Michael Walton

Pat - what are your thoughts on this. The only thing that does make me wonder is the line has to go upward to get it to come out as a tangential wound. And I think you are right with that BTW and I also think Kemp was too: Somehow that shot had to have taken place because the open cranium wound does show beveling - meaning an outshoot. It's just mind-boggling for me though to figure out *where* exactly you'd be able to get it off. Chris D showed elsewhere that it'd be very hard to get from the underpass and there were people there too.

Thanks Tracy good one.

Thanks Paul very well said. And the comedy continues with DJ posting a smiling LHO to an unsmiling one and asking in all seriousness why we've not seen any more smiling teeth photos! It reminds me of the other funny bit - that one LHO's mom was thin and smiled a lot where the other was dumpy and never smiled. OMG! Give them credit for one thing in that they know how to be consistent in their comedic routine LOL

And Sandy remember the ball throwing one? That too was very very funny of you...and very wrong as well LOL

This is exactly right. This is the whole problem with this CT community. It's amazing to me how the available record - photos, the Z film, etc - SHOW conspiracy. Which is why in the case of the Z film it was suppressed from the general public until 1975. It's also why "expert" reporter Dan Rather lied about what he saw on nationwide TV describing the film on 11/24. I had already shown this from the internal (as in not for public viewing) FBI film that was made I believe 6 months after 11/22. In it, there it is plain to see is the Z film in black and white. Except for it having no color, it's the exact same film we see today, showing the timing of the shots negates the SBT fantasy, the violent snap back of the body and so on. So from that point until 1975 when the Z film was shown, what has changed? Absolutely nothing. But it's just never enough, that people want to see what they WANT to see in these photos and films. A good example is Sandy saying he "saw" one of the old guys down on the knoll in the Nix/Muchmore film holding what he "thought" was a pistol. When I called him out on it, he "laughed it off" by making a joke of it. And Cliff - several posts back I said it looks like you think all photos and films are faked. Remember your reply? It was "EXCUSE ME?" Well, here we are - you DO seem to think everything is faked here without taking it for what it is - evidence proving conspiracy without reverting to the far more Intellectually lazier way to go by screaming everything if FAKE!!!

Hahahaa...it does make you wonder, Paul, if that's what they're doing. Good one

I am not going to say you are wrong. But I am also not going to say you are right. I think what I have is reasonably accurate - not 100%. And yes, I agree it's possible that the open cranium photo needs to be tilted and reoriented to bring the beveled hole upward somewhat. However, you're free to get some graphics software and create your own version and share and compare here.

No I don't because that's what all of you do. Just go back to all of the times you and others have copied chapter and verse from the WR to fit bits and pieces of the testimony into the Hardly story. Then you all turn around and say the WR is fake and cannot be trusted. You cannot have it both ways - it's as simple as that.

Yes that... You could be right. It sure doesn't look like a lock of matted bloody hair. But it could be. But yes, that's what I meant.

Unfortunately, you never hear humility from the Hardly crowd like this. Bill Simpich is good at this too - he basically did an outstanding job of his SS story but admits it's not perfect. Not so with the Hardly crowd. It's all rabid breaking into coffins and stealing teeth and pigeon holing testimony that is supposed to be fake and "you're despicable...get out of here" when you disagree with them LOL

I was actually surprised at that too - pretty respectful. I thought it was going to get out of hand because on the GEMS thread there was one point when Norwood was threatening to report EVERYONE who didn't agree with the Hardly...er, Harvey and Lee fantasy LOL.

Chesser did not go into WHAT is fake in photos. And even if he did, it does not change the fact that based on his analysis of the wound he can see in the X-ray, he's saying that there was a front shot in the hairline. Then, assuming that back of head photo with him spread out on the table showing a black spot in the hairline, it matches the blue dot that Chesser put on his picture. Now - and don't take the easy way out and say "Chesser said the photos are fake so therefore they are and therefore nothing can be verified" - don't go that way. Ask yourself - if that black dot is something sinister, why would they not fake it by taking it out? Or put another way - for argument's sake let's say that black dot is real. It's exactly the way it looked when the photo was taken that night. So assuming that - and I'm not quite sure you know how to do this as you tend to immediately fall back into your own counter-belief of things - but let's assume: The photo is real, including the black dot The x-ray is real and does show a forehead temple wound and fragment spray from front to back A medical doctor puts a dot on a photograph showing where that wound would be in the X-ray He does this 6 months AFTER I posted the January "hairline" thread Jim DiEugenio says that the funeral guy said he plugged a "temple" hole ...do you care to speculate what that black hole is?

It's called comedy David. When I saw it over on Greg's site, I literally spit all over my PC screen it was that funny. You may not agree with anything over there but I'll give him credit - he can be a riot. And no, I'm not a member there. But he's done a whole of good debunking of the Hardly... oops, I mean Harvey & Lee story over there. He even discovered why Oswald came back skinny from the USSR - he had tape worm for goodness sake. In my book that goes a helluva lot further than any Hungarian clone fantasy. But nope - you Hardly guys just keep plugging away saying it was a Hungarian clone of LHO, they look alike, their MOTHERS look alike (except one is stumpy and one is smiling), they were practically living in each other's shadows, they operated on the clone's mastoid to match the other one, they broke into the coffin to switch skulls and teeth, one has a bridge, then dentures, then no front teeth....do you not realize how incredibly goofy you look with all of this? How can you expect anyone to take you seriously with anything ELSE you write? Your belief in this does actually make me wonder if I can believe the better works you've done like the paperwork for the rifle and gun as well as the MC trip. In other words, if you're that snookered into Hardly Lee with absolutely no room for debate and calling me and others names when we rebut you, how can we possibly trust you with anything else in this case?

Yes. But to integrate it into the other photo, you do what's called cropping. Illustrators do this all the time. Otherwise, if you did not crop then it looks like two photos just thrown on top of each other. I thought you'd understand this but looks like I'm mistaken.

OK thanks Paul. And whew - maybe in another life we'll discuss the merits of the OJ case LOL.

Exactly right. And the funniest thing of all, it seems like all Hardly Lee believers DO NOT buy into anything the government wrote. In other words, they think EVERYTHING is fake in the Warren Report. Richly ironic. But when it suits them, you can bet your bottom dollar they'll start reciting chapter and verse ANYTHING in that so-called fake record to suit their fun-and-games HARDLY LEE story. LOL, indeed.

Sandy - I'm not sure what you mean. He does not talk about any autopsy photos. He only talks about the diagrams of the brain, which is a whole other subject and one I'm not interested in at the moment. As for the X-ray photos, he says one may be fake and the other isn't. He says the one that isn't is the one that shows the possibility of the hairline entrance in the same area that I pointed out in the HAIRLINE thread. Also, FWIW in all honesty saying everything here and to is "fake" in this case is a truly lazy way to cop out of the case. Why? Because when someone goes around saying everything is fake you're really limiting yourself to other possibilities.

Micah, the open cranium photo is NOT the front of the head. Please go to Pat Speer's website and read and look and you'll find it is the rear right side of the head. That half-hole shape in it is a beveled out shoot. You can see below the same photo above combined with another autopsy photo to give you an approximation of what it looked like if you literally peeled back the scalp to see the massive hole. WARNING TO SENSITIVE VIEWERS - PLEASE DO NOT LOOK ANY FURTHER. VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED!!

Wow never saw that. Very interesting view of bridge in relation to where car was at 313. Limo would have been right where that car is next to middle guy's neck tie.

Can we try to get this thread back on track? I'm interested in the forehead black dot as well as Chesser is because he too states it in his PDF. And Jim D mentions the funeral director plugging the temple. C Davidson proved me wrong with a shot from the underpass. But forehead dot is IMO very important. That dot has to be more than matted hair. And Cliff V please don't say the photos are fake...they're not. What I notice here is whenever someone posts something and it goes against someone else's own beliefs they revert to the ITS FAKE line which is a cheap lazy way to go.

Thank you Paul and Tracy I really do liken this Hardly Lee story to the OJ case. Despite all the evidence proving his guilt the jury was either too biased, blind or worst to comprehend the merits of the case. And the biggest thing of all that's missing from the Hardly Lee garbage is a good healthy dose of plausibility and common sense. When you throw those two out with the bath water all bets are off LOL. Paul interesting about the PROBE article. Do you have the link to it?

Andrej I'll try to put warnings up from now on. Remember Kennedy and Oswald had families too. Sandy FWIW thanks for that. I'm only doing this for educational purposes.

Oh Dave for goodness sake. Where in the world is your citation for this?! This statement of yours is one of the most ridiculous ones yet right up there with your it's CONTRAST and the SLOPING SHOULDERS nonsense. The more fibs and silliness you and others mention about Hardly Lee the more you and others look foolish. So I've gotta ask when will the foolishness end? Do you not realize that the good work others have done on the case is lessened with thid ridiculous story, just like Fetzer did with his craziness?

Well said by Paul T. about LHOs askcent LOL. But in all seriousness people move around. My family moved 7 times in 10 years. This was a non military family too. Just because someone moves a lot doesn't mean it's for a sinister reason.

Thanks Robin after seeing CDs clip I can't imagine a shot from there now. Sure would be nice to know what that black dot is in autopsy photo. With Chessers recent work and JD saying the funeral guy plugged a temple hole it does get you wondering.