Micah Mileto
-
Posts
2,020 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Micah Mileto
-
-
The story of Saundra Spencer relates to one of many issues in the chain of custody for the official autopsy photographs – there is no clear identification for who developed the film and made the prints at the NPC. There are least 4 potential candidates for who could have done the hands-on processing there – besides Saundra Spencer and James Fox, there is U.S. Navy Lieutenant j.g. Vincent Madonia, White House photographer Robert Knudsen, and NPC employee Carol Ann Bonito. There doesn’t seem to be any single definitive account. There is also a lack of information on how the color negative film in the official collection was duplicated from the color positive film. The HSCA tried publishing a report on the chain of custody for the autopsy materials (HSCA Vol. 7, p. 23 [text]), but it was not very detailed, and a lot more information came afterwards. The statements of Saundra Spencer clearly don’t corroborate the official story, but she did suggest some other potential witnesses. When Spencer was asked in her first 12/13/1996 interview “...Was there anyone else you know of at NPC who had any role in developing any autopsy photograph- photographs other than yourself?”, she said “I- I was trying to think of who the two people were that were working that day, and I- I can't think of it”. Spencer said that whoever else was helping would have been a military rank below her. Spencer then suggested the name of “Bonita” as somebody who could have helped process the photos (Spencer’s 12/13/1996 interview by the ARRB [audio]). The name of Carol Ann Bonito was listed on a Navy Enlisted Distribution and Verification Report from 1963 (ARRB MD 144). In 1963, Carol was in the Navy as a third class E-4 photographer's mate (ARRB, 12/16/1996 email from Douglas Horne to Dave Montague; ARRB Electronic Files of T. Jeremy Gunn, Executive Director and General Counsel, INTERVIE_BONITO.WPD). When Spencer was asked in her deposition about who else could’ve been there helping with the photographs, she said “They secured the regular color lab crews and we stayed”... “There was about three of us up there”... “Carol Bonito was the only one I can identify. There was a 2nd Class that had come aboard just recently, but I didn't remember. The only thing I remember is Kirk was on his name”... “...the gentleman I was talking about was a 2nd Class…”. Question: “When Mr. Fox or the person came to the White House lab, approximately, how many other people were working in the lab at that time?”, answer: “Two others”, question: “Do you remember who they were? Was one Ms. Bonito, for example?”, answer: “Yes, and the 2nd Class. The day crew was on. We had two, usually two 2nd Class that worked the evening shift” (Spencer’s ARRB deposition, 6/5/1997 [text] [audio]). Carol Ann Bonito, whose last name was later changed to Roberts, was found and contacted by the ARRB in 1996 (ARRB staff memo, 5/18/1998, Doug Horne to Jeremy Gunn, Requested Lists of Information Re: All of ARRB's Medical Witnesses, and All New ARRB Medical Evidence Not Previously in JFK Collection; ARRB, 12/27/1996 letter from Jeremy Gunn to Carol A. Roberts), but further details do not seem to be currently available on the internet.
-
The transcript is littered with [unintelligible] because this is an old audio tape from 1979 being digitized in 2022. Tape can deteriorate into powder before that point. If anybody has any old videos or recordings on any kind of tape (which aren't available on the internet, try using duckduckgo video search to be sure), please look into acquiring a machine to turn them into digital files or a CD, or else they will be lost forever.
-
If only more people would try to save videos like these as digital files. Unfortunately, the internet not as permanent as people once thought.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnoWB2x_TIc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNOruNVAMjc
Maybe there is more to come. This is from Bart Kamp, right? Did he post these somewhere else or is this Youtube channel connected to Kamp?
-
On 9/5/2022 at 8:40 PM, David Von Pein said:
And I never said McClelland capitulated. In fact, that was kind of my whole point---the fact that he didn't reverse his opinion regarding the location of JFK's head wound even after seeing this autopsy photo at the National Archives:
On 9/5/2022 at 8:40 PM, David Von Pein said:And then, after seeing the above photo at the Archives, McClelland comes up with his "Scalp Pulled Up Over The Wound" theory, which is completely ridiculous and impossible given the wholly undamaged condition of JFK's scalp in the photo above.
Dr. McClelland was, of course, trying his best to have it both ways concerning President Kennedy's head wound. But when logic and common sense enter the equation, it's quite clear that having it both ways is just not possible in this instance.
Please inform me as to how and where I have engaged in "a complete misrepresentation of McClelland". I look forward to seeing that.
I think you must be referring to other Lone Assassin believers who have stated in the past that McClelland completely reversed his position regarding JFK's head wounds in the 1988 NOVA special [see link below]. Because I have never said any such thing about Dr. Robert N. McClelland.
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / The Odd Tales Of The Parkland Doctors On PBS-TV In 1988
I'm not even saying that I personally think the cerebellum was blasted out, but I found this (date 2012 maximum) McClelland lecture where he insists that he saw cerebellum, and spoke of having a previous conversation with Dr. Marion "Pepper" Jenkins where they "agreed to disagree" over whether they saw cerebellum that day. 14 minutes in, and on 32:30 he talks about the photographs.
https://ia600603.us.archive.org/24/items/Dr.RobertN.Mcclelland/DrMcclelland.mp3
-
On 9/6/2022 at 6:04 AM, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:
"Human duplicity is a marvel to contemplate."
(Ok, I'll admit, I've stolen that from a certain review I recently read)
I used to think it had to do with age, experience,.... stuff like that, but it's not.
It's simply because we are all different. Some just have a really really really hard time admitting they are wrong, or know nothing about a subject. I'm not saying, quote "Opposites are not contradictory but complementary", hmmm, nah...
My kids are opposites, it took me years to get them "to agree to disagree", sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, and when it doesn't I'll hide for cover just in case another book comes flying over my head all across the living room...
There is no such thing as maturity, there are only changed opinions. The changing of one's opinion is not a magical marker for an objective truth about the world. It terrifies me how people age-shame using "maturity" a a justification, when if anything, one believing in maturity is a sign of immaturity! It's like saying "My favorite color used to be red, but then I grew up and realized blue was the best color".
-
11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
I can't remember which but in Eye of History the attendant to Humes, Jenkins, O'Connor, David or Custer whichever remembered them investigating a wound to the right temple. Told to stop, Humes called to the gallery, coming back and saying we will move on from this.
The same attendant told to go tell the cigar smoker in the gallery to put it out by Humes? But didn't because of his rank?
https://old.reddit.com/r/JFKeveryday/
It was Jenkins. O'Connor also said Burkley didn't want them examining the throat.
-
19 hours ago, Cory Santos said:
For the record, when Oswald was in the marines he was reading Orwell’s classic Animal Farm. Bunk mates joked with him because he was clueless that the book was anti-communist in its theme. So he did not understand a book taught to 9th graders. Keep that in mind.
Orwell is just a whiny writer. It's true. Apparently a shill too. I mean, he was on the BBC.
-
-
The "bird brain" photo isn't very good propf that x-rays can be faked in the way some say
-
7 minutes ago, Chris Bristow said:
Thanks for posting that. Mcclellend never capitulated at the archives. And I just watched that again and McClellend said something I missed "The doctor has taken this loose piece of scalp WHICH IS HANGING BACK IN MOST OF THE PICTURES EXPOSING THIS LARGE WOUND"(He draws a circle at the occipital parietal). So did he see photos showing the O.C. wound? He continues saying "Naturally the scalp appears to be in it's normal state".
Fake photos being shown to the doctors at the National Archives in 1988? McClelland did say he thought it was strange that the room with the photos was occupied by a guard holding a rifle.
-
7 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
I know this has been pointed out to you before - but McClelland said the autopsy photographs were only consistent with his memory on the condition that the hand in the photo is holding a piece of scalp over a hole in the back of the head.
-
Dr. McClelland apparently told the same story throughout the years: he was standing on the head of the gurney at Trauma Room One, helping Perry and Baxter perform the tracheotomy by holding a retractor into the neck incision while it was being explored. Kennedy's head was right below him, so he was in one of the best possible positions to see the large head wound. But an undiscussed quote attributed to Dr. Paul Peters in Gerald Posner's 1993 book Case Closed seems to say otherwise:
[...] “I saw a piece of cerebellum fall out on the stretcher,” says McClelland, who claims he was in the best position of any of the doctors to view the head wound.98 He drew a sketch in 1967 for Josiah Thompson’s book Six Seconds in Dallas, which showed a gaping wound in the rear of the head.99
“I am astonished that Bob would say that,” says Dr. Malcolm Perry. “It shows such poor judgment, and usually he has such good judgment.”100 “I don’t think Bob McClelland was in the best place to see the head wound,” says Dr. Peters. “He wasn’t in that position the way I remember it, as he was on the other side of the table. As for Dr. McClelland saying he saw cerebellum fall out on the table, I never saw anything like that.”101 […]Any ideas on what this is supposed to mean?
-
Will that be Dallas on the dreaded 60th anniversary?
-
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:
Well, I would have to reply that neither Jim G nor Donald Miller was there.
I should also mention that reporter Martin Steadman passed away, weeks after I tried to get in touch with him, and especially ask him about the contemporaneous "notebook" he mentioned in his article. Maybe a family member could help? idk.
-
On 3/23/2022 at 3:15 PM, James DiEugenio said:
Micah:
Miller's meeting with Perry was alone. And that is what Perry told him.
What is in The Parkland Doctors, that happened years before Moore encountered Jim.
So now you have four independent witnesses : The Parkland Doctors witness, McClelland; the nurse who talked to Perry the next day; Steadman's notes which came from Perry himself; and then Miller much later.
As far as I can see, none of those four had anything to do with Moore.
I mean really, how many independent witnesses do you need?
Perry changed his story. And he did so under pressure. Period.
And it looks like Steve Roe has donned disguises in order to create a disinfo machine. Has anyone been able to find any kind of legitimate enterprise for steveroeconsulting? Is it architecture? Is it accounting? Is it commercial real estate? It is financing stock purchases?
Everyone search for what it is. Because I have found nothing but JFK stuff. And look at Quora, that Andrew Jackson alias sure looks like roe.
Sockpuppetry.
As for Perry's interaction with the person after the press conference, this seems to be a myth, unless I'm missing something. I can't find where either James Gochenaur or Dr. David Miller claimed that Perry was "intimidated" on the first day. It sounds to me like Dr. McClelland misremembered something from JFK and the Unspeakable, even though McClelland was apparently present for the later 12/11/1963 interactions with Elmer Moore, which officially involved no coercion, although we've all seen cop shows where the cheapest interrogation tactics can be used without it being legally called coercion.
-
6 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:
I agree.
In around 2001/2002, I exchanged several e-mails with Gary Mack, who was then the curator of the museum, about the biased selection offered by the museum's bookstore. The last e-mail I received from him was sent to me by mistake; he intended to send it to the museum's management, but he accidentally included me as a recipient. In the e-mail, he told them that they would have to formulate a response to the objections I was raising because others would raise the same objections. Of course, he said nothing about fixing the problem by making the bookstore's selection more balanced.
The museum literally lies to people about simple things like the back wound etc.
-
7 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:
You'd think with the technology available today, a down-to-the-centimeter accurate interactive simulation of Dealey Plaza and the surrounding buildings would be very feasible - but it would probably cost an obscene amount of money to develop. Heck you could even do greater Dallas and simulate the entire assassination, Tippit killing and arrest, and program the movements of all the key players based on witness statements, etc.
It would be an extremely valuable research tool. You could run different scenarios, the possibilities are really endless. According to Google, GTA V cost $265 million to develop. This would me a much smaller map but with a lot more necessary precision in certain areas. Who's got a quarter billion lying around and wants to finance a video game?
-
11 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:
This video game looks like a Warren Commission/CIA fantasy version of the JFK assassination.
Does the game have a more realistic version, with the assassin standing behind the fence on the Grassy Knoll?
That would be an interesting stealth game - shoot Kennedy from the Knoll and then try to quickly escape in a way that maintains consistency with all of the real-life photographic evidence.
-
22 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:
Yes, and I also noticed today that the Sixth Floor Museum bookstore is carrying several pro-conspiracy books, including Thompson's new book Last Second in Dallas and Summers' Not in Your Lifetime.
Maybe one day they could fix their horribly misleading presentation of all of the evidence.
-
31 minutes ago, Kathy Beckett said:
I keep getting this:
Warning: Potential Security Risk Ahead
Firefox detected a potential security threat and did not continue to jfk.emuseum.com. If you visit this site, attackers could try to steal information like your passwords, emails, or credit card details.
What can you do about it?
The issue is most likely with the website, and there is nothing you can do to resolve it. You can notify the website’s administrator about the problem.
Learn more…
It should have an option letting you admit access to the site anyway
-
-
If the geometry of the official story is correct (as it is in this game), it would have been possible to fire a bullet through Kennedy's head and into Connally's heart.
-
6 hours ago, John Kowalski said:
Why is international trade the same as what IBM did?
If the holocaust happened because it was an excuse for slave labor benefiting international business.
HSCA's Andy Purdy: Bethesda pathologist Dr. Humes was threatened by the wife of Parkland's Dr. Perry?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Micah Mileto
The House Select Committee on Assassinations interviewed Dr. Malcolm Perry on 1/11/1978, but there was also apparently an interview before that on 7/14/1977. According to what little was written about this rarely-mentioned earlier interview, there was a discussion between Perry and Committee staffer Dr. Andrew Purdy over some kind of alleged "threat" made by Perry's wife to Dr. James Humes of Bethesda Hospital. The only reference to this that seems to be available on the internet is from an unfinished 1998 essay by researcher Kathleen Cunningham, posted to the old broken website of researcher Kenneth Rahn: http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/park2.html
[...] On July 14, 1977, the HSCA's Andy Purdy telephoned Dr. Perry. Oddly, he would wait for more than a month to type out a memorandum on their conversation. This is most peculiar because of the bizarre story Purdy would relate in the memo's final paragraph. Purdy wrote that Dr. Perry told him that "some years" after the assassination, he went to Detroit. Its not clear from Mr. Purdy's wording if what happened next occurred in Detroit, or upon Perry's return, yet apparently Humes contacted Perry by phone "regarding a threat against Humes allegedly made by Dr. Perry's wife." Mr. Purdy fails to tell us what type of threat this was, or why Dr. Humes believed it was made by Mrs. Perry. Purdy only tells us that this "allegation was untrue, but apparently someone had made the threat." Then Purdy delivers the punchline. The investigation of this threat was conducted by the Secret Service, who ". . . maintained a very cooperative attitude toward the doctors for a number of years after the assassination, including looking into such threats." <38> Such threats? Were there others? The United States Secret Service has no jurisdiction over such matters. This was a case for the local police. Who called them in? Based only on the little currently known, it would seem logical to presume that Dr. Humes did, although this must be considered sheer speculation. However, there exists yet another possibility altogether. It is intriguing that it was Mrs. Perry and not her husband that was alleged to have made the undefined threat against Humes. Thus the authors have asked the ARRB to obtain a copy of the Secret Service file on this episode. Even presuming it contains little more information than is in Mr. Purdy's memo, the date this happened could indicate the entire affair was a veiled threat aimed at Mrs. Perry because her husband was not responding to continued "directions."
The website doesn't appear to be a part 1 or 3, only a part 2 (Link), and the numbered citations don't correspond to any list of source notes.
It does not say any such thing in the report and partial transcript of Purdy's 1/11/1978 interview with Perry (HSCA Vol. 7, p. 292 [text])
What is this July 14, 1977 interview Cunningham was referring to? I can't find any other reference to this, anywhere.