Chesser/Mantik cut from Mock Trial

[Sandy Larsen]

13 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

How is the "surgery of the head, top of the skull" comment cover-up nonsense?

I didn't say that the "surgery of the head" was part of the cover-up. It's the massive wound on the top of the head, instead of the back of the head, that is part of the cover up.

 

13 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

The most common sense simple explanation for that is how the right skull flap in the autopsy photographs kind of looks like a craniotomy incision.

 

We have no idea what that comment was referring to. Lifton, like you, has a theory. And trust me, it has nothing to do with a top-of-head wound.

 

13 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

And the right skull flap being created by the shooting would explain the Zapruder film and why Dealey Plaza witnesses described a wound on the right side of the head. So whatever the agents were there to see, they certainly saw the skull flap, which their drawing does not depict.

 

You're theory is up against the eyewitness testimony of more than 15 medical professionals at Parkland. Borrowing from Cliff's favorite phrase, you're a "Parkland Denier."

 

 

[Sandy Larsen]

13 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

And Cliff V please  don't  say the photos are fake...they're  not.

Okay, so you disagree with Chesser on that.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

The great thing about this teletype is the last line: "...and hole of short depth with no point of exit, no bullet located in the body."

Lee Oswald in the warehouse with a bolt action rifle didn't commit this crime.

 

Edited December 4, 2017 by Cliff Varnell

[Sandy Larsen]

1 minute ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The great thing about this teletype is the last line: "...and hole of short depth with no point of exit, no bullet located in the body."

Lee Oswald in the warehouse with a bolt action rifle didn't commit this crime.

 

 

At that time they were still going with the "bullet fell out of the back wound" idea. And the "EOP bullet came out the top of the head" idea.

 

 

[Micah Mileto]

21 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I didn't say that the "surgery of the head" was part of the cover-up. It's the massive wound on the top of the head, instead of the back of the head, that is part of the cover up.

 

 

We have no idea what that comment was referring to. Lifton, like you, has a theory. And trust me, it has nothing to do with a top-of-head wound.

It's not that hard of a leap of logic. 

21 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

 

You're theory is up against the eyewitness testimony of more than 15 medical professionals at Parkland. Borrowing from Cliff's favorite phrase, you're a "Parkland Denier."

 

 

Just look at the stare-of-death photos. It does indeed look like the occipital is blown out, but it's just an optical illusion. Especially if the head was tilted back, the large head wound would appear to be even further behind the ear. 

[Cliff Varnell]

6 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

At that time they were still going with the "bullet fell out of the back wound" idea. And the "EOP bullet came out the top of the head" idea.

Sure.  But bullets don't fall out of backs, and bolt action 6.5mm FMJ don't leave shallow wounds.

[Micah Mileto]

Just now, Cliff Varnell said:

Sure.  But bullets don't fall out of backs, and bolt action 6.5mm FMJ don't leave shallow wounds.

They could if they were undercharged? 

[Cliff Varnell]

4 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

They could if they were undercharged? 

That presents a problem for the State -- first they say the bullet transited his neck, then they're going to say it was a short load?

Was the shot to the throat from the front a short load too, since there was no point of exit for that either?

And short loads don't explain why there were no bullets in the back/throat.

Edited December 4, 2017 by Cliff Varnell

[Sandy Larsen]

14 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

It's not that hard of a leap of logic. 

 

Well you see, Micah, I am not a Parkland Denier. So I don't have to go around looking for things to support my BOH wound belief.

Maybe you can debate this with Lifton.

 

14 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Just look at the stare-of-death photos. It does indeed look like the occipital is blown out, but it's just an optical illusion. Especially if the head was tilted back, the large head wound would appear to be even further behind the ear. 

There's no way that would fool 15 doctors. With one staring right down into the hole from a distance of 18 inches. And a couple of nurses who prepared the body for delivery. They were handling the body, not looking at a few photos.

Your and Pat's insistence that there was no funny business at the autopsy or with the photos is not serving you guys well. It's forcing you into believing unbelievable things IMO.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

27 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

28 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Sure.  But bullets don't fall out of backs, and bolt action 6.5mm FMJ don't leave shallow wounds.

They could if they were undercharged? 

 

Too bad Robert Prudhumme isn't here. He's an expert with ballistics. The problem with the undercharged idea is that such a bullet would travel slowly, and it would drop a large distance before reaching the target. That's the reason bullets from rifles have to be high velocity. Robert knows where to find calculators that will show  how low the bullet would hit.

 

[Michael Walton]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Okay, so you disagree with Chesser on that.

Sandy - I'm not sure what you mean.  He does not talk about any autopsy photos.  He only talks about the diagrams of the brain, which is a whole other subject and one I'm not interested in at the moment.  

As for the X-ray photos, he says one may be fake and the other isn't. He says the one that isn't is the one that shows the possibility of the hairline entrance in the same area that I pointed out in the HAIRLINE thread.

Also, FWIW in all honesty saying everything here and to is "fake" in this case is a truly lazy way to cop out of the case.  Why? Because when someone goes around saying everything is fake you're really limiting yourself to other possibilities.

[Sandy Larsen]

8 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Okay, so you disagree with Chesser on [some photos being fake].

Sandy - I'm not sure what you mean.  He does not talk about any autopsy photos.  

Yes, he does.

On page 2:

"There is evidence of alteration of the autopsy skull x-rays and of some of the autopsy photographs"

Page 40:

Kemp Clark, M.D.
Handwritten statement of 11-22-63: “…there was a large wound in the right occipitotemporal region, from which profuse bleeding was occurring….. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound.”

("Occipito" and "cerebellar" refer to the bone and brain tissue at the lower back of the head.)

Page 47:

The evidence was altered:
• The brain photographs
• The x-rays
• The autopsy photographs of the back of the head

 

 

8 minutes ago, Michael Walton said:

He only talks about the diagrams of the brain, which is a whole other subject and one I'm not interested in at the moment.  

As for the X-ray photos, he says one may be fake and the other isn't. He says the one that isn't is the one that shows the possibility of the hairline entrance in the same area that I pointed out in the HAIRLINE thread.

Also, FWIW in all honesty saying everything here and to is "fake" in this case is a truly lazy way to cop out of the case.  Why? Because when someone goes around saying everything is fake you're really limiting yourself to other possibilities.

Yes that would be lazy. But who is doing that?

 

[Micah Mileto]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Too bad Robert Prudhumme isn't here. He's an expert with ballistics. The problem with the undercharged idea is that such a bullet would travel slowly, and it would drop a large distance before reaching the target. That's the reason bullets from rifles have to be high velocity. Robert knows where to find calculators that will show  how low the bullet would hit.

 

It's definitely not nutty to think an assassin was intentionally trying to hit or kill Connally. Perhaps in the hope that the Dallas Police would be angry and want to kill the patsy.

[Sandy Larsen]

Just now, Micah Mileto said:

It's definitely not nutty to think an assassin was intentionally trying to hit or kill Connally. Perhaps in the hope that the Dallas Police would be angry and want to kill the patsy.

Okay. But I don't know why you are telling me that.

 

[Micah Mileto]

3 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

That presents a problem for the State -- first they say the bullet transited his neck, then they're going to say it was a short load?

Was the shot to the throat from the front a short load too, since there was no point of exit for that either?

And short loads don't explain why there were no bullets in the back/throat.

What's wrong with the throat wound being a fragment from a shot entering near the EOP? The torso X-rays clearly show an air cavity traveling down the lower neck and changing paths from the first rib to near the location of the throat wound. The bruises on the neck would support it, as well as explaining what happened to the bullet that entered near the EOP. The EOP wound is just as established as the tiny throat wound.

Edited December 5, 2017 by Micah Mileto