Where is the exit?

[Micah Mileto]

38 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

You're inventing lies that never existed, Micah.

What do you think Admiral Galloway meant when he said told Arlen Specter that during the autopsy it was an "assumption" that the bullet had emerged from the President's throat, or later to the HSCA when he said the doctors "suspected this [a tracheotomy made over a bullet hole] during the autopsy, but couldn't prove it"?

Edited July 25, 2018 by Micah Mileto

[David Von Pein]

21 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

What do you think Admiral Galloway meant when he told Arlen Specter that during the autopsy it was an "assumption" that the bullet had emerged from the President's throat, or later to the HSCA when he said the doctors "suspected this [a tracheotomy made over a bullet hole] during the autopsy, but couldn't prove it"?

Sure, the conclusion about the bullet exiting JFK's throat was an "assumption" on the part of the autopsy surgeons. Of course it was. But it was also the only REASONABLE assumption the doctors could reach given all the knowable factors involved.

Do you really think they should have reached the same conclusions that CTers have reached over the years? Such as, two separate bullets entering JFK's body but neither bullet exiting and then both bullets disappearing or being dug out of the body by conspirators who stole Kennedy's corpse before the "real" autopsy began?

Come now. Let's keep our heads here, shall we?

After all, Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck were medical pathologists, not fiction writers.

Edited July 25, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Micah Mileto]

11 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Sure, the bullet exiting the throat was an "assumption" on the part of the autopsy surgeons. Of course it was. But it was also the only REASONABLE assumption the doctors could reach given all the knowable factors involved.

Do you REALLY think they should have concluded the things the CTers have concluded over the years? Such as, two separate bullets entering JFK's body but neither bullet exiting and then both bullets disappearing or being dug out of the body by conspirators who stole Kennedy's body before the "real" autopsy began?

After all, Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck were medical pathologists, not fiction writers.

The Humes WC Deposition and the Sibert-O'Neill report give the misleading impression that the autopsy pathologists did not seriously conceive of the throat wound as a bullet wound during the body examination. Something must have happened off the record.

Would you also agree with the 11/29/1963 Barnum journal saying that the autopsy pathologists CONCLUDED on the night of the autopsy that a round had entered the back and exited the throat?

What is your opinion on the self-contradictory Boswell HSCA interview statement I posted in another thread?

What if we drop the "Assumption" all together. Perry said the phone call came at friday night. Ebersole and Stringer remember the phone call during the body examination. Humes said there was only one phone call while Perry always remembered two. Francis X. O'Neill falsely claiming he saw the morticians put on JFK's undies when he was actually the FBI lab by 1:45 AM. John Van Hoesen, Joe Hagan, and Tom Robinson describing having to wait for the body examination to be completed. Kellerman's 2:45 AM notation. Jenkins, Lipsey and other witnesses remembering discussion about the throat wound referring to it as a bullet hole. Plus, you probably agree that the perimeter of a bullet hole may be visible in the autopsy photographs showing the tracheotomy. They knew all about the throat wound way earlier.

Edited July 25, 2018 by Micah Mileto

[Ron Bulman]

9 hours ago, Rick McTague said:

Paul,

Please consider this: if he was first shot in the throat, how could he say "My God, I've been hit"?  This is why I believe the shallow, low trajectory back wound was hit #1 possibly from the Dal-Tex building (not necessarily shot #1) which may have partially paralyzed him as you say.  I think hit #2 was the frontal throat shot through the windshield, probably from the south knoll.  

Jim,

I might ask the same question on the location of the shallow back wound - where did that round end up?  Didn't a Parkland ER nurse pick up an intact round off the floor?

Thanks

 

Well, if it was a frangible bullet hitting to the right of T3 heading downward between two ribs...  I'm not familiar with information on the condition of the lungs.  Speculation again.  But arguable again since the pathologists but not well experienced autopsists did not follow standard autopsy protocol on the President of the United States and dissect the wound.

Regarding "My God I've been hit".  To my knowledge Kellerman was the only one to say this.  I've wondered before why John Connally, Nellie or Jackie didn't mention it.  They were sitting closer to JFK than Kellerman.  If I'm wrong please tell me.  If I remember right I do recall Nellie saying John said "Oh My God, They're Going To Kill Us All" when he was hit.  In the heat of the moment might Kellerman have transposed a phrase in thought, forgotten a word or two or even inserted one in thought?

Given his due Kellerman is the one who told the Warren Commission about the "flurry" of bullets in the car.  And he said "But Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four (!) wounds, Governor Connally three, there have to be more than three shots gentlemen."  See 2H61. 

 https://www.history-matters.com/analysis/witness/witnessMap/Kellerman.htm

I don't remember Specter's response.

Why didn't Kellerman jump over Connally onto JFK at the sound of the first shot, which he said he recognized as gunfire, like LBJ says Youngblood did, but didn't?

 

[David Von Pein]

36 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

They knew all about the throat wound way earlier.

I disagree. But even if the autopsy doctors DID think the tracheotomy wound masked a bullet hole DURING the autopsy examination----where are you going to go with such a revelation?

Do you think that if the doctors fudged on the exact TIME of when they realized the trach wound was also a bullet hole, this alleged "fudging" somehow bolsters the conspiracy theory that has JFK being shot in the throat from the front? Is that it?

But how would such "fudging" by Dr. Humes (et al) benefit and aid any type of multi-shooter conspiracy theory in the JFK case?

Whether the doctors found out about the bullet hole in the throat on Friday night or Saturday morning, the wound would still have been declared in the autopsy report to be the wound of exit for the bullet that entered JFK's upper back.

Or do you think that Dr. Humes deliberately fudged (lied) about the time of the Perry phone call in order to give the autopsists a more valid excuse for having not dissected the neck wound completely? Is that the underlying "conspiracy" theory buried within this discussion?

Edited July 25, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Micah Mileto]

8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

I disagree. But even if the autopsy doctors DID think the trach masked a bullet hole DURING the autopsy examination----where are you going to go with such a revelation?

Do you think that if the doctors fudged on the exact TIME of when they realized the trach wound was also a bullet hole, this alleged "fudging" somehow bolsters the conspiracy theory that has JFK being shot in the throat from the front? Is that it?

But how would such "fudging" by Dr. Humes (et al) benefit and aid any type of multi-shooter "conspiracy" in the JFK case? How?

Whether they found out about the bullet hole in the throat on Friday night or Saturday morning, the wound would still have been declared in the autopsy report to be the wound of exit for the bullet that entered JFK's upper back.

Oh my God, seriously? "It doesn't matter if the autopsy pathologists lied about forensic evidence, I have gifs of both JFK and Connally's arm twitching at z225"???

Quote

Or do you think that Dr. Humes deliberately fudged (lied) about the time of the Perry phone call in order to give the autopsists a more valid excuse for having not dissected the neck wound completely? Is that the underlying "conspiracy" theory buried within this discussion?

Are you willing at the very least to admit that Humes' WC testimony is intentionally misleading? If the autopsy pathologists had every reason to think the tracheotomy was originally a bullet wound during their body examination, do you think they may have fudged the time to cover for their incompetence? Too lazy to dissect the throat wound or didn't have the guts to tell the officials breathing down their necks they needed to wait another hour to excavate further?

Edited July 25, 2018 by Micah Mileto

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

Oh my God, seriously? "It doesn't matter if the autopsy pathologists lied about forensic evidence, I have gifs of both JFK and [Connally's] arm twitching at z225"???

This has got nothing to do with the Zapruder Film. The autopsy surgeons, of course, knew nothing about the existence of that film when the autopsy was going on. So why did you even bring up the Z-Film at all? Just to jab a dagger in my eye regarding my belief in the SBT? I was talking about what Humes & Co. would have concluded even if they had known about the bullet hole in the throat on Friday night. And the answer is: They most certainly would have concluded the very same thing they ultimately did conclude---that the throat wound was a wound of EXIT for a bullet that had entered President Kennedy's upper back.

 

1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

Are you willing at the very least to admit that Humes' WC testimony is intentionally misleading? If the autopsy pathologists had every reason to think the tracheotomy was originally a bullet wound during their body examination, do you think they may have fudged [the] time to cover for their incompetence? Too lazy to dissect the throat wound or didn't have the guts to tell the officials breathing down their necks they needed to wait another hour to excavate further?

Well, Micah, since I don't think Dr. Humes talked to Dr. Perry on Friday night at all (and, therefore, Humes didn't confirm that the trach wound also masked a bullet hole), then I don't think Humes' WC testimony was "intentionally misleading" either.

I do think that Dr. Humes did exhibit a bit of "incompetence" on Friday night during JFK's autopsy at Bethesda when he did not contact Parkland Hospital that very night while JFK was still on the autopsy table, so he could confirm the information about the trach/bullet hole in a much more timely manner. That, in my opinion, was a very stupid delayed decision on Humes' part, and I've said so in the past as well....

"The biggest and most stupid mistake, IMO, made at the autopsy was when Dr. Humes refused to call Parkland Hospital in Dallas WHILE JFK WAS STILL IN THE MORGUE. Instead...he waited until 10 AM the next morning to call Dr. Perry at Parkland. (I guess Humes was worried he would interrupt Perry's slumber or something by calling late on Friday night. Just silly.)" -- DVP; April 16, 2010

 

Edited July 25, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

2015 Addendum Regarding Dr. Humes....

"Everything Dr. Humes did during the autopsy on 11/22/63 at Bethesda, while President Kennedy's body was lying on the autopsy table, indicates that Dr. Humes did not positively know that there was a bullet hole in JFK's throat. And we don't have to take just Dr. Humes' word for this. We also have the Sibert/O'Neill report to guide us, too. In that report...it states the following on Page 4:

"Inasmuch as no complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other area of the body as determined by total body X-Rays and inspection revealing there was no point of exit, the individuals performing the autopsy were at a loss to explain why they could find no bullets."

Therefore, via the above excerpt that comes from the report written by FBI agents Sibert and O'Neill, it's quite clear that the autopsy doctors (including James J. Humes) were not fully aware during the course of the autopsy of the existence of the bullet hole in the lower part of President Kennedy's throat."

-- David Von Pein; June 17, 2015

Edited July 25, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Pat Speer]

C'mon, David. You embarrass yourself when you try to claim the SBT is the only possible conclusion fitting the facts. The reality is that virtually every fact related to the SBT suggests its basically BIgfoot...a scarcely believed myth for whom the "evidence" is largely missing and/or discredited.

Let's refresh.

The SBT entails a high-velocity bullet entering JFK's back, exiting his throat, and then entering Connally's armpit, exiting his chest, blasting through his wrist, and then embedding itself in his thigh, only to fall out in near pristine condition.

But there's a mountain of problems with this.

1. The holes on Kennedy's clothing and the underlying back wound were too low to support that a bullet fired from above exited his throat. Some think we should end this discussion right here. They may very well be right.

2. The autopsy doctors couldn't find a passage from the back to the throat. Okay, that's conclusive. This should be the end of discussion right here. I've read hundreds of autopsy protocols over the years, David, and haven't seen one where the doctors probed a supposedly high-velocity wound track only to have it end in muscle, but then decided the bullet somehow found its way through anyhow. I mean, c'mon, do you really think it's a coincidence that the clothing holes are so low AND that the doctors couldn't find a passage through the neck? I mean, what are the odds? Call up Vince and ask him, will ya?

3. The trajectory from the back wound to the throat wound passes right through bone. This is a huge problem, as the nose of the bullet was undamaged, and a high-velocity bullet would not curve around JFK's spine.

4. The Parkland doctors and the autopsy doctors both noted very little damage to the vessels of the neck, a near-impossibility if a high-velocity bullet had blasted its way through the neck and exited from the center of the throat.

5. The throat wound was far too small to represent the exit of a high-velocity bullet. While some have tried to claim JFK's tie held the skin in place, and that the throat wound was a "shored" wound of exit, articles on shored wounds of exit note that while smaller than expected they are nevertheless larger than the corresponding entrance. Oops. JFK's throat wound was reported to have been smaller than his throat wound.

6. The Warren Commission's wound ballistics expert, Olivier, was unable to get his tests regarding a Mannlicher bullet's expected loss of velocity while creating Kennedy's and Connally's wounds to match up with what supposedly happened, i.e. the bullet's exiting Connally's wrist at a low velocity and barely damaging his thigh.

7. The Connallys felt certain JFK was hit several seconds before Connally was hit.

8. The entrance wound in Connally's armpit was not suggestive of a tumbling bullet.

 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Pat Speer

[Cory Santos]

4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

But that "puzzler" completely disappears if you and other CTers would just face the obvious fact ---- i.e., one bullet went clean through JFK's upper body, entering his upper back and exiting just where the autopsy doctors concluded it did exit---the front of the throat at the site of the tracheotomy.

All the mysteries about disappearing bullets totally vanish if CTers would simply accept the SBT truth.

And, Jim, you do realize (don't you?) that it's not just "no exit for the throat wound" that should have you bewildered. It's the OTHER bullet that didn't exit too (i.e., the one that you claim entered the upper back and also disappeared). Where's THAT bullet as well? You said earlier that you think the back wound bullet disappearing is "explainable". But is it reasonable to think that BOTH of those bullets that you say entered JFK's upper body BOTH just disappeared without a trace (whether it be in a sinister or non-sinister manner)? To me, that explanation isn't reasonable at all, especially when we consider all these knowable factors....

Don't CTers ever step back and look at the following four things in tandem with one another (and all 4 of these things do, indeed, exist---simultaneously!---in this case)....

1. There's a bullet hole of ENTRY in JFK's upper back.

2. There's a bullet hole in JFK's throat (which, according to Dr. Perry, could have been "either" an entry or an exit wound; and Dr. Carrico said the very same thing).

3. There's a bullet hole of ENTRY in John Connally's upper right back.

4. There were NO BULLETS in John F. Kennedy's body.

Now, based upon the above 4 basic facts, how can anyone maintain that the bullet which caused Connally's upper-back wound could not possibly have been the same bullet which also caused President Kennedy's upper-back wound --- especially when factoring in the additional fact that Governor Connally was sitting in a position in the limousine that most certainly placed him in the path of any bullet that would have exited from JFK's throat?

When evaluating all these variables (and others not discussed here), it's simply impossible (IMO) for the Single-Bullet Theory to not be the truth.

 

That is so ridiculous.  To believe the SBT means to discount the other evidence-which was not lost, destroyed, or mutilated.

Moreover, if you believe the SBT, it would help if LHO's tests showed he fired a RIFLE that day, lol.

Unless, you are willing to concede that while you believe in the SBT, you agree LHO did not fire the rifle from the TSBD.

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

C'mon, David. You embarrass yourself when you try to claim the SBT is the only possible conclusion fitting the facts. The reality is that virtually every fact related to the SBT suggests its basically BIgfoot...a scarcely believed myth for whom the "evidence" is largely missing and/or discredited.

Then what's the alternative scenario, Pat?

I challenge you to come up with a reasonable, sensible, and believable anti-SBT theory which is based on the actual evidence (and wounds) in the case. Can you do that without using the words "fake", "manipulated", or "cover up"?

Good luck.

 

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

The trajectory from the back wound to the throat wound passes right through bone.

Dead wrong. But I guess you think you know more about these things than the four doctors on the Clark Panel who signed off on this conclusion in February 1968 (emphasis DVP's)....

"The possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no bony damage in the thorax or neck." -- Clark Panel Report

Edited July 25, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

To believe the SBT means to discount the other evidence-which was not lost, destroyed, or mutilated.

Like what?

[Micah Mileto]

6 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

This has got nothing to do with the Zapruder Film. The autopsy surgeons, of course, knew nothing about the existence of that film when the autopsy was going on. So why did you even bring up the Z-Film at all? Just to jab a dagger in my eye regarding my belief in the SBT? I was talking about what Humes & Co. would have concluded even if they had known about the bullet hole in the throat on Friday night. And the answer is: They most certainly would have concluded the very same thing they ultimately did conclude---that the throat wound was a wound of EXIT for a bullet that had entered President Kennedy's upper back.

 

Well, Micah, since I don't think Dr. Humes talked to Dr. Perry on Friday night at all (and, therefore, Humes didn't confirm that the trach wound also masked a bullet hole), then I don't think Humes' WC testimony was "intentionally misleading" either.

I do think that Dr. Humes did exhibit a bit of "incompetence" on Friday night during JFK's autopsy at Bethesda when he did not contact Parkland Hospital that very night while JFK was still on the autopsy table, so he could confirm the information about the trach/bullet hole in a much more timely manner. That, in my opinion, was a very stupid delayed decision on Humes' part, and I've said so in the past as well....

"The biggest and most stupid mistake, IMO, made at the autopsy was when Dr. Humes refused to call Parkland Hospital in Dallas WHILE JFK WAS STILL IN THE MORGUE. Instead...he waited until 10 AM the next morning to call Dr. Perry at Parkland. (I guess Humes was worried he would interrupt Perry's slumber or something by calling late on Friday night. Just silly.)" -- DVP; April 16, 2010 

 

8/17/1977 John Stringer HSCA Interview report https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=600#relPageId=13&tab=page

MR. STRINGER recalled conversation about the pathway through the neck and specifically discussion about air in the throat. He remembers a great deal of discussion and concern as the doctor searched for a missing bullet. He believes HUMES instituted the call to Dallas.

[...]

STRINGER recalls that during the autopsy someone was asked to call Parkland. He also remembers DR. BURKLEY discussing the fact that the doctors should not conduct a full autopsy, saying: "...shouldn't do a complete one if didn't have to." STRINGER said the doctors had to crack the skull somewhat to get the brain out, though they didn't have to saw it off.

[...]

Regarding photograph #40, MR. STRINGER said the doctors were debating whether the hole was caused by a bullet.

3/11/1978 HSCA Testimony of John H. Ebersole, M.D. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=324#relPageId=6&tab=page , https://archive.org/stream/JFKEbersole/Dr.ebersoleHscaTestimony_djvu.txt 

The autopsy proceeded and at this point I am simply an observer. Dr. Humes in probing the wound of entrance found it to extend perhaps over the apex of the right lung bruising the pleura and appeared to go toward or near the midline of the lower neck.

 

I believe by ten or ten thirty approximately a communication had been established with Dallas and it was learned that there had been a wound of exit in the lower neck that had been surgically repaired. I don't know if this was premortem or postmortem but at that point the confusion as far as we were concerned stopped.

 

The only function that I had was later in the evening, early in the morning, perhaps about twelve thirty a large fragment of the occipital bone was received from Dallas and at Dr. Finck's request I X rayed these. These were the last X rays I took. The X rays were taken by the Secret Service that evening; I did not see them again.

 

[...]

 

Dr. Baden. Do you recall seeing those three fragments and X raying the bones?

 

Dr. Ebersole. Yes. This was maybe midnight to one o'clock when these fragments arrived from Dallas.

 

Dr. Baden. After the autopsy?

 

Dr. Ebersole. The autopsy was still going on during that period.

 

Dr. Baden. And it is your impression that before the autopsy was finished at ten thirty at night contact had been made between Dr. Humes and --

 

Dr. Ebersole. I must say these times are approximate but I would say in the range often to eleven p.m. Dr. Humes had determined that a procedure had been carried out in the anterior neck covering the wound of exit. Subsequent to that the fragments arrived. At the time the fragments were X rayed Dr. Finck was present.

 

Dr. Baden. Do you have any idea, what did you do with the fragments after you finished X raying them?

 

Dr. Ebersole. Returned to the autopsy room. They were kept in the autopsy room.

 

[...]

 

Dr. Weston. I am not clear on the chronology. When you first started talking you gave the impression that everybody had the impression that there was a bullet hole in the back of the neck. You gave me the impression that they rolled the body over almost immediately. Is that a correct impression?

 

Dr. Ebersole. I don't know whether we looked at the anterior or posterior aspect first. I would suspect it was posterior.

 

Dr. Weston. You looked at the posterior first?

 

Dr. Ebersole. A head wound and a wound of entrance.

 

Dr. Weston. They saw the wound of entrance on the back of the neck almost immediately?

 

Dr. Ebersole. Yes. At least immediately, yes. This again is a question of recollection of whether it was the posterior or anterior surface.

 

Dr. Weston. But you said they didn't recognize this as being an exit wound until after the conversation with Dallas which was ten or ten thirty.

 

Dr. Ebersole. Or later.

 

Dr. Weston. By that time you had already taken two sets.

 

Dr. Ebersole. No, no, no.

 

Dr. Weston. Oh.

 

Dr. Ebersole. When both aspects of the body had been viewed, and I do not know in what order they were reviewed, we were faced with the problem of a wound of entrance and not a known wound of exit, so at that point we perhaps would never I have taken any X rays had we had a wound of entrance and a wound of exit. Remember, I am standing by waiting for the prosector to start with my X ray equipment. We had certainly not to my knowledge planned to take any X rays at this autopsy but when it became apparent we had a wound of entrance and no known wound of exit, this is when I was brought into the action.

 

[...]

 

Dr. Ebersole. We can put this back on when we get the tape on but somewhere during the course of the evening the input came in from Dallas about the wound exit in the neck. That I think stopped the problem from my aspect of taking the X rays. I cannot tell you what time that was. The time is rather vague that night but it was quite late in the evening.

 

Dr. Petty. Do you want him to repeat what he just said?

 

Mr. Flanagan. Yes, if you would, please.

 

Dr. Ebersole. The taking of the X rays again were stopped to the best of my remembrance once we had communication with Dallas and Dr. Humes had determined that there was a wounded exit in the lower neck anterior at the time that the President arrived at the hospital in Dallas. I think once that fact had been established that my part in the proceedings were finished.

 

Dr. Petty. May I ask two questions further. One, did you see the wound in the neck and associate it with a bullet wound of exit after it had been pointed out that the tracheostomy had been through that area?

 

Dr. Ebersole. No, sir, I can't say that I did. After the dissection had started I saw the area that Dr. Humes was very interested in. He pointed out to us that this was a track running over the apex of the lung -- I think he used the term bruising the apex of the lung and pointed to the middle line. I remember the area was open and he was pointing this out to us. I cannot recollect if I saw this area again after that information was known to him.

 

Dr. Petty. All right. The second question that I have is you said that you left the autopsy area somewhere around three o'clock in the morning.

 

Dr. Ebersole. Yes.

 

[...]

 

Dr. Wecht. Dr. Ebersole, hypothesize with me for a moment, please, that if on the autopsy evening Dr. Humes or any of the other physicians or people present had not received information at that time that there had been a bullet entrance wound in the front of the neck, that no such information was known by anybody on that evening, what would be your professional opinion as a radiologist -- what would it have been at that time concerning the need or desirability for taking additional x ray pictures?

 

Dr. Ebersole. I think we would have had to — I would like to try to keep retrospective thinking out of this but it is difficult. I think had we not had that information eventually, I would have wanted to take the body to the main X ray department and do an honest to God total body radiograph. It is remotely possible a bullet entering the back can end up in the ankle but again the hypothetical case, I think this is what we would have done.

 

[...]

 

Dr. Baden. Is it your impression perhaps, and again as Dr. Wecht said 15 year old memories get clouded, if we assume that the information about the tracheostomy through a bullet hole was not available to the doctors that evening but came later on, could there have been a tentative conclusion reached was there a tentative conclusion reached that evening that in fact the bullet entering the back region had dropped out and that is why it was not present and that explained the autopsy and X ray findings?

 

Dr. Ebersole. I don't remember such conclusion being reached but assuming it, I suppose it could have.

 

[...]

 

Mr. Purdy. One other question I have has to do with the nature of the information you received from other sources on the night of the autopsy. You mentioned a phone call which helped clear up confusion.

 

Dr. Ebersole. Somewhere in the course of the evening Dr. Humes received information from Dallas re the procedures that had been carried out there, number one. Number two, somewhere in the course of the evening Dallas sent to us the bony fragments you saw which were X rayed as to how this was carried out. The mechanics I don't know. Somewhere in the course of the autopsy Dr. Humes was made aware of the surgical procedures at Dallas vis-a-vis the neck.

 

Mr. Purdy. And what was that information?

 

Dr. Ebersole. The information was that there had been a wound of exit there, a tracheotomy and a suturing done.

 

Mr. Purdy. Do you recall how that information was conveyed to Dr. Humes?

 

Dr. Ebersole. I don't. I don't recall.

 

 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Micah Mileto

[Cliff Varnell]

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

1. The holes on Kennedy's clothing and the underlying back wound were too low to support that a bullet fired from above exited his throat. Some think we should end this discussion right here. They may very well be right.

Von Pein has stipulated to the fact that JFK's jacket was elevated just "a little bit" on Elm St  -- THAT should end all debate with him.

Why let him off the hook with ancillary issues?

[Greg Wagner]

On 7/24/2018 at 1:25 AM, James DiEugenio said:

If the anterior neck wound is an entrance, where is the exit hole?

Good question, Jim. I am far from a ballistics expert and the following is just my speculation, so take it for what it's worth.

I believe the throat entry was likely a head shot that got diverted and fragmented as a result of passing through the windshield or the Stemmons sign. The fragment, having less mass than an intact bullet and reduced velocity due to the windshield or Stemmons sign impact, did not have the energy to traverse all the way through the neck.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t one of the guys who prepared Kennedy’s body for burial state that Kennedy’s cheek had small perforations that had to be sealed so the embalming fluid wouldn’t leak out? Perhaps those perforations were caused by smaller fragments from that same bullet.

As this Secret Service report documents, there were bullet fragments found all over the interior of the limo.

 

Edited May 13, 2019 by Greg Wagner