Cliff Varnell

A dozen witnesses to JFK’s throat entrance wound. Compiled by Denny Zartman, with Vincent Palamara's 2015 book "JFK: From Parkland To Bethesda" as the source. Dr. William Clark: "Dr. Kemp Clark...said that there were two wounds, a traumatic wound in the back of the head and a small entrance wound below the Adam's apple..." Pg. 1 Dr. Robert McClelland.: "this [the neck wound] did appear to be an entrance wound." ... "Dr. Robert Mc Clelland ... told me afterward that they still believed it [the neck wound] to be an entry wound." Pgs. 7-8 Dr. Marion Jenkins: saw an entry wound on JFK's neck; would let their 1963 observations stand. Pg. 13 Dr. Charles Carrico: "small penetrating wound of ent. neck" Pg. 14 Dr. Ronald Jones: "The hole [in the throat] was very small and relatively clean cut, as you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting from a patient." ... "compatible with an entrance wound ... I would stand by my original impression." Pgs. 15-16 Dr. Gene Akin: "this [the neck wound] must have been an entrance wound..." Pg. 17 Dr. Paul Peters: "...we saw the wound of entry in the throat..." Pg. 19 Dr. Charles Crenshaw: "There were two wounds to the President that we observed at parkland. The first was a small and neat entrance wound to the throat..." Pg. 22 Dr. Charles Baxter: The wound in the neck was "no more than a pinpoint. It was made by a small caliber weapon. And it was an entry wound." Pg. 24 Dr. Joe Goldstritch: "...I realized how impossible it would have been for the neck wound I saw to have been an exit wound..." Pg. 44 Nurse Diana Bowron: "...the entry wound in his throat...looked like an entry wound." Pg. 33 Nurse Margaret Hinchliffe: "...a little hole in the middle of his neck ... About as big as the end of my little finger...An entrance bullet hole---it looked to me like...I have never seen an exit bullet hole---I don't remember seeing one that looked like that."; "...it was just a small wound and wasn't jagged like most of the exit bullet wounds that I have seen." ... "She also insisted the President had an "entry" wound in his throat." ... "Throat wound---Definitely an entrance wound. Resented Arlen Specter trying to get her to say it might be an exit wound..." Pgs 35-36

Same talking point, isn’t it? Bullet hits JFK in the back and exits his throat. No matter what the evidence shows.

Lone Nut lite. I knew it...

Always draw a conclusion first, then work backward finding anything to prove it. Meanwhile... From the Sibert & O’Neill FBI report on the autopsy.: <quote on > During the later stages of this autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders and two inches to the right of the middle line of the spinal column. This opening was probed by Dr. Humes with his finger, at which time it was determined that the trajectory of the missile entering at this point had entered at downward position of 45 to 60 degrees. Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with a finger. </q>

Ben, you’re not hustling the SBT, are you?

A Secret Order, Hank Albarelli, pg: 14 <quote on> [D]uring WWII George Hunter White and a number of other [Federal Bureau of Narcotics] agents assigned to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), precursor to the CIA, worked very closely in New York City with Port Security and the Office of Naval Intelligence on what is now commonly called Operation Underworld. This was the top-secret project that involved freeing infamous gangster Charles "Lucky" Luciano from prison in return for his, and the Mafia's, assistance with security at America's ports and the Allied invasion of Italy. All the FBN agents assigned to work on Operation Underworld went on to become covert operatives of the CIA, and would become involved with Projects MK/ULTRA and MK/NAOMI. <quote off>

In regard to Finck’s probing of the wound?

Humes probed the wound with his little finger. Then Finck showed up and used a proper probe. Jenkins gave a detailed description of the probing. The bullet holes in the clothes prove there was no wound at the base of the neck, plus the witnesses etc. Irrelevant. Jenkins described it — that you cannot process this is your problem. Because they wanted it traced back to the Soviets. MKNAOMI briefed the FBI on exactly that.

The HSCA Photographic Panel said they might not be admitted. Excuse me? My favorite talking point is the clothing evidence, which you pretend doesn’t exist. The clothing evidence outweighs all of that, corroborated by 15 eye witnesses. That’s not what the HSCA photo experts said. So, Pat, show us how you bunch many inches of fabric above the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar.

HSCA Vol. 7 (emphasis added) (quote on) Among the JFK assassination materials in the National Archives is a series of negatives and prints of photographs taken during autopsy. The deficiencies of these photographs as scientific documentation of a forensic autopsy have been described elsewhere. Here it is sufficient to note that: 1. They are generally of rather poor photographic quality. 2. Some, particularly close-ups, were taken in such a manner that it is nearly impossible to anatomically orient the direction of view. 3. In many, scalar references are entirely lacking, or when present, were positioned in such a manner to make it difficult or impossible to obtain accurate measurements of critical features (such as the wound in the upper back) from anatomical landmarks. 4. None of the photographs contain information identifying the victim;such as his name, the autopsy case number, the date and place of theexamination. In the main, these shortcomings bespeak of haste, inexperience and unfamiliarity with the understandably rigorous standards generally expected in photographs to be used as scientific evidence. In fact, under ordinary circumstances, the defense could raise some reasonable and, perhaps, sustainable objections to an attempt to introduce such poorly made and documented photographs as evidence in a murder trial. Furthermore, even the prosecution might have second thoughts about using certain of these photographs since they are more confusing than informative. Unfortunately, they are the only photographic record of the autopsy. Not all the critics of the Warren Commission have been content to point out the obvious deficiencies of the autopsy photographs as scientific evidence. Some have questioned their very authenticity. These theorists suggest that the body shown in at least some of the photographs is not President Kennedy, but another decedent deliberatelymutilated to simulate a pattern of wounds supportive of the Warren Commissions' interpretation of their nature and significance. As outlandish as such a macabre proposition might appear, it is one that, had the case gone to trial,might have been effectively raised by an astute defense anxious to block the introduction of the photographs as evidence. In any event, the onus of establishing the authenticity of these photographs would have rested with the prosecution. (quote off) I prefer the truth Gaeton Fonzi presented on that day in the summer of ‘66 when the clothing evidence gave Arlen Specter a nervous breakdown. No, we can’t have multiple violations of autopsy protocol no matter what Pat Speer thinks it proves.

Dr. John Ebersole attended the autopsy and told David Mantik in a 1992 interview that the back wound was at T4. Chester H. Boyers was the chief Petty Officer in charge of the Pathology Department atBethesda November 1963. This is from Boyers signed affidavit: (quote on) Another wound was located near the right shoulder blade, more specifically just under the scapula and next to it. (quote off) The location just below the upper margin of the scapula is consistent with T3. SSA Will Greer in his WC testimony (Vol 2 pg 127) placed the back wound “in the soft part of that shoulder,” consistent with the testimony of Boyers. SSA Roy Kellerman testified before the WC (Vol. 2 pg 93) that the wound in the back was “the hole that was in his shoulder.” Kellerman expanded on this for the HSCA witha diagram which placed the back wound in the vicinity of T-3. Autopsy photographer Floyd Reibe stated that the back wound was a lower marking on the Fox 5 autopsy photo (Harrison Livingstone's Killing the Truth, pg 721). Parkland nurse Diana Bowron stated the same thing to Livingstone: the back wound was lower than the "official" wound in the autopsy photo (KTT, pg 183). Bethesda lab assistant Jan Gail Rudnicki told Livingstone that he saw "what appeared tobe an entry wound several inches down on the back." (Livingstone's High Treason 2, pg 206). This consistent with T3. Bethesda x-ray tech Edward Reed reported seeing a back wound "right between the scapula and the thoracic column," although he thought it was an exit (KTT, pg 720). This location is also consistent with T3. Total of 15 T3 vicinity back wound witnesses — hallucinations, Pat?

The Fox 5 photo was singled out by the HSCA as of especially poor quality. There’s no indication that’s JFK in that photo. It wasn’t written according to autopsy protocol, for reasons cited above. No, Pat, you did no such thing. The contemporaneously recorded accounts contradict the 3 year old recollections of military men acting under orders to lie. You pretend the clothing evidence doesn’t exist. You ignore the accounts of Bennett, Hill, Sibert, O’Neill, Robinson, Jenkins and yes, Burkley. Burkley’s death certificate was properly filled out and signed off as Verified, just like the autopsy face sheet filled out in pencil. Your case requires Humes and Boswell to be unfaltering tellers of truth, material in protocol violation preferred over material that followed protocol —and a movement of JFK’s clothing that’s insane.

I didn’t make anything up. You put the back wound at T1. You rely on autopsy material that violated multiple protocols. That isn’t the issue. The part of the face sheet written in pencil puts the back wound in the location of the bullet holes in the clothes. You cite the measurements written in pen (a violation of protocol) which use two moveable landmarks (2 more violations) and in the mastoid measurement used a cranial landmark for a thoracic wound (protocol violation grand slam!) The bullet holes in the clothes are 4 inches below the bottom of the collars — that’s T3. You say 2+ inches of both shirt and jacket fabric bunched up entirely above the top of the back. Dealey Plaza photos show a normal amount of shirt collar visible at the back. The jacket collar was in a normal position just above the base of his neck. Yout “home experiment” failed to involve the jacket collar, right? Show us how multiple inches of fabric bunch up above the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar. <cue Jeopardy theme>

James Curtis Jenkins was a lab tech at the autopsy and made this statement to David Lifton: (quote on) I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe...through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]...You could actually see where it was making an indentation...where it was pushing the skin up...There was no entry into the chest cavity...it would have been no way that that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity...somewhere around the junction of the descending aorta [the main artery carrying blood from the heart] or the bronchus in the lungs. (quote off)

Hard to imagine a shooter aiming thru a windshield. Yes. To JFK’s right...2 o’clock?

That’s not what he said. Any reason to conclude he lied other than what he says shoots down a pet theory of yours? It’s easy to figure out — there is autopsy material prepared according to autopsy protocol, and material that wasn’t. The properly produced material corroborates the location of the holes in the clothes and a half dozen contemporaneous accounts of witnesses in position of authority.

Delete

Delete

Delete

Delete

Delete

Delete

“Devout”? You’re implying that the conclusions drawn from the physical evidence are based on belief, not fact. The “T1” movement of JFK’s clothing that you apparently believe in is contrary to the nature of reality.

Delete

In this scenario the throat shot induced paralysis — along with broken blood vessels, a hairline fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and an air pocket overlaying the right C7 and T1 transverse processes. Then the bullet was removed pre-autopsy. My question is — what caliber rifle creates that kind of damage, no exit?