Robert Prudhomme

And, as I said earlier, this "projectile" would not leave traces of metal on the tie or shirt. It would, however, leave particles of metal in the vicinity of cervical vertebrae C3/C4, just as x-ray tech Jerrol Custer told the HSCA he recalled seeing in the x-rays he saw of JFK's neck.

Round projectile? a ball ...shot from a musket on the knoll? Nope. It came from behind, and was not a musket ball, although you are correct about it being round. Let's see if Ashton is smart enough to figure it out before I give the answer.

Hi Robert. Good to see you here. I still post there for a few reasons. First of all, Duncan has been gracious with me posting my series (415 installments in one of them so far) as some other sites wouldn't let me post it. I won't post it here because I am sure everyone knows the case well. Doing it has taught me so much that I didn't know even after many years of study.Secondly, I use it as a testing ground for things that I am studying. If his group of WC supporters can't shoot it down then it has some merit IMO. Thirdly, it keeps me sharp on the case. If we all agree on things I tend to learn things at a slower rate. They can get rough and a few of them go too far, but most are okay. They have their beliefs and I have mine. The difference is that I am open to changing mine if supporting evidence is presented. Thanks for the welcome. It's good to see you posting here, Rob. I miss your fiery "take no prisoners" approach to debating.

Hey Rob, long time no see! Still slugging it out with all the trolls over at Dunc's forum? I miss that place like a molar with a big cavity in it LOL.

What the evidence that is RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD shows is that There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat. It is physically impossible. Great. So show us how Edwin Walker put a bullet into JFK's throat—or how Ronald McDonald put one there, for all I care—without it going through FIFTEEN LAYERS OF TIE FABRIC IN THE KNOT. Ashton The exiting bullet did not go through the tie knot. It passed just outside the tie knot, near the bottom of the knot, and nicked the tail of the tie on its way by. It also made a round hole exiting the throat, and left no metal traces on the shirt or tie. Care to hear how it did that? Not in the slightest, because it's both ridiculous and impossible. The nick is not on the back seam-side of the tie. It is on the front. You cannot twist the tail of the tie just below the knot around 180 degrees, as you so often twist the facts to fit your twisted "theories." BZZZZZZT! But thanks for playing. Ashton No one ever said the nick was on the back "seam side" of the tie, my little friend. And it is not necessary to "twist the tail of the tie just below the knot around 180 degrees" in order to put a nick on the front of the tail of the tie. Surely a smart guy such as you can figure out how the front of the tail got nicked by a bullet (or projectile) exiting JFK's shirt. It's really not that complicated, if you think about it a bit. P.S. Figure out how the projectile made a round exit wound in the throat yet, despite the fact it was likely not following its original straight path, and was likely "tumbling", although tumbling is not a word you would associate normally with this kind of projectile? I've already given you and everyone else the answer to this one, though I noticed no one has had the savvy to pick up on it yet.

Three shots to the head from the same gun? An automatic? -- Tommy Lipsey did not describe three shots to the head, Thomas. He heard the autopsy doctors describe three entrance wounds; one in the back of JFK's head, one high on the back of the neck just below the back of the skull and one at the base of the back of the neck. Go to the link and read the interview. It is an eye opener. http://www.history-m...HSCA-Lipsey.htm

Thanks for the brief biography, Sandy. As can be seen, Lipsey had no medical experience and this was, in fact, the first autopsy he had ever witnessed. According to the HSCA interview, Lipsey witnessed the entire autopsy plus the enbalming and reconstruction process performed by the morticians; only leaving the theatre for breaks of a few minutes when General Wehle stopped in to relieve him. Lipsey had a good vantage point, too, no more than 12-15 feet from the table on which JFK's corpse lay during the autopsy. From what he described, the three doctors made no effort to conceal their discussions from Lipsey and the others present, although Lipsey was the first to admit a lot of the medical discussion went right over his head. The thing I like most about Lt. Richard Lipsey is he kept his oath of silence for 14 years following the autopsy, discussing with no one what went on at that autopsy. It was only at the request of the HSCA interviewers that he reluctantly broke his oath of silence. Following the interview, he didn't go on speaking tours or write books about his JFK experience but, instead, went back to the quiet life he had been living since he left the military in 1974 and, as far as I can tell, made no effort to share his recollections further. The amazing thing about Lipsey's interview is that while, in 2016, the details provide earth shattering revelations to those of us well studied in the medical evidence of the JFK assassination, how many in 1978, outside of a handful of researchers, would appreciate the full implications of what his recollections pointed to? Did Lipsey himself understand the implications of the wounds he was describing? I really don't believe so, as he parrots the autopsy doctors in describing three bullets striking JFK from behind and high up, and all three bullets that struck JFK coming from the same weapon. Although he never says so in the interview, he seems to support the notion of a single shooter and he looks down upon conspiracy theorists as uninformed amateurs. Lt. Richard Lipsey's interview is valuable simply because I believe he is answering every question as honestly as he can. With no axe to grind, he seems to be delivering the real goods to us. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm

What the evidence that is RELEVANT TO THIS THREAD shows is that There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat. It is physically impossible. Great. So show us how Edwin Walker put a bullet into JFK's throat—or how Ronald McDonald put one there, for all I care—without it going through FIFTEEN LAYERS OF TIE FABRIC IN THE KNOT. Ashton The exiting bullet did not go through the tie knot. It passed just outside the tie knot, near the bottom of the knot, and nicked the tail of the tie on its way by. It also made a round hole exiting the throat, and left no metal traces on the shirt or tie. Care to hear how it did that? You might be surprised at the answer.

Should I retrieve the large bore poison needle posts you made, Ashton? That is, if you haven't deleted them.

"Well, congratulations again, then, Robert, because it's your theory, not mine. All I did was recite facts of record. It looks like you've come up with your own theory that could fit the actual facts. I find that a vast improvement over your usual tiresome efforts to twist and cherry-pick facts to fit loopy theories. I think you may be getting somewhere. My hat's off to you. (I apologize for only having a photo that shows my hat still on.) Ashton" No, Ashton, that is your theory. You laid it all out for us, and told us the throat and tracheal wounds were caused by insertion of poison via a 1/4 inch needle in Trauma Room One. Unless, of course, you have the audacity to say you never posted such a thing. (I would be trying to weasel out of it, too, if I was you)

Au contraire, petit guy. We have demonstrated over and over how ridiculous your arguments are. You simply refuse to listen to reason.

Robert, sometimes posts here make me smile, and sometimes even make me chuckle, but few are able to make me guffaw—so congratulations on this one. Here, after a wonderful laugh, are a few actual facts: ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY was at Parkland Hospital, by his own admission, within as little as three minutes of the arrival of JFK at Parkland hospital. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY was already in the small Trauma Room 1 on Dr. Carrico's arrival in the room from across the hall, where Carrico had been tending to John Connally, as Dr. Carrico has testified: "Admiral Burkley, I believe was his name, the President's personal physician, was there as soon as he [JFK] got to the hospital." ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY, while in Trauma Room 1, personally "checked the President's physical condition," "viewed the President" at the "head of the table," and "saw President Kennedy's wounds at Parkland Hospital." ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY personally supplied John F. Kennedy's blood type, which happened very early on, before Nurse Henchliffe left Trauma Room 1 to go get the necessary blood, which she says was within about two minutes of JFK's actual arrival inside Trauma Room 1. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY then was in Trauma Room 1 with Nurse Diana Bowron, who is documented as having lied about the throat wound. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY was in Trauma Room 1 with Nurse Diana Bowron and Dr. Carrico when Kennedy's clothing was initially partially removed, including his tie, and the opening of his shirt by Dr. Carrico—at which time Carrico first observed the throat wound. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY was in Trauma Room 1 when the cutdowns were done to start administering fluids to JFK. Jaqueline Kennedy was still outside Trauma Room 1 on a folding metal chair. Some hospital personnel felt she even was being neglected and arranged for some water for her, and asked if she would like to remove her bloodstained gloves, which she would not do. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY was in Trauma Room 1, within arms' reach, when Malcom Perry came in and had the conversation with Dr. Carrico about the throat wound, then started the tracheotomy. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY was in Trauma Room 1 when steroids were administered to John F. Kennedy, and in fact ordered the administration of the steroids himself, and in fact supplied the steroids to be used: SolU Cortef (spelled in evidence as Sol U Cortef). The assertion that Carrico administered steroids on his own is yet another willful and malicious falsehood designed to deceive. The source in testimony of that falsehood is Malcolm Perry himself—entered into the record under the guiding questioning of John J. McCloy himself—and the motive for the lie was to cover up the presence and activities of George Gregory Burkley inside Trauma Room 1. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY personally went into the corridor and brought Jacqueline Kennedy into Trauma Room 1 only after the tracheotomy incision had been made—when he was damned good and ready for her to be there. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY had become John F. Kennedy's personal physician only about four months earlier, in July 1963. DIANA BOWRON had arrived from England at Parkland hospital on 4 August 1963—less than a month after Burkley had been announced as Kennedy's personal physician. MALCOLM PERRY had returned to Parkland Hospital, after a year away in San Francisco, on or around 1 September 1963—about a month after Bowron's arrival at Parkland. DIANA BOWRON lied about the throat wound. MALCOLM PERRY made the incision that destroyed any chance of competent forensic analysis of the throat wound. DR. ROBERT MCCLELLAND testified that Perry's incistion "obliterated it [the throat wound]." DR. JAMES JOSEPH HUMES, who performed the autopsy, had no idea when he did that there had been a throat wound. The next morning he called Perry, who said, "Oh, yeah, there was a wound right in the middle of the neck by the tie, and we used that for the tracheotomy." Humes said of what Perry had done to the wound, "Well, they obliterated, literally obliterated—" And: "There was a big gaping tracheotomy wound in the anterior neck [throat]. I learned later that there had been a gunshot [sic] wound in that location, but I didn't know it. That was 99 percent of my problem." MALCOLM PERRY is the first person who told the entire world, during the press conference at Parkland, the lie that JFK had been shot in the throat from the front, which is patently impossible by all laws of physics. ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY reportedly went up, at some point, to the operating room where Connally was being worked on, and then told Secret Service agent Kellerman that Connally "still has the bullet in him." [bullet—not "fragment."] According to Connally himself, there was such a bullet—but it fell from his thigh to the floor when the medical personnel rolled him "off the stretcher and onto the examining table." That HAD to have been in the trauma room where he originally was seen by Carrico et al., not the operating room upstairs. According to Connally, a "nurse picked it [the bullet] up and slipped it into her pocket." No one has identified this nurse. MALCOLM PERRY claimed in Warren Commission testimony that "a bullet was not removed from Governor Connally's leg." ADMIRAL GEORGE GREGORY BURKLEY oversaw every aspect of the autopsy, and allowed it to be completed with NO IDENTIFICATION OR EVEN MENTION OF ANY THROAT WOUND. Humes had to change his autopsy findings AFTER talking to Perry the following morning, and getting Perry to admit that there had been a hole in JFK's throat, exactly where Perry had sliced for the tracheostomy, which had OBLITERATED the throat wound for any forensic purposes, including autopsy. Ashton Gray So, let's see now, Ashton. Next, are you going to tell us Burkley administered poison to JFK in Trauma Room One, via a 1/4 inch diameter needle attached to a syringe; a needle large enough to drink a milkshake through? And then, just for good measure, and with several doctors and nurses watching, Burkley's partner in crime Dr. Malcolm Perry "obliterated" the throat wound in the process of performing a tracheotomy on JFK, just to cover Burkley's tracks? That has got to be one of the stupidest theories I have ever heard. Do you believe Perry was able to conceal the tear made in the right side of JFK's trachea when he made the tracheotomy incision in the trachea? Let me explain to you why that would be a little more difficult, and why your theory falls apart at this point. The tear in JFK's trachea was not, contrary to popular belief, through half the diameter of the trachea. "Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Perry, you mentioned an injury to the trachea. Will you describe that as precisely as you can, please? Dr. PERRY - Yes. Once the transverse incision through the skin and subcutaneous tissues was made, it was necessary to separate the strap muscles covering the anterior muscles of the windpipe and thyroid. At that point the trachea was noted to be deviated slightly to the left and I found it necessary to sever the exterior strap muscles on the other side to reach the trachea. I noticed a small ragged laceration of the trachea on the anterior lateral right side. I could see the endotracheal tube which had been placed by Dr. Carrico in the wound, but there was evidence of air and blood around the tube because I noted the cuff was just above the injury to the trachea." Gee, Ashton, how did your razor sharp large bore 1/4 inch needle make a "small ragged laceration of the trachea"? And wouldn't a "small ragged laceration of the trachea on the anterior lateral right side" indicate that it was only the right front quarter of the trachea that was involved? Above is a tracheostomy site made on a trachea, and ready for the insertion of a tracheostomy tube. Tracheostomy tube in place, showing balloon inflated to secure tube in place and to maintain airtight seal. Everyone knows the incision in JFK's throat was transverse (horizontal). What did the incision in the trachea look like, and was it able to "obliterate" the tear in the trachea? The tear in the trachea involved the right front and right side of the trachea, and did not go straight across the trachea. Rather, the tracheal tear was a wound that descended, back to front, from the 2nd to the 3rd tracheal ring. In order for Perry to "obliterate" the tracheal wound with his tracheal incision, can you imagine the butchery required to hide the tracheal wound, aside from the fact he would have damn near severed the trachea in half in the process?

Ramon Have you ever shot a deer?

Bob: Recall that we are talking about millimetric, microsecond level. Are you referring to entry or exit? In any event, I would expect: ( a ) On entry: very little difference. ( b ) On exit/traversal: dramatic difference. JFK would have been left headless as the Australian demonstration corroborated. -Ramon Ramon Let me be the first to tell you that you cannot learn everything from a book, and that you are full of it to the eyeballs. I have NEVER seen a bullet, be it a FMJ (illegal for hunting), soft point or hollow point bullet leave an animal headless. This is the stuff cartoons and documentaries from Australia are made of, and anyone who believes it possible to remove a deer's (or a man's) head with a bullet is a complete and utter fool. I would expect a fairly large exit wound from the hollow point but, that is not what I was after. What other MAJOR difference would you see?

You obviously don't do a lot of hunting, Ramon. If you shot one deer in the head with a full metal jacket bullet, and another deer in the head with a hollow point bullet, do you think there would be a visible difference in how the two deer reacted? P.S. Round nosed bullets enter skull bone just as easily as "pointy" bullets. "Pointy" bullets don't enter bone easier than round nosed bullets.

I think the time has come to discuss the observations of JFK's autopsy made by Lt. Richard Lipsey, and to further discuss who Lipsey was, and how it came to be he was able to witness almost the entire autopsy from such close quarters.

I must have read Lt. Lipsey's testimony BEFORE I read one of your sermons on frangible bullets. Had I read them in reverse order instead, I surely would have let out a big AH-HAH! upon reading this. They DID find pieces of the bullet in the back. "Particles." I've been entertaining for some time Cliff Varnell's blood-soluble bullet theory for the back wound. But now I'm having second thoughts. Again. Robert, I remember watching videos of that bullet with lead shot in it and capped with some kind of plastic or something, colored red IIIRC. In particular I remember one time when shot into gelatin, most the pieces dispersed within 3 inches of the surface the was hit, But a few of the pieces went much further. One time they even exited the other end of the gelatin. So I'm thinking -- and this was discussed in my other thread a month or two ago -- that the particles dispersed quickly upon hitting Kennedy's skin, and maybe some hit a rib and embedded themselves there or were deflected downward toward the feet. But maybe a few particle continued on through and punctured the lung. Maybe some even exited the chest, leaving tiny wounds that were not noticed. But this is off-topic for this thread. LOL No more off topic than the last couple of pages of this thread. This is one of the reasons I posted these excerpts from Lt. Lipsey's HSCA interview. I have a vague recollection this post was originally about the throat wound (or lack of a throat wound) and I thought you would be quite interested in Lt. Lipsey's observations about the autopsy teams' exploration of JFK's wounds. Do you not find the entry wound at the top of the neck, just below the skull, rather interesting? Do you think we should begin a thread just to deal with Lt. Lipsey's autopsy observations? P.S. If a frangible bullet penetrated JFK's back 3 inches and dispersed, this bullet would be WAY into JFK's lung. Watch the video again. The wound track is visible in the gelatin, and the bullets stay intact for at least 2 inches of penetration, and the bullets do not break up on the surface upon impact.

From the HSCA interview of Lt. Richard Lipsey, January 18, 1978: "Q: To follow that up, as you should well know because I take it you do hunt a lot, locating wounds in hair is very difficult. The sighting. Did you visibly see the wounds in the back of the head, what you feel were the entrance wounds? Was based on what the doctors stated that we know their opinions… [Lipsey is interrupting with "No…That's…No."] LIPSEY: No. That’s...No. I hope I’m not contradicting myself. But at this point, there again, like I said, it's been a long time. I feel that there was no really entrance wound --maybe I said that --in the rear of his head. There was a point where they determined the bullet entered the back of his head but I believe all of that part of his head was blown. I mean I think it just physically blew away that part of his head. You know, just like a strip right across there or may have been just in that area -- just blew it out.. Q: So you say the damage caused by the entrance and the exit of the bullet to the head caused one large hole? LIPSEY: To the best of my recollection, yes it did. But one, the other one went in the back of the neck. Like a say, I saw the blood spots and what have you, but they weren't tremendous, not a blow-a-way like this. But, of course, what little I know about it, which isn't a hell of a lot, your bone is right there, so when it hit it, the bullet probably expanded, hit something solid and ripped. But here, it went in to tissue before it hit anything." http://www.history-m...HSCA-Lipsey.htm

From the HSCA interview of Lt. Richard Lipsey, January 18, 1978: "Q: Getting back to the entrances you just stated one exit you believed was on the right hand side of the head. Now what about the other entrances, what about the corresponding exits if there were any? Let's clarify that a little more. For starting, one… LIPSEY: The bullet entered lower part of the head or upper part of the neck. [long pause] To the best of my knowledge, came out the front of the neck. But the one that I remember they spent so much time on, obviously, was the one they found did not come out. There was a bullet -- that's my vivid recollection cause that's all they talked about. For about two hours all they talked about was finding that bullet. To the rest of my recollection they found some particles but they never found the bullet -- pieces of it, traces of it. The best of my knowledge, this is one thing I definitely remember they just never found that whole bullet." http://www.history-m...HSCA-Lipsey.htm

From the HSCA interview of Lt. Richard Lipsey, January 18, 1978: "Q: Okay, getting back to the bullets themselves, not the bullets themselves but the entrances, can you just go over again the entrances as you remember them? LIPSEY: Alright, as I remember them there was one bullet that went in the back of the head that exited and blew away part of his face. And that was sort of high up, not high up but like this little crown on the back of your head right there, three or four inches above your neck. And then the other one entered at more of less the top of the neck, the other one entered more of less at the bottom of the neck." http://www.history-m...HSCA-Lipsey.htm

Know why the perspective is all wrong in the BYP? Sandy pointed out that the posts on the right lean right, the window on the left leans left, and the support post for the stairs is close to being plumb. What about the gate itself? The whole thing leans to the right; a match for the 2nd post from the right. It breaks all of the rules.

From the HSCA interview of Lt. Richard Lipsey, January 18, 1978: "LIPSEY: Yeah, well as far as the exact x-rays were taken, no I don’t recall. I do recall the comments from the doctors, you know, who started examining the body before they did anything, you know, looking at the body, looking at where the bullets had entered the back of the his head. It was obvious that one bullet entered the back of his head and exited on the right side of his face and pretty well blew away the right side of his head. And then the other two bullets had entered the lower part of his neck and the best of my knowledge, or the best of my memory, one had exited. The other bullet had entered from behind and hit his chest cavity and the bullet went down into the body. And during the autopsy, this is the only part that I can imagine would be of any--really, what I’ve told you right there, of strictly confidential nature that was never written up anywhere. And I presume, am I right, that this tape and this conversation is strictly confidential? You know, it’s not going to be published I guess is what I’m getting at?" http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm

The horizontal lines in the stonework are perpendicular to the force of gravity, unlike the horizontal structures in the BYP.

Well, Ashton, just because a person is gay -- as General Walker evidently was -- does not disqualify them from a JFK assassination plot. Huh? Um, I think you might want to read what I wrote again. I just said that he was central to the plot. He cooperated with the plotters—the CIA. He participated with the plotters—the CIA. He lied for the plotters—the CIA. He knew in advance that a bullet was going to be fired into his house that night so that it could be collected into "evidence" (with the usual CIA-fingerprint clouded chain of custody). Walker was a marionette dancing at the end of CIA strings. The reason the CIA arranged it with one of their blackmailed marionettes was so that bullet could be trotted out months later (with a lot more confusion and contradictions) as a way to tie Oswald and the "Oswald rifle" to the JFK assassination (with as much confusion and contradictions as possible). During the same time frame as the phony, staged "attempted assassination" on Walker, the rifle was missing for several days, during which time— it is my contention—bullets were fired from it into a variety of materials and recovered that later "turned up" in the JFK case—either at Parkland, or in the limo, or as a switcheroo even for the Walker bullet itself. That, by the way, can account for this: The fibrous debris recovered from the bullet fragment of C.E. 567 was thus determined to consist of paper fibers and unidentified proteinaceous material of non-textile origin, and did not originate from the clothing of John F. Kennedy or John B. Connally. Further Scientific Examination of JFK Assassination Evidence Mary T. Baker, Smithsonian Center for Materials Research and Education Margaret Ann T. Kelly, NARA Document Conservation Research and Testing Laboratory December 14, 1999 I regret that they did not leave a trail of blood leading from Dallas to the front door of Langley for you to follow. I'm sure it was a bureaucratic oversight. Perhaps you should write a letter to your Congressman. Ashton Ashton Are you purposely ignoring the fact the Walker bullet was described by DPD detectives as being "steel jacketed", and that CE 573 was jacketed in a copper alloy? And that Walker himself hotly contested that CE 573 was not the bullet recovered from his home? Is this how one "cooperates" with plotters?

Also, there is some question as to whether or not CE 573 was fired from C2766. The FBI's SA Robert A. Frazier testified to the WC about CE 573, and the measurements he gave for this bullet work out to a bullet diameter smaller than a 6.5mm Carcano bullet.