Robert Prudhomme
-
Posts
4,105 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Robert Prudhomme
-
-
It's funny you should ask that question, Paul. Now that I don't have Mr. Varnell as a distraction, I was just about to expound upon those very things. It will be a much more pleasurable experience without having to deal with Cliff's ramblings about dissolving bullets, rocket propelled darts and invisible bullet wounds.
-
Now, if I was prone to paranoia, I would almost think the person who posted that bogus diagram knew it was out of proprtion.
-
Wow, it worked! How refreshing!
-
Well, Ron, after a while you just get tired of someone and you have to do something.
-
Or flies to the manure heap!
-
The reason I want to block certain members is I have grown tired of attempting to reason with members who are certifiably insane.
-
Goodbye, crazy person.
-
What is the procedure for blocking another member, that I might not have to see that person's posts?
-
You have entirely lost it now, Cliff, and I see no point in continuing to discuss anything with you.
Does anyone know how to block someone so you don't have to see that person's posts?
-
Qualifications?? We don' need no steenkin' qualifications! ANYBODY can be Attorney General!
Even the old guy off of Duck Dynasty.
I do not believe there has ever been an AG who was not a lawyer. The very name implies that one is an attorney.
I'll go one better, has there ever been a president with absolutely no experience in politics or government? If that orange faced clown wins, we will witness the dawn of a whole new age, and you might be very surprised at who gets appointed to what.
How about Donald's two sons as national security advisors?
-
On the right, to the right....please explain the difference, Mr. Webster.
Have you figured out the word "transverse" yet?
-
"He didn't say "contusions and hematoma on the right", he said "it was seen there was some contusions, hematoma to the right of the larnyx."
To a normal person, it would appear he was listing the things he observed to the right of the larynx...."some contusions, hematoma to the right of the larynx...."
You still have not explained how a bullet could strike the larynx and not break the skin (or even leave a mark on it) but then deflect 90° downward and pierce the throat at the level of the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings; making another 90° turn in the process.
-
Hi Sandy
In the top diagram, notice how many tracheal rings there are extending above the part of the ribcage known as the suprasternal notch. I count at least 7 or 8 visible, with several more just out of view. Also, look at the horizontal gap between the trachea and the suprasternal notch at the top of the sternum.
My trachea is actually in contact with my suprasternal notch, and wasn't it you who said all of your tracheal rings are concealed by your suprasternal notch?
As you observed, the larynx in this diagram is massive, and totally disconnected from reality.
Next, look at the upper vertebrae. What is that gap at the top of the vertebral column?
It seems the neck has been stretched out in this diagram, and the various components put out of place.
The top diagram is a gross exaggeration of reality and, if I cultivated paranoid thoughts, I would almost say someone intentionally posted this joke of a diagram just to throw us off the trail.
-
Perry: ...I then began the tracheotomy making a transverse incision right through the wound in the neck.
That was the beginning of a long vertical incision.
Obviously, the tube went in below where the incision started.
Cliff
Do you know what the word "transverse" means?
trans·verse -
What theory?
Carrico reported contusions in the larnyx, as well as hematoma and a slightly deviated larnyx.
What theory have I made about the x-rays?
Just because I inventory the wounds in JFK's throat means I have a theory?
Carrico testified there were contusions and haematoma to the right of the larynx, not in the larynx. You are making things up again, Cliff.
-
You see, Cliff, no matter how you slice it, if the throat wound was an entrance wound, the bullet HAS to break the skin somewhere.
Now, we know the throat wound was directly over the trachea wound, as Perry cut through the middle of the throat wound to gain access to the trachea. He then performed a tracheotomy right where the tear in the trachea was.
As the tear in the trachea was between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings, below the thyroid cartilage, are you saying the bullet hit the thyroid cartilage, without leaving a dent, bruise or even discolouration on the skin, deflected almost 90° downward, broke through the skin at the 2nd/3rd tracheal ring level (turning 90° horizontal?), and tore through the right side of the trachea on its way to fracturing the T1 vertebra????
Seriously, Cliff?
-
BTW, I'm having a little trouble following you here, Cliff. If the projectile hit the larynx and got deflected downward to the T1 vertebra, but didn't leave a visible wound on the larynx, what made the wound in the throat at the level of the 2nd to 3rd rings of the trachea?
Contusions aren't visible wounds?
No, a contusion is a bruise. No one remarked on any visible bruises on the larynx, nor any other marks on the surface of the skin over the larynx. The only mention of contusions and haematoma is from Carrico, and those were all seen internally via the laryngoscope he was using to guide insertion of the endotracheal tube.
Once again, how could the projectile or bullet hit the larynx, not break the skin and deflect downward and go on to hit the T1 vertebra, which was way inside the neck?
Do you know the difference between the larynx, Adam's apple and thyroid cartilage, Cliff?
-
BTW, I'm having a little trouble following you here, Cliff. If the projectile hit the larynx and got deflected downward to the T1 vertebra, but didn't leave a visible wound on the larynx, what made the wound in the throat at the level of the 2nd to 3rd rings of the trachea?
-
How did "haematoma" graduate to "haematoma, contusions" in the space of five days?
-
And, of course, when I go to the "Alphabetical list of witnesses and testimony" found at http://jfkassassination.net/russ/wit.htmand go to the listing for "Carrico, Charles James" there are two listings; "WC Testimony 1" and then "2". I am assuming the "2" stands for "WC Testimony 2".
When I click on the "WC Testimony 1" I get this message:
Not FoundThe requested URL /russ/carrico1.htm was not found on this server.
However, I can click on any other witness's WC testimony and their testimony pops up instantly. Strange, huh? This has happened a couple of other times, coincidentally, when debate was getting hot and heavy.
When I click on "2". I get Carrico's WC testimony from March 25, 1964. It contains the quote from my last post.
"No pulse was present, and at that time, because of the inadequate respirations and the apparent airway injury, a cuffed endotracheal tube was introduced, employing a larynzo scope. Through the larynzo scope there seemed to be some hematoma around the larynx and immediately below the larynx was seen the ragged tracheal injury. The endotracheal tube was inserted past this injury, the cuff inflated, and the tube was connected to a respirator to assist the inadequate respiration. At about this point the nurse reported that no blood pressure was obtained."
Obviously, Cliff Varnell is quoting from the "other" WC testimony of Dr. Carrico.
Cliff's, with no date http://jfkassassinat...ny/carrico1.htm
Mine, March 25, 1964 http://jfkassassinat...ny/carrico2.htm
The only clue I could find in the 25/03/64 WC testimony was right near the end:
"Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Carrico, have I made available to you a letter requesting your appearance on Monday, March 30, before the Commission, and do you acknowledge receipt of that?
Dr. CARRICO - I do.
Mr. SPECTER - And would it be possible for you to attend and testify at that time?
Dr. CARRICO - I certainly can.
Mr. SPECTER - Washington, D.C.
Dr. CARRICO - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Thank you very much, Dr. Carrico.
Dr. CARRICO - Yes, sir."Everyone, please read the two testimonies, and then I would like someone to explain to me why Arlen Specter would take the complete testimony of Dr. Carrico at Parkland Hospital on March 25, 1964, only to take the exact same testimony again in Washington, DC five days later
-
"Carrico: ""there were some contusions, [comma!] hematoma to the right of the larynx, [another comma!] with a minimal deviation of the larynx to the left"
Cliff
Would you please tell us where you obtained this quote of Dr. Carrico's? Is this from his Warren Commission testimony of March 25, 1964?
Do you know what the date of this testimony of Carrico's is? I have testimony dated March 25, 1964, in which Specter questions Carrico. Looking at the two testimonies, the same ground is covered but they are definitely not the same testimonies.
Here is the quote from 25/03/64:
"Through the larynzo scope there seemed to be some hematoma around the larynx and immediately below the larynx was seen the ragged tracheal injury."
Not the same thing at all.
-
We'll have to quote "factoids" to him and accuse him of having paranoid delusions.
-
"Carrico: ""there were some contusions, [comma!] hematoma to the right of the larynx, [another comma!] with a minimal deviation of the larynx to the left"
Cliff
Would you please tell us where you obtained this quote of Dr. Carrico's? Is this from his Warren Commission testimony of March 25, 1964?
bump
-
Thanks, Bart.
That's equivalent to $983 in today's money.
-- Tommy
He wouldn't have spent that much money. It was, after all, really just a light meter.
There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Robert Prudhomme
Of course, Paul.
The best indication, from everything I and Sandy Larsen have been able to find, is that two bullets hit JFK from behind, and these bullets originated from quite high up; possibly in the Dal-Tex Building.
It is hard to determine which shot hit him first but it appears one hit him in the upper back and entered the top of his right lung, and the other hit him near the top of the neck; a tangential wound that allowed the bullet to slide under the base of the back of the skull. This last shot would have ended up at cervical vertebrae C3/C4, and either a fragment or component of this bullet or a particle of bone exited JF's throat at the level of the 2nd/3rd tracheal rings.
Of course, there was also a third shot that hit JFK in the right front of his skull.