Pat Speer Posted May 13, 2005 Share Posted May 13, 2005 When one reads about the Harper fragment, one finds reference to a discoloration on one edge that could be lead. Evidently John Hunt claims to have seen the x-rays at the Archives and that there are indeed specs of lead on this edge. The HSCA published a black and white photo of the exterior as figure 28. There is a color photo of the exterior in Groden's books, but they crop off the edge in question. This image is also up on the Lancer website. Does anyone have a copy of the full color image of the exterior? And, if so, could you put it up on this website or send it to me? Any help appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted May 13, 2005 Share Posted May 13, 2005 Pat, This image below has a small section cropped from the top so I don't know if it helps or not. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 14, 2005 Author Share Posted May 14, 2005 (edited) Pat,This image below has a small section cropped from the top so I don't know if it helps or not. James <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks, James. I think that grayish blur on the top section is what Dr. Cairns was talking about. Unfortunately, this is the interior view of the fragment. According to Dr. Mantik and others the lead smear was on the outside. As stated, the only color view of the exterior I could find online was Groden's shot on the JFK Lancer site, but the edge in question is cropped. Edited May 14, 2005 by Pat Speer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 14, 2005 Author Share Posted May 14, 2005 I found the full image on our old buddy Wim Dankbaar's website. It's not very clear, but it is a shot of the exterior. If anyone has or knows where I can find a picture of the exterior which is as clear as the photo of the interior skull posted by James, please let me know. Thanks, Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Hope this one helps, Pat. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Crowe Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 This is the first time I have seen a picture this clear of the fragment, very interesting.. Thanks James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 15, 2005 Author Share Posted May 15, 2005 Hope this one helps, Pat.James <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks a lot, James. Although it appears to be the same photo as the one on Wim's site, your image is quite a bit clearer. Thanks. I'm curious. Just how many photos do you have in your archive? It's gotta be thousands. Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Richards Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 Just how many photos do you have in your archive? It's gotta be thousands. (Pat Speer) Pat, I have well over 10,000 images related to the assassination, the U.S. government at the time and Cuba. There are about 800 I have yet to scan. FWIW. James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted May 15, 2005 Share Posted May 15, 2005 (edited) Is there any medical consensus on exactly what part of the body this came from? Was it temporal, parietal or occipital? Is the provenance of the HARPER FRAGMENT convincing? Their is a very regular arc along one edge. Thanks Shanet Edited May 15, 2005 by Shanet Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted May 16, 2005 Author Share Posted May 16, 2005 (edited) Is there any medical consensus on exactly what part of the body this came from?Was it temporal, parietal or occipital? Is the provenance of the HARPER FRAGMENT convincing? Their is a very regular arc along one edge. Thanks Shanet <{POST_SNAPBACK}> While some maintain the Harper fragment was occipital, I tend to agree with the likes of Dr. Angel and Joseph Riley that it was parietal, although an inch or more more forward on the head than in Angel's drawing. Dr. Mantik agrees that it could be parietal but that the lead smudge on the OUTSIDE of the skull indicates it was the location of an entrance; he concludes from this that it must be occipital. Well, this blew my mind because the location on the parietal bone that would have been an entrance if the Harper fragment was indeed parietal, is EXACTLY where I placed the entrance in my analysis of the x-rays and bullet trajectories. I hope to convince a lot of people of this in the near future. Edited June 28, 2005 by Pat Speer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanet Clark Posted May 17, 2005 Share Posted May 17, 2005 Is there any medical consensus on exactly what part of the body this came from?Was it temporal, parietal or occipital? Is the provenance of the HARPER FRAGMENT convincing? Their is a very regular arc along one edge. Thanks Shanet <{POST_SNAPBACK}> While some maintain the Harper fragment was occipital, I tend to agree with the likes of Dr. Angel and Joseph Riley that it was parietal, although an inch or more more forward on the head than in Angel's drawing. Dr. Mantik agrees that it could be parietal but that the lead smudge on the OUTSIDE of the skull indicates it was the location of an entrance; he concludes from this that it must be occipital. Well, this blew my mind because the location on the parietal bone that would have been an entrance if the Harper fragment was indeed parietal, is eEXACTLY where I placed the entrance in my analysis of the x-rays and bullet trajectories. I hope to convince a lot of people of this in the near future. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So you think it is a temple bone from the right side of the head with an entry wound above the right ear's temple? It should be fairly easy for a neurologist or anthropologist to strictly locate the origin of the bone. I keep going back to John Ligget and the BLOB obscuring the parietal area. The X rays are useless, and Mantik pretty well disposes of them...... Where did this bone come from? It must explain a ballistics trajectory if properly understood !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Wilkinson Posted June 28, 2005 Share Posted June 28, 2005 I have well over 10,000 images related to the assassination. James, I thought I had a lot with my collection of just over 4,000! I have just really got to get around to sorting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now