Micah Mileto

Looks like a hot ticket! This will be nice for getting into Webster!

Doug Horne Replies: On Oswald’s Earnings Now if we could only see more information on Roy Truly's income....

Doug Horne Replies: On Oswald’s Earnings

So both James Gochenaur via Elmer Moore and Dr. Donald Miller via Perry corroborate the idea that Perry was warned right after his first press conference, to stop calling the throat wound a bullet entrance? Sorry, it just wasn't totally clear in the film

Does it ever seem like Perry is holding back some information, when he goes back and forth between insisting it was an entry wound and just saying it could've been an exit wound?

Weak sauce! Soon I'll post a much better, more concise summary of Crenshaw. 99% of it is already done in a text document. Most of the information linked above is useless in assessing the credibility of Crenshaw.

I don't think Dr. McClelland claimed that Perry every told him this, and I don't think Dr. Donald Miller ever claimed to have exclusive information on this story, this story seems to trace back to James Gochenaur in 2007. And we have Gochenaur saying in the 70's that Elmer Moore denied "twisting Perry's arm". From JFK and the Unspeakable by James W. Douglass, 2008: [...6. Washington and Dallas] Dr. Perry's retraction was not only manipulated but given under stress. He had been threatened beforehand by "the men in suits," specifically the Secret Service. As Dallas Secret Service agent Elmer Moore would admit to a friend years later, he "had been ordered to tell Dr. Perry to change his testimony. " Moore said that in threatening Perry, he acted " on orders from Washington and Mr. Kelly of the Secret Service Headquarters. "555 Moore confessed his intimidation of Dr. Perry to a University of Washington graduate student, Jim Gochenaur, with whom he became friendly in Seattle in 1970. Moore told Gochenaur he "had badgered Dr. Perry" into "making a flat statement that there was no entry wound in the neck."556 Moore admitted, " I regret what I had to do with Dr. Perry. "557 However, with his fellow agents, he had been given "marching orders from Washington. " He felt he had no choice: "I did everything I was told, we all did everything we were told, or we'd get our heads cut off. "558 In the cover-up, the men in suits were both the intimidators and the intimidated. [...Notes] 555 . House Select Committee witness Jim Gochenaur to interviewer Bob Kelley on Gochenaur's conversations with Secret Service agent Elmer Moore. Notes by Bob Kelley on June 6, 1975; pp. 3-4. JFK Record Number 157-10005-10280. 556. From transcribed copy by House Select Committee on Assassinations of taperecorded conversation with James Gochenaur, May 10, 1977, p. 22. JFK Record Number 180-10086-10438. 557. Author's interview with Jim Gochenaur, April 28, 2007. 558. Moore cited by Gochenaur. HSCA conversation with Gochenaur, May 10, 1977, p. 23. Also Jim Gochenaur's letter to the author, October 23, 2007. Dr. Robert McClelland lecture at Bayor University 10/24/2013 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tSFF8CzJC3g 52:54 No, no, no. The only one that I know was warned like that was Dr. Perry, I don't know of anybody, none of the rest of us were ever told, you know, 'keep your mouth shut' or any of that, that was never done, so... https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2013/11/19/as-50th-anniversary-of-assassination-approaches-surgeon-who-treated-jfk-remembers/ And like many, Dr. McClelland has struggled to fill in the blanks about the details of the assassination himself. He frequently references one book “of the 32,000 out there” on the event – JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, by James W. Douglass, which argues that military and intelligence agencies in the U.S. are responsible for President Kennedy’s assassination and the subsequent cover-up. According to Douglass, those organizations were upset by JFK’s evolving stance on the Cold War and, desperate to win, they plotted Kennedy’s death because he was “getting in the way” of their plans for a nuclear strike. For McClelland, that book seems to offer answers to the questions he’s been grappling with over the last fifty years – in particular, why his colleague, Dr. Perry, who also treated the President that day, would never speak of the assassination (“If you ever even mentioned the assassination [to Dr. Perry], he would cloud up and say, ‘I don’t talk about that,’ period.”) If you take Douglass at his word, a Secret Service agent approached Perry shortly after he’d given a description of JFK’s wounds to the media – when he’d pointed to his neck and seemed to imply that the entrance wound was there. That agent supposedly threatened Perry, ordering him never to talk about the assassination again…”or else,” Dr. McClelland emphasizes. 2014 McClelland interview where he says the following, 24:06: https://www.parklandsurgical.com/home/2014/7/25/a-conversation-with-dr-robert-mcclelland Audience member: I read that Mac Perry originally had said that he characterized the neck wound as a quote 'wound of entrance'. And I also know that subsequent to that, to his dying day, he never spoke about it again. McClelland: He would not say anything to anybody, me or any other- anybody at all, he was just completely- said nothing. Recently I read a book out of all of the some three thousand books that are written about this, and apparently, according to the author of this book, someone had come up to Dr. Perry after he gave his initial testimony- or, not testimony, but initial interview to the many newsmen that were gathered in the grand rounds room at Parkland right after this event happened. And Dr. Perry had made a comment about this being possibly an entrance wound in his neck. And according to this book, and this again is, you know, maybe [inaudible], maybe not. Someone with an American flag in his lapel, you know, you know, you know, Secret Service man, maybe not, came up to him and he said 'Dr. Perry', he said, 'whatever you do, do not ever say that that was an entrance wound again if you know what's good for you'. Other than that, Not only did Dr. Perry never say that was an entrance wound, he never said anything, period, at all about it to me or to anybody else. And he left town right after this event and went down to South Texas where his mother-in-law lived.

Ah, ok. I edited my description out.

The Draping of President Kennedy by Davy Jones, University of Kentucky College of Medicine, 11/11/2018: https://toxicology.med.uky.edu/sites/default/files/The Draping of President Kennedy.pdf

It seems clear that, at some point during the attempted resuscitation, somebody said out loud "theres a large wound on the back of his head", "a piece of cerebellum fell out".

Yesterday? The article I linked came out 3 days ago. I never knew any of these guys.

Cartoonists Oliver Stone and James DiEugenio try to Dupe the Public about Dr. Malcolm Perry (steveroeconsulting.wixsite.com) Nice little gem - for me there's nothing like rediscovering an old forgotten medical statement.

This is from the 10/23/1997 response letter by Dr. Perry. Try to spot the difference between the bold and non-bold text: 30 plus years have not improved my recall. My sworn testimony is in the records, and has not changed. Many people have misquoted me and more often taken my comments out of context (this is why I have not given public interviews for many years). I'll try to answer your questions in order. […] […] A. did you have the time to see his wounds? Briefly. I did not even wipe the blood from the anterior neck wound before doing the tracheostomy. I was in a hurry to secure an airway and hopefully save his life. E. could you give a precise measurement of the wound in the throat before you did the tracheotomy? See Above. No one else saw the wound despite what you may have read. Dr. Jones, Carrico and I only, and then without further exam I did the trach. 2. You are aware of Dr. Charles Crenshaw's book. A. Do you say he was with you in Trauma Room 1? B. What do you think of his claims? (He was once a student and resident of mine years ago) I don't remember him being there. He had no part in the decision-making or the resuscitation attempts. Many people (even dozens) now claim to have helped me then (and when I operated on Oswald) 3. You know David Lifton and Robert Groden. They are well-known Kennedy assassination researchers. They have talked to you or interviewed you. I don't read or watch or talk about these tragic events. I've no desire to relive that weekend. A. Have they sometimes misquoted you? Yes B. do you think they have uncovered evidence? No C. do you agree with their conclusions, as far as you are concerned? I Don’t know their claims. D. Do you agree with Lifton's general conclusion regarding the whole medical case? Don't know what they say. E. Do you agree with Groden's general conclusion regarding the whole medical case? I've not read anything they wrote; they have no real information. 4. David Lifton has written a book "Best evidence", in which he claims Kennedy's body was stolen and his wounds were altered. I didn't know this - what a joke! A. have you ever discussed that theory with your colleagues? No B. as a physician, do you think his theory is possible? C. what did you think of that theory? Don't know (or really care what he says. He wasn't there) […] E. how can you explain the very large hole in Kennedy's throat that can be seen in the autopsy photos? I did a transverse incision through the ant. neck wound to perform the tracheostomy. How large? Large enough to get the job done quickly, and then I inserted a large metal flanged trach tube. 5. You know Gerald Posner's book "Case closed". In it, he says he has interviewed the Dallas doctors and that makes him think that conspiracy theorists are wrong. A. Has he sometimes misquoted you? B. do you think he is right in his conclusions? I think Mr. Poser did a better job in objective evaluation. He is probably correct. As far as I know he has not misquoted me, but I don't read about it. [...] I've met only one person who have studied the entire 26 volumes of the Warren Report. It's difficult for me to accept as as serious any person who has not done his or her "homework". That would necessarily include a careful study of the sworn testimony before declaring it invalid. I believe most people who have written about the events did so for money and not to seek the truth. Can you imagine how many people would have had to agree a priori to participate in a conspiracy? that theory lacks face value, and is ludicrous. We all tried our best to tell the truth and all of the truth. mp

If Perry was trying to insist that only himself, Carrico and Ronald Jones saw the original throat wound, that may partially support Lifton's recent idea that there was no trach incision, and that all descriptions of a trach incision are lies or misunderstandings.

deleted

If we consider the total history of Dr. Perry's statements, he went back and forth as to whether he still believed it was an entry wound or an exit wound. For example, according to Harrison Livignstone, Perry said on 8/10/1979 “My whole credibility as a trauma surgeon was at stake…I COULDN’T have made a mistake like that. It destroys my integrity if I don’t know an entrance wound from an exit wound!”, “he has told me often enough that what he said in 1963 stands”. Sometimes Perry's statements about his personal opinions give the impression that he's holding back something - a point of mystery, given the other issues with witness statements being too vague. Either way, we know that the Parkland descriptions of the pre-incision throat wound are compatible with how we know entry wounds look - it's just that there is still too little information to prove that there couldn't be a small exit wound under those circumstances. If proven that such an exit wound would be incompatible with the Parkland descriptions, that may amount to proof of a conspiracy. We also have indications that Perry described making a smaller trach incision than the one shown in the autopsy records and photographs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ySO0pLcN5ww& At 45:28 into this 2015 interview with Dr. Robert McClelland, he says "We know that he had a little wound in his neck, next to but not through the windpipe". Do you have any idea what this could mean? I have sensed before, while reading earlier Parkland medical statements, some hesitation or vagueness in describing damage to the trachea. Is it possible the trachea was not pierced at all, but rather just the tissue next to it? I was under the impression that the official story had the bullet piercing the right side of the trachea, leaving an open wound, and that the trachea ended up (officially) having both a pre-existing defect from a bullet and the surgical defect made over it. Maybe the Parkland witnesses just had a hard time making out the nature of the injuries under the blood and darkness or just couldn't remember?

Thanks for posting! Is there a longer transcript?

Who is Bishop?

I don't know if it's "proof", but there is like one scientific paper suggesting that bullets striking tangentially can result in a lot of missing skin, but there is no total scientific proof that shows only a tangential wound could leave so much skin on the bullet. Seems simple enough, a bullet scraping along the body is more likely to scrape off skin, but it is too hard to jump to conclusions with ballistics. Although I must say that your theory on the shooting is pretty good compared to others.

Some might think of CE 567 as the "good brother", but CE 567 is the label given to not just the nose fragment but FOUR particles of (human?) tissue that are in the same container fragment. I could not find any evidence that the tissue was originally attached to the nose fragment. I am aware of nothing from the 1960's FBI investigation that acknowledged the tissue - no photograph, no written report. Robert Frazier told the Warren Commission that he wiped BLOOD off of the nose fragment, he mentioned nothing about tissue, and I am not aware of any blood sample that was catalogued onto evidence. The 1990's FBI re-examination of CE 567 only found non-tissue fibers embedded on the nose fragment. The tissue could have been a totally separate artifact that was added later.

It couldn't just be "they lost the record"? There exist records that specifically prove the negative that Oswald and Truly were not paid?

Is there any chance that this is simply a case of a record being lost, or does the record specifically say that Oswald and Shelly weren't paid? This is strange information because it sounds groundbreaking at first, but then again it might just depend on the public's limited knowledge on the very niche subject of 50's-60's-era payment records? Or no?

Thanks for your reply. So it would seem that, not only does your 3D model refute the Single Bullet Theory, but it also refutes most other possible theories on the single assassin story. I was wondering, in the new 3D model, is there any opportunity for a clear shot from the Sixth Floor into Connally's official entry wound? I can't help but envision a scenario in which the government finally admits the SBT isn't true but still tries to resurrect the single assassin story by theorizing that Oswald shot slow-moving bullets made by removing powder from Carcano ammunition. Yes, it would contradict the previous official interpretation of Connally's reactions Zapruder film, but conspiracy theorists have also came up with strange ideas on when Connally was hit in the Zapruder film, so maybe objections would be droned out, and seem to the average person as just quibbling over a blurry video.

Doug Horne says this 8 minutes in to part 4 of JFK: Destiny Betrayed. According to some kind of earnings records with the Social Security office, Oswald was not paid any money for the last quarter year before he defected to the Soviet Union. Any more info on this? Jim DiEugenio said that Doug Horne was partially afraid of being arrested if he gave out some information for the documentary - is this that info?