Robert Prudhomme

How come I gotta do all the dirty work?

Well, gosh, Bob. You are the one who seems to be obsessed with finding Calvery in Couch / Darnell, etc.

I figured a good way of ID-ing her for sure in any 11/22/63 photo or film (so she can be spotted in other photos and films) would be to ask one of the women with whom she claimed to have witnessed the assassination (Reed, Hicks, and Westbrook) "whether or not Thierry Speth identified Gloria correctly down there by the Stemmons sign."

Just a suggestion.

BTW, I still don't understand what your ideal scenario for Calvery would be. Standing on the "island" during the motorcade? Standing by the Thornton sign during the motorcade? Standing with "Reed" and "Hicks" by the Stemmons sign during the motorcade? Shooting at JFK from a TSBD window during the motorcade?

In answering this question, just forget what she said, and forget what Reed and Hicks and Westbrook said, and forget about Thierry Speth's alleged "identification" of her, and forget about what we know she looked like from her high school year book and her wedding picture, etc.

Where do you want her to be and what do you want her to do in order for your theory-in-progress about Shelley and Lovelady and Baker and Truly and Oswald "to work"?

Please don't go into any detail here about those characters.

The Question For Robert Prudhomme: Where do you want Gloria Jean Calvery to be during the motorcade, and what do you want her to for the first few minutes after it, you know, to make your theory-in-progress "work"?

--Tommy

Bumped for Mr. Robert Prudhomme, who seems to be avoiding it.

BTW, Thomas, I might point out that it is not a matter of where I WANT Gloria Calvery to be that is important. Where she actually was during the assassination, and what she did in the first few minutes following the assassination could well be one of the most important pieces of information yet.

P.S.

Despite Barto's slur on my work, I still give credit and kudos to him for bringing forth the statement of Peggy Joyce Hawkins, which is a lot more than he would ever do for me.

Of course, though, I am not a small man.

No, it was not a hunch, Greg, and you can take that to the bank. I did a great amount of very careful research on this matter, and there were a great number of other factors that pointed toward Baker not immediately entering the TSBD.

Wasn't Bart Kamp a great defender of Baker immediately entering the TSBD? Or was he always defending Lovelady and Shelley being seen in the Couch/Darnell film, walking down the Elm St. extension as Baker ran in the opposite direction? I recall he left your forum in a big huff at least once, vowing never to return. And then came back a week later. Isn't that what your buddy MacRae does on a regular basis here?

Whatever the case, I have bumped the thread "Who saw Baker enter the TSBD" just to show it was slightly more than a "hunch" that made me question Baker's movements.

bump

Thought I'd revive this old thread, in light of new evidence revealed at the ROKC.

I'm a bit disturbed to see that the posts of members Bart Kamp and Randy Sorenson have been deleted in entirety.

I much appreciate "Faroe Islander" giving me credit at the ROKC for being the one to deduce that Baker may not have entered the TSBD as quickly as we have been led to believe.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bob had a hunch by the looks of it, nothing more than that??? Barto, are you seriously going to attempt to take credit for this "discovery" now? That might pass for research on the ROKC, but you'll be laughed off of any other forum.

Ray Mitcham found this thread on the ROKC and I thought I'd share it here:

Moderator
Posts: 1316

Peggy Joyce Hawkins came to collect her husband from the TSBD, watched the limo and the the pres. getting shot and went back to the TSBD where she saw a motor cycle policeman in front of the TSBD and she heard remarks on his radio about the railroad yard.............so did Baker stand in front of those steps longer than has been thought?

Strange one....

Add on that she is mentioned on the list of people on the so called roll call sheet as mentioned by Ed, even though she was not a employee there, but her husband was and she must have made it back in there when the cops shut the gaff down.

http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13151626-the-roll-call-remedy?page=4

And I see that Jim Fetzer claimed she was on the front steps which is bollox if you read the document carefully, then again everything is fake according to Jimbo

--

This is the first time I've seen this statement, and it seems to point to Baker lingering in front of the TSBD.

I didn't realize Canadians used baseball metaphors. Hockey was always my favorite sport (and I have the collapsed vertabrae to prove it!) and I imagine you also prefer hockey to baseball.

We like hockey lots but American baseball is big up here too. No collapsed vertebrae but I do have one missing tooth.

Only ONE missing tooth? Sorry to hear you spent SO MUCH time on the bench!

I was always bigger than the other kids. As they say, "tis better to give than receive".

That is an amazing find, though, Tom. How could anyone support the SBT after reading this memo?

The ones that support it and know better, have an agenda. That few that actually believe it -- I can't make any sense out of them at all. Possibly the individuals will believe *anything* said by an authority figure...

Was this kept hidden for many decades?

I have no idea. IIRC, Harold Weisberg stated that in a personal Carrico stated that the two nurses used scalpels to remove the tie and shirt and jacket. Prior to that the slits were controversial. In a 1997 video interview conducted by the Sixth Floor Museum he states that they used scissors. I don't offhand recall the nurses being asked what they used, but I will re-read their testimony.

Tom

Hi Tom

Judging from the date on this United States Government Memorandum (26/11/63), this memo might possibly even be hidden in the bowels of the WCR. If anyone reading this knows more about this, I would be very interested to know where this memo eventually wound up, and how long it has been available to the public.

I'm just waiting for someone like DVP to show up with a brilliant rebuttal such as, "Well, the bullet was covered in blood and tissue, and this acted as a barrier between the bullet and the collar, preventing the bullet from leaving traces of metal behind."

The author of the memo seems to believe there should have been metallic traces on the slit in the shirt collar.

Do I get a "You really hit one out of the park for that one"?

LOL of course. My Ed Forum sluggers, Tom and Ray!

I didn't realize Canadians used baseball metaphors. Hockey was always my favorite sport (and I have the collapsed vertabrae to prove it!) and I imagine you also prefer hockey to baseball.

Tom

We like hockey lots but American baseball is big up here too. No collapsed vertebrae but I do have one missing tooth.

That is an amazing find, though, Tom. How could anyone support the SBT after reading this memo? Was this kept hidden for many decades?

Well once again, my post vanished when I tried to post it!!!

One more try...

Hey Bob,

I was able to find the source. Glad you asked because I either hadn't read the entire memo, or I had forgotten that as well as stating that a spectrographic analysis on the hole in the back of the shirt that revealed traces from a jacketed bullet, it also states that the slit in the front of the shirt was tested in the same manner and there were no traces of a bullet.

Here's a link to the document. The results of the tests are indicated in the last sentence of paragraphs 1 and 2:

http://s166.photobucket.com/user/ed_mccauley/media/spectrographic%20analysis%20if%20JFK%20shirt%20slit%20and%20back%20bullet%20hole_zpscrmwctem.jpg.html?filters[user]=142410050&filters[recent]=1&sort=1&o=0

Do I get a "You really hit one out of the park for that one"?

Tom

LOL of course. My Ed Forum sluggers, Tom and Ray!

Bob,

the throat, just over the trachea at a level just below the larynx

Since you mentioned the larynx and trachea...

My research has indicated that the trachea begins immediately below the Larynx, and in an adult male that would occur at the juncture of C6 and C7. Would you agree with that?

Carrico and Perry describe the 'throat wound' as just below the larynx. I'm attempting to find a statement as to how far below the larynx the wound/tear in the trachea was actually located. I have a vague memory of it being located at the "3rd ring" in the trachea, but I can't seem to find that statement. Any thoughts?

Thanks,

Tom

Hi Tom

Yes, the trachea begins at the base of the larynx. The third ring (cartilege) of the trachea can be seen below, and is at about the juncture of C5/C6. The base of the larynx can be seen at the juncture of C4/C5. I seem to recall the wound being described as at the 3rd ring of the trachea, too, but also cannot recall where I saw this.

The next diagram shows the trachea again, and the last panel shows what Malcolm Perry was referring to. As he stated, it was coincidental that the throat wound was in exactly the precise location preferred as a tracheostomy site.

Whether this is merely another of the bizarre coincidences that seem to plague this case, or it points to something more sinister, is still worth investigating.

Tom said:

"Spectrographic analysis of the hole in the back of the shirt revealed traces of the bullet."

This is interesting, Tom, and I was not aware the shirt had been tested in this manner. Could you provide more details on this?

Well said, Roy. These guys are moving in to Cinqueland.

Ray,

Since Ashton stated he is very busy with his book but still took the time to provide a thorough response to my question, since I've read the entire thread, and you may be referring directly to me in your statement, I'll jump in here and make a few comments.

First, earlier in the thread he was asked 'what' could have caused the throat wound if it was not a bullet. He speculated that it could have been a large-bore needle. In response to a question from me, he indicated that he didn't think that this actually happened, but he was trying to answer a question and was speculating.

In response to a question of mine, Ashton: "Seriously, I don't have any "belief" about the throat wound having been created with a large-bore needle." Later, he clearly stated that "If, and that's a big 'if' a needle was used..." so he is not stating that actually happened.

If your statement that "These guys are moving in to Cinqueland." includes me, at no time have I stated that I believe or disbelieve in the 'needle' theory. If you are referring to something other than the needle you'll have to clarify...

Tom

Seriously, Tom?

With a title thread such as "There was no Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat", Mr. Ashton is now claiming he doesn't really believe his own theory about a large bore needle? Then why propose it in the first place?

He seemed quite comfortable defending this theory when he first proposed it. Is he a little uncomfortable with it, now that I have begun to show it as being a little ridiculous?

This is the diagram Mr. Ashton first posted in support of his theory. Note the diameter of this needle is shown as .2320 inches. This is the size of 1/4 inch copper tubing, and is not the size of needle used to inject substances into the human body. I have horses, and even when giving one of them a large I.M. injection of penicillin, I have never used a needle anywhere near that big.

The reason the needle above is called a "piercing" needle is that needles such as this are used to pierce the pleural cavity of the chest in cases of tension pneumothorax, in order to relieve built up air pressure. The large bore of this needle allows for rapid decompression of a tension pneumothorax.

It is quite obvious that Ashton Gray has no basic medical knowledge, and has never consulted a physician regarding his "injection of poison via a large bore needle into the throat theory".

Quite simply put, the throat, just below the larynx, is possibly the worst place to attempt to introduce a poisonous substance into the body via injection. The subcutaneous layers of the skin are extremely thin at this point, and the trachea is made up of tough cartilagenous rings that do not readily absorb foreign substances.

The three main types of needle injection are intravenous (directly into a vein), intramuscular (into a large muscle such as the buttocks, thighs, back of arms, etc.) or subcutaneous. Subcutaneous means the upper layers of the skin, and the injected product, such as insulin, is absorbed by blood flow through that area of the skin. However, subcutaneous injections are usually reserved for areas such as the mid-abdomen, where the subcutaneous layer is far thicker on the human body.

Unfortunately for Mr. Gray, the throat, just over the trachea at a level just below the larynx, does not qualify well for any of these types of injection, and it is highly doubtful any doctor would attempt to utilize this site for injecting poison.

From Commission Exhibit No. 392 - the medical reports (Appendix VIII, WCR):

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/app8.htm

"The President arrived in the Emergency Room at exactly 12:43 p. m. in his limousine. He was in the back seat, Gov. Connally was in the front seat of the same car, Gov. Connally was brought out first and was put in room two. President was brought out next and put in room one. Dr. Clark pronounced the President dead at 1 p. m. exactly. All of the President's belongings except his watch were given to the Secret Service. His watch was given to Mr. O. P. Wright. He left the Emergency Room, the President, at about 2 p.m. in an O'Neal ambulance. He was put in a bronze colored plastic casket after being wrapped in a blanket and was taken out of the hospital. He was removed from the hospital. The Gov. was taken from the Emergency Room to the Operating Room.

The President's wife refused to take off her bloody gloves, clothes. She did take a towel and wipe her face. She took her wedding ring off and placed it on one of the President's fingers." (Italics mine)

Note, in Italics, that JFK was "wrapped in a blanket".

Questions for Ashton Gray (or anyone else who wants to explain this all for me):

1. Why use a "large bore" needle (+4 mm) to administer a poison that could have been injected I.M. with a tiny needle on some other part of the body?

2. This was obviously not an I.V. injection. Why choose the location of the throat, when the trachea would obviously become damaged as well?

3. Why inject this large bore needle into the throat, when it seems quite likely the conspirators wanted all shots to be seen as coming from the rear?

4. How did Malcolm Perry "obliterate" the throat wound by merely making scalpel incisions leading from the left and right side of this wound? Was the wound not still there and quite visible? Was the wound to the right side of the trachea also not still there, and quite visible as well?

5. If you believe Malcolm Perry was part of the conspiracy, and deliberately "obliterated" the throat wound, in an attempt to hide the administration of poison through this wound, why does Dr. Perry, 3.5 hours later, report both the entrance wound in JFK's throat PLUS the wound in the right side of JFK's trachea in his medical report?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/app8.htm

"At the time of initial examination, the pt. was noted as non-responsive. The eyes were deviated and the pupils were dilated. A considerable quantity of blood was noted on the patient, the carriage and the floor. A small wound was noted in the midline of the neck, in the lower third anteriorly. It was exuding blood slowly. A large wound of the right posterior cranium was noted, exposing severely lacerated brain. Brain tissue was noted in the blood at the head of the carriage.

Pulse or heartbeat were not detectable but slow spasmodic respiration was noted. An endotracheal tube was in place and respiration was being assisted. An intravenous infusion was being placed in the leg.

At this point I noted that respiration was ineffective and while additional venisections were done to administer fluids and blood, a tracheostomy was effected. A right lateral injury to the trachea was noted. The tracheostomy tube was put in place and the cuff inflated and respiration assisted. Closed chest cardiac massage was instituted after placement of sealed drainage chest tubes, but without benefit. Electrocardiographic evaluation revealed that no detectable electrical activity existed in the heart. Resuscitation attempts were abandoned after the team of physicians determined that the patient had expired.

Malcolm O. Perry, M.D.
1630 hr 22 Nov 1963"

As I posted earlier in this thread, I have theorized that a fragment from the nose of a frangible bullet may have made the throat wound. The reason it did not go through the shirt collar and tie was that its energy was expended by the time it pierced the skin.

I cannot recall which doctor said it, or when he said it but, one of the Parkland physicians described the throat wound as being made by a bullet with an extremely reduced velocity.

Lt Richard Lipsey, in his deposition to the HSCA, related what he heard while observing the autopsy. It seems the autopsy doctors were convinced one shot had entered the back and ranged downward, either into the chest or the abdomen, and a great deal of their time was spent dissecting organs looking for this bullet or fragments of it. They also believed one bullet either entered low on the back of the skull or grazed the base of the skull, and the throat wound was a result of a fragment of this bullet either passing through the base of the skull or under the base of the skull. Considering the downward angle of most of the shots, this is not that farfetched.

This idea of the throat wound being the result of a bullet hitting near the base of the skull is further supported by the deposition of the x-ray technician Jerrol Custer, who took all of JFK's x-rays that night. In his deposition to the HSCA, he claimed the x-ray of JFK's neck was not the one he recalled, and that the one he took showed many fragments in the vicinity of cervical vertebrae C3/C4.

Looking at this diagram, it is possible to see how all of this would line up with the throat wound.

Regarding the discrepancy between Nurse Bowron's WC testimony and her 1993 interview, as they pertain to the neck wound, we seem to see a growing pattern here when we compare this discrepancy to the testimony, and later interviews, of other witnesses.

Dare I suggest alterations to the WC testimony of many witnesses by WC lawyers?

Ray hits another one out of the park. Good show, again!

Nurse Bowron in 1993.

”... I grabbed a gurney in the hall and together with an orderly ran to the entrance.I saw that the person in the back of the car was injured so I climbed in to render what assistance I could until such a time as we could move him to a trolley, then to the trauma room (others were assisting the Governor in the front seat). I saw that there was a massive amount of blood on the back seat and in order to find the cause, I lifted his head and my fingers went into a lrage wound at the back of his head; I turned his head a seeing the size of the wound realized that I could not stop the bleeding. I turned his head back and saw an entry wound in the front of the throat. "

Seems the throat wound was there before the victim was moved into Parkland.

The throat wound was above the tie, not behind it. The shirt shows cuts behind the tie, not a bullet hole.

Mr. Dulles. I see.

Dr. Carrico. The entrance. All we knew this was a small wound here.

Mr. Dulles. ‘I see. And you put your hand right above where your tie is? Dr. Carrico. Yes, sir ; just where the tie---

Mr. Dulles. A little bit to the left.

Dr. Carrico. To the right.

Mr. Dulles. Yes; to the right.

Note the way Dulles interrupted Dr Carrico when he was describing exactly where the throat wound was.

Aint nothin' like a man that does his homework, Ray. Good show!

A fragment from the nose of a frangible bullet either entering low in the back of the skull, or glancing off the base of the rear of the skull and impacting the vertebrae at C3/C4, could have made the wound in the throat. If it had expended all of its energy by the time it exited the throat, it may not have gone through the shirt collar.

Where did it go? I'd check JFK's briefs.

I bumped this post, just in case Mr. Grey did not see it. As this addresses the actual topic of this thread, unlike many of the recent posts here, I thought it worthwhile to bring it back to the spotlight.

Incidentally, the notion of the throat wound being caused by a fragment that had just enough energy left to break through the skin was proposed by a Parkland doctor (which one escapes me at the moment * ) while he was testifying to the Warren Commission. I believe he was attempting to explain why the throat wound was such a clean wound without ragged edges.

* I've tried to find which doctor referred to the throat wound as being caused by a very low velocity bullet or fragment, to no avail. Anyone?

I remember reading somewhere that the rifle needed some work before they even tested it. That what i am looking for.

Aha! That is an interesting topic, and I'm glad you brought it up.

I'll be back in a few hours, and I'll share with you what I know about that.

One important point I should make is that the amount of time it takes steel to oxidize and form a light coating of rust will vary with the climate (humidity) and the presence of corrosive agents, such as salt. Where I grew up on the Prairies, a shovel could be left outside for a long time, in dry weather, before it accumulated a coating of rust. However, I live on the West Coast now, in what is technically known as a temperate rain forest (rains all the time) and have seen a brand new shovel laid on the sand for half an hour, while clam digging, accumulate a fine coat of rust.

The military ammunition made in Italy for the 6.5mm Carcano was made with primers that had a corrosive substance in them that led to many misfires and hangfires, and this likely contributed greatly to the Carcano's reputation as an unreliable rifle. Whether this corrosive substance also left a corrosive residue in the barrel, I do not know. I do know that the cartridge casings found on the 6th floor were made by the Western Cartridge Co. of the USA, and did not have the corrosive primers found in Italian milsurp ammo.

So, it appears that what we have here is a rifle that may or may not have been fired on 11/22/63. Thanks to the lousy questioning of Frazier and Day, and their possible decision to not volunteer any information about it's not being fired. Or not.

The fact that neither of them were asked if the rifle had been fired on that day or right before it suggests to me that the lawyers didn't want Frazier or Day to "spill the beans."

What a kettle of fish.

--Tommy

Hi Thomas

Yes, they covered their tracks well. Even if someone on the DPD had examined the barrel, and found its interior to be rusty (indicating a long unfired rifle), I'm sure this bit of evidence would have been altered or "mislaid" somewhere.