off on forums as evidence.

An explanation for why millennials are more given to the "government shi* that dissolves" scenario than boomers.

Does nuance regularly escape you?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

BTW, one of the really neat things about the JFK community is how they openly welcome new and, in some ways, revolutionary evidence :P.

What's the pity is the JFK community's inability to fully learn the lessons of the old evidence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

What's the pity is the JFK community's inability to fully learn the lessons of the old evidence.

 

I thought I'd take advantage of the rare occasion we are in agreement, Cliff.

I recently took a look at some old evidence--the statements and testimony of the people known to have been in the depository before and after the shooting and discovered that, much as the clothing evidence, which did in fact demonstrate there was more than one shooter, this statements and testimony of these witnesses demonstrated that some unidentified person who was not Oswald took an elevator down from an upper floor just after the shooting.

It kinda blew my mind. I mean, why wasn't this a focus of the early researchers? Or the media?

 

Edited by Pat Speer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×