Ray Mitcham

Working OK for me, Bob. Maybe you need to reboot your machine.

That's what we have been saying all along Pat, the BACK of the head, not the top, or the side.

Cliff, the whole of Dave Reitz's posts have also disappeared (not that I agreed with his arguments) but it seems strange that he has disappeared as a member as well. Voluntarily or censored?

Hear hear, Ken. It seems Pat prefers to believe (possibily altered/fake) photos and x rays rather than the testimony of experienced surgeons, who saw what they saw. Perhaps it might be better to let things.

Vince,Pitzer didn't necessarilly have to be in the room. The film may well have been from the close circuit system, as Dr Humes confirmed, "In fact, not only did we review them there, but there was a closed circuit television. They [sic] went to Andrews Air Force Base, NIH, and it was a closed circuit instruction. I agree about that the Marvin story seems way out but stranger things have happened.

"Grossman said that he and Dr. Clark, together, lifted President Kennedy's head so as to be able to observe the damage. It was his impression in Trauma Room One that no one else even knew there was a head wound until the head was lifted up a bit by Clark. Horne stated that Grossman was making the point that the wound was not enormous, that you really had to lift up the head to see this wound. He said he observed two wounds to President Kennedy's head. One was a circular puncture in the occipital region and one was a plate of bone in the parietal region. He believes the bullet entered through the tentorium, which is the membrane surrounding the cerebellum, and went through the right hemisphere of the cerebellum before passing through the right cerebral hemisphere index and through the right parietal bone. Repeatedly during the interview Dr. Grossman asked the ARRB staffers to interview Dr. Kemp Clark. He felt that Dr. Clark's observations would be more accurate than his." If as you say, Pat, "the wound went from the forehead back to the occipital region, in that the skull was fractured on almost the entire right side. Only one part of the wound was missing scalp and skull, however, and that was the area above and in front of the ear." why on earth did these two doctors and others not see the wound as you describe it? A wound of that nature would have been obvious. Dr. Clark was the head of neurosurgery at Parkland. He did examine President Kennedy's wounds up close and was the doctor who pronounced him dead. Drs. Clark and McClelland were at the head of the gurney and had the best view of President Kennedy's head wound. Both testified to the Warren Commission. Dr. Clark - "I then examined the wounds in the back of President's head. This is a large gaping wound in the right posterior part with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed." Dr. McClelland "As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described to help out with the tracheotomy I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered apparently by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp. It seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out."(MD 38)

John, a sweat bee is one which is attracted by the smell of salt in human sweat. The sting isn't as bad as some other bees, so that is probably why Tague didn't notice the wound and described it thus.

This the one, Bob? TOM ROBINSON: was the assistant to Joe Hagen, president of Gawler's Funeral Home, which prepared John Kennedy's body for his coffin. Robinson assisted with the preparations for an open casket funeral so preparation of the skull was especially meticulous. Robertson described the skull wound in a 1/12/77 HSCA interview released in 1993 conducted by Andy Purdy and Jim Conzelman: Purdy asked Robinson: "Approximately where was this wound (the skull wound) located?" Robinson: "Directly behind the back of his head." Purdy: "Approximately between the ears or higher up?" Robinson, "No, I would say pretty much between them." (HSCA rec # 189-10089-10178, agency file # 000661, p.3. On the day of their interview Purdy and Conzelman signed a diagram prepared and also signed by Robinson. The sketch depicts a defect directly in the central, lower rear portion of the skull. (HSCA doc # 180-10089-10179, agency file # 000662)

I think the problem is that some posters believe (possibly) altered/fake xrays and photos, rather than the statements of the professionals who were there. Unlike, Pat, I don't think that the surgeons at Parkland either suffered from hallucinations or were persuaded by others that what they saw wasn't what was in front of them. Professionals do not describe the wounds in the same way unless they saw them.

It's important that we realize the difference between emergency room doctors and forensic pathologists. An emergency room doctor forms an impression as to entrance and exit wounds, while a pathologist comes to a conclusion. Perry most certainly never concluded the throat wound was an entrance. It APPEARED to be one. He didn't waver on this in his testimony, or ever. He always insisted that it appeared to be an entrance. That doesn't mean he'd concluded it was an entrance, and LIED later when he said it could have been an exit wound. Most emergency room physicians, we can only hope, have some humility about these matters. Their impressions are frequently at odds with the conclusions of pathologists--which is why we have pathologists. Pat, I wonder what you have to say about Dr Miller's recent article. Dr Donald W Miller Dr. Perry publicly changed his view of the neck wound for the Warren Commission after a Secret Service Agent came to Dallas, threatened him, and coerced him to testify that it was an exit wound. In 1970, that Agent, Elmer Moore, confessed to a friend that he had acted “on orders from Washington.” He regretted that he had “badgered Dr. Perry into making a flat statement that there was no entry wound in the neck.” As ordered, he said, “I did everything I was told, we all did everything we were told, or we’d get our heads cut off.” The friend he admitted this to was (appropriately enough) a University of Washington graduate student named Jim Gochenaur. Thirteen years later, Dr. Perry and I performed surgery on a patient with a thoracoabdominal aneurysm. I removed the thoracic, or chest part of the aneurysm, and Dr. Perry, the abdominal part. When the residents were closing the incisions Malcolm and I sat together alone in the surgeons’ lounge drinking coffee. Dr. Perry had always refused to discuss the Kennedy assassination, but that night, after we had been operating together for many hours on a complex case, I once again asked him about it. This time, Perry told me that the bullet wound in Kennedy’s neck was, in fact, unquestionably a wound of entrance. A year later, when called to testify to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) Dr. Perry once again publicly supported the government’s single-bullet-theory official truth and agreed with the committee that the bullet wound in the neck must be an exit wound, explaining that the wound was so small that he had initially mistaken it for an entrance wound. But in 1986, Dr. Perry told another physician, Dr. Robert Artwohl, that it was in fact an entrance wound. I have read this. I suspect he's exaggerating. It would be incredibly unprofessional for Perry to tell a near stranger that a wound he thought was an entrance absolutely positively was an entrance, particularly when there are conditions under which an exit can look like an entrance. Studies have shown that emergency room doctors mix up entrance and exit all the time. It's not their yob. Dr. Jones, for one, pointed this out in his own testimony, when he said the wound could have been an exit for a slowly moving projectile. Sorry that you "suspect" he is exaggerating, Pat, but that's a cop out. What you mean is that he is lying. Why would Dr Miller lie about what Dr Perry told him? The Warren Testimonies cannot be trusted.

It's important that we realize the difference between emergency room doctors and forensic pathologists. An emergency room doctor forms an impression as to entrance and exit wounds, while a pathologist comes to a conclusion. Perry most certainly never concluded the throat wound was an entrance. It APPEARED to be one. He didn't waver on this in his testimony, or ever. He always insisted that it appeared to be an entrance. That doesn't mean he'd concluded it was an entrance, and LIED later when he said it could have been an exit wound. Most emergency room physicians, we can only hope, have some humility about these matters. Their impressions are frequently at odds with the conclusions of pathologists--which is why we have pathologists. Pat, I wonder what you have to say about Dr Miller's recent article. Dr Donald W Miller Dr. Perry publicly changed his view of the neck wound for the Warren Commission after a Secret Service Agent came to Dallas, threatened him, and coerced him to testify that it was an exit wound. In 1970, that Agent, Elmer Moore, confessed to a friend that he had acted “on orders from Washington.” He regretted that he had “badgered Dr. Perry into making a flat statement that there was no entry wound in the neck.” As ordered, he said, “I did everything I was told, we all did everything we were told, or we’d get our heads cut off.” The friend he admitted this to was (appropriately enough) a University of Washington graduate student named Jim Gochenaur. Thirteen years later, Dr. Perry and I performed surgery on a patient with a thoracoabdominal aneurysm. I removed the thoracic, or chest part of the aneurysm, and Dr. Perry, the abdominal part. When the residents were closing the incisions Malcolm and I sat together alone in the surgeons’ lounge drinking coffee. Dr. Perry had always refused to discuss the Kennedy assassination, but that night, after we had been operating together for many hours on a complex case, I once again asked him about it. This time, Perry told me that the bullet wound in Kennedy’s neck was, in fact, unquestionably a wound of entrance. A year later, when called to testify to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) Dr. Perry once again publicly supported the government’s single-bullet-theory official truth and agreed with the committee that the bullet wound in the neck must be an exit wound, explaining that the wound was so small that he had initially mistaken it for an entrance wound. But in 1986, Dr. Perry told another physician, Dr. Robert Artwohl, that it was in fact an entrance wound.

Ref Don's comment about the throat wound being a frontal wound, Dr Donald W Miller's comments are to be found here http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/11/donald-w-miller-jr-md/jfk-thought-control-and-thought-crimes/

Pat, what is your position on where the head wound was? IYO was it on the top of the head or the side of the head?

Of the 8 attending Parkland doctors who made notes, only four described the location of a head wound. Those people were Drs. Clark, Perry (MD57), Baxter (MD97), and Jenkins (MD96). Of these four, three described damage to the cerebellum. It was visible extruding from the open wound. In addition to his own notes Dr. Kemp Clark also prepared a typewritten consensus product the weekend of the assassination, an overview of the events in Trauma Room One (MD37). "There is a large wound in the right occipital - parietal region, there is considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebrum and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound." Dr. Clark was the head of neurosurgery at Parkland. He did examine President Kennedy's wounds up close and was the doctor who pronounced him dead. Drs. Clark and McClelland were at the head of the gurney and had the best view of President Kennedy's head wound. Both testified to the Warren Commission. Dr. Clark - "I then examined the wounds in the back of President's head. This is a large gaping wound in the right posterior part with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed." Dr. McClelland "As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described to help out with the tracheotomy I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered apparently by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp. It seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out."(MD 38) These experienced doctors obviously couldn't tell the difference between cerebellum and macerated cerebrum, and couldn't tell where the wound was. With referene to Pat's story about the gorilla in the room, more important is the elephant in the room which is the evidence of the Parkland doctors which says the wound was in the Parietal/occipital area NOT the top of the head.

Many people have changed their minds over the years, Pat, including you ("Like many of us, my position has evolved."-Pat Speer.) His statements about the head wound being in the parietal/occipital region of the head, corresponds to the views of the other doctors and nursing personnel present in Parkland. See what Dr Crenshaw had to say in the following interview.

W.C. Dr McClelland. Dr. McCLELLAND - " As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open."

I find it hard to believe that experienced surgeons at Parkland would describe the hole in the back of the head as being in the Parietal/occipital region, if it wasn't in that area. These were surgeons experienced with gunshot wounds of all kinds, and would hardly be confused by the fact that the body of JDK was lying on its back and were confused into thinking the hole was somewhere it wasn't. Surely most of the patients they saw with serious gunshot wounds would be on lying on their backs. If they were mistaken and were confused into believing the wound was on the top of the head, then I'm glad I never had to visit their hospital for treatment. It doesn't make sense that they were all wrong in their first statements.

Quote by Tom Robinson, Funeral home represenative, who attended the autopsy. When he was was shown the autopsy photo of the top of JFK’s head, showing the entire top of the cranium missing, he told the ARRB staff, “Well that makes it look like that’s what the bullet did, but that’s what the doctors did.” Further, Both Tom Robinson and Navy technician Ed Read, both witnessed illegal and clandestine post mortem surgery performed on JFK’s skull by Dr Humes PRIOR to the official autopsy. After the start of the official autopsy, Dr Humes acknowledged that surgery had indeed been performed on the skull (two FBI agents wrote that down on their notes.) As Humes was the first surgeon after the body was released by Parkland to see and work on the body, and as the surgeons at Parkland did not perform any surgery on the head, it makes it difficult to see who apart, from Humes,could have opened up JFK's cranium.

If you have well paid job, sometimes you have to bite your tongue and go along with the requirements. My dad always said never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes, (because by then, when you've made your judgment, you will be a mile away and you'll have his shoes.)

David, did you notice the comment of Humes to the ARRB. "Page 66 Mr Gunn “Dr Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy? Humes “I didn’t look at my watch if I even had a watch on, but I guess it was 6.45 or 7 o’clock, something like that, approximately.

Capt James Young White House MD. Then word was obtained that the President was at Parkland Memorial Hospital. Within five minutes Doctor Burkley and his group were at the hospital. When Doctor Burkley arrived, the President was already in the emergency room. He had a cut-down in place and a tracheotomy was being performed. Meanwhile, external cardiac massage was being applied. Solu-cortef18 was given IV and an external cardiac pacemaker was obtained. Doctor Burkley immediately evaluated the situation as hopeless as soon as he saw the gaping, bloody macerated huge wound and defect in the right posterior occipital area. This was the President's Personal physician. Was he wrong, Pat?

Thirded (?)

Bump.

That's why it was curtains for JFK.