Jon G. Tidd Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 The discussion here misses the point. Which is, there should be no discussion, no raging debate here. The fact there is debate means one thing: the photographic record (including the autopsy photos, the autopsy x-rays, the various films) are unreliable. Completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) The discussion here misses the point. Which is, there should be no discussion, no raging debate here. The fact there is debate means one thing: the photographic record (including the autopsy photos, the autopsy x-rays, the various films) are unreliable. Completely. Jon, there is a "window" where the close proximity witness testimony, the Dealey Plaza photos, the physical evidence, and the autopsy material produced according to proper autopsy protocols -- all sync up perfectly. Betzner 3 (Z186), Willis 5 (Z202), Altgens 6 (Z255), Zapruder frames Z186-255. The close proximity testimonies of Nellie Connally, Jackie Kennedy, Linda Willis, Clint Hill, Glenn Bennett, The properly produced medical materials -- the contemporaneous notes of two Parkland doctors, Adm. Burkley's death certificate, the portion of the autopsy face sheet filled out in pencil, the Sibert/O'Neill report on the autopsy, the neck x-ray (declared genuine by Dr. Mantik). The bullet holes in the clothes too low to have been associated with the throat wound. It's consistent -- JFK was shot in the throat, then shot in the back. Neither round exited. Neither round was recovered from the body during the autopsy. What happened to the bullets causing the back and throat wounds? The autopsists speculated it was high tech weaponry. Interesting how much it is automatically assumed they were wrong... Edited February 1, 2016 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) JFK was shot in the throat from the front right below his adams apple. That's a provable fact established by the physical evidence and the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photos/film. The rest of this discussion is nothing but fake debate. Cliff, what was he shot with and how did it get through the tie? It didn't go thru the tie. JFK didn't wear his tie upon his adams apple. The shot struck above the tie and below the adams apple. The autopsists thought he may have been struck with a high tech weapon which wouldn't show up in the autopsy, or on x-ray. That's right there in the historical record, a record for which Pet Theorists display little truck. Well I'm open to the high-tech weapon theory. I think Tom Neal is too. Problem is, there's too much evidence against this scenario for the throat. First, look at where JFK wore his tie: Ok. JFK wore his tie up against a skin fold that was up against the adams apple, Maybe not the tie, but the shirt is right up against the Adams apple. That's a skin fold. Now look where the wound is: There is no chain of evidence for the extant autopsy photos. The photos were not produced according to proper autopsy protocol. They are worthless. Source: McAdams If you click to enlarge, it's easy to see that the wound is about an inch below the bottom of the Adam's apple. In fact, it is right where the holes in the shirt are as well as the nick on the tie! (Note: The nick you see in the photo above either should be located on the back side of the tie knot, where it could have been hit, or isn't related to the bullet/fragment at all.) Then there is the testimony. The early testimony points more to "the wound was discovered after the shirt was opened" than to the opposite. Thus supportingthat the tie (or at the very least, the top of the shirt) covered the wound. What evidence is there indicating a high-tech weapon, with a shot from the front? Speculation? The autopsists speculated he was struck in the back with a high tech weapon. Same situation as the throat wound -- a wound of entrance, no exit, no round recovered during the autopsy. JFK appears to react to throat trauma and then within a couple of seconds he appears to seize up paralyzed, consistent with MKNAOMI field tests on blood soluble paralytics. http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf Edited February 1, 2016 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Neal Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 If somebody could find the photo I mentioned that Tom posted, I'd be happy to reconsider my position if that photo provides clues to support another theory. Sandy, Which photo are you referring to above? Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Neal Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) JFK was shot in the throat from the front right below his adams apple. That's a provable fact established by the physical evidence and the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photos/film. Cliff, I was away all day yesterday and I've just now returned to this thread. Am I correct that you believe a bullet entered ABOVE his collar line creating the throat wound located just beneath his adam's apple? Personally, I would VERY MUCH like to believe this is what actually happened, because it separates the throat wound, and the shirt slit/tie nick into separate events. The first problem with this idea is, of those who COULD have seen this wound, only Diana Bowron states that she saw this wound PRIOR to the removal of JFK's clothing. Her testimony to the WC is ambiguous due to the questions she is asked. IMO, she appears to be uncertain as to which point in time Specter's questions are referring to. I have the transcript for her 1993 interview with Harrison Livingstone. She clearly states that she saw the throat wound while examining JFK in the limo. I've found a few additional comments from this book ("Killing the Truth") that offer an explanation as to why her statements differ from her 1964 WC testimony. I have this book on order, but have never read it. Once I search this book I'm hoping to find more evidence regarding her alleged "conflicting" testimony. IIRC she stated in 1964 as well as in 1993, that while in the limo she couldn't find a pulse 'anywhere'. This indicates that she checked at more than one location. It seems almost a certainty she checked for a pulse at his carotid artery. In doing so she would be in an ideal position to observe the throat wound IF it was above the collar. She makes a reference that as a nurse she was doing whatever 'First Aid' she could despite the massive head wound. It's not unreasonable to think that she might have loosened his tie, and even gone so far as to unbutton his collar button to aid his breathing. Is this when she first saw the throat wound or did she see it with his shirt buttoned and tie in place? Hopefully the comments in Livingstone's book will clarify some of these issues. The second problem is the physical location of the throat wound as indicated by the doctors/nurses/photographs may be too low to have been seen while clothed. The consensus of the medical people is that the throat wound was located just below the Adam's Apple. I don't wear my necktie on or above my Adam's Apple - does anyone? IMO, photographs of JFK on 11-22-1963 show that he did not either. In a 1997 video interview, Carrico states that the wound was AT the collar line, even poking his finger BEHIND the top of his collar in demonstration. It is regularly stated that in his WC testimony he says the words 'the wound was located above the collar.' He puts his had to his throat, begins to speak, and Dulles jumps on him, and states 'the wound was "ABOVE the collar". Carrico attempts to speak, and Dulles immediately cuts him off. But, all of this is irrelevant. Later in WC testimony, Carrico unequivocally states that he was "too busy then" and did NOT see the throat wound until AFTER removal of JFK's clothing. He repeats this same statement in his 1997 interview. Thus, when Carrico states the location of the throat wound RELATIVE to the collar line, he is only estimating -- not remembering what he actually observed. Considering all of the above, IMO the best we can say is that the throat wound was very close to the collar line. Again, this is MY OPINION. Tom Edited February 1, 2016 by Tom Neal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 JFK was shot in the throat from the front right below his adams apple. That's a provable fact established by the physical evidence and the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photos/film. Cliff, I was away all day yesterday and I've just now returned to this thread. Am I correct that you believe a bullet entered ABOVE his collar line creating the throat wound located just beneath his adam's apple? Personally, I would VERY MUCH like to believe this is what actually happened, because it separates the throat wound, and the shirt slit/tie nick into separate events. The first problem with this idea is, of those who COULD have seen this wound, only Diana Bowron states that she saw this wound PRIOR to the removal of JFK's clothing. Her testimony to the WC is ambiguous due to the questions she is asked. IMO, she appears to be uncertain as to which point in time Specter's questions are referring to. I have the transcript for her 1993 interview with Harrison Livingstone. She clearly states that she saw the throat wound while examining JFK in the limo. I've found a few additional comments from this book ("Killing the Truth") that offer an explanation as to why her statements differ from her 1964 WC testimony. I have this book on order, but have never read it. Once I search this book I'm hoping to find more evidence regarding her alleged "conflicting" testimony. IIRC she stated in 1964 as well as in 1993, that while in the limo she couldn't find a pulse 'anywhere'. This indicates that she checked at more than one location. It seems almost a certainty she checked for a pulse at his carotid artery. In doing so she would be in an ideal position to observe the throat wound IF it was above the collar. She makes a reference that as a nurse she was doing whatever 'First Aid' she could despite the massive head wound. It's not unreasonable to think that she might have loosened his tie, and even gone so far as to unbutton his collar button to aid his breathing. Is this when she first saw the throat wound or did she see it with his shirt buttoned and tie in place? Hopefully the comments in Livingstone's book will clarify some of these issues. The second problem is the physical location of the throat wound as indicated by the doctors/nurses/photographs may be too low to have been seen while clothed. The consensus of the medical people is that the throat wound was located just below the Adam's Apple. I don't wear my necktie on or above my necktie - does anyone? IMO, photographs of JFK on 11-22-1963 show that he did not either. In a 1997 video interview, Carrico states that the wound was AT the collar line, even poking his finger BEHIND the top of his collar in demonstration. It is regularly stated that in his WC testimony he says the words 'the wound was located above the collar.' He puts his had to his throat, begins to speak, and Dulles jumps on him, and states 'the wound was "ABOVE the collar". Carrico attempts to speak, and Dulles immediately cuts him off. But, all of this is irrelevant. Later in WC testimony, Carrico unequivocally states that he was "too busy then" and did NOT see the throat wound until AFTER removal of JFK's clothing. He repeats this same statement in his 1997 interview. Thus, when Carrico states the location of the throat wound RELATIVE to the collar line, he is only estimating -- not remembering what he actually observed. Considering all of the above, IMO the best we can say is that the throat wound was very close to the collar line. Again, this is MY OPINION. Tom Tom, Since the close proximity witnesses describe JFK reacting to throat trauma and the Zap film shows JFK reacting to throat trauma -- seems obvious that he was reacting to throat trauma on Elm St. This is all "false mystery" nonsense, frankly and with all due respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 He may have been reacting to what you call "throat trauma" but, how does that establish that the projectile causing this came from the front, Cliff? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Neal Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 JFK was shot in the throat from the front right below his adams apple. That's a provable fact established by the physical evidence and the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photos/film. Cliff, I was away all day yesterday and I've just now returned to this thread. Am I correct that you believe a bullet entered ABOVE his collar line creating the throat wound located just beneath his adam's apple? Personally, I would VERY MUCH like to believe this is what actually happened, because it separates the throat wound, and the shirt slit/tie nick into separate events. The first problem with this idea is, of those who COULD have seen this wound, only Diana Bowron states that she saw this wound PRIOR to the removal of JFK's clothing. Her testimony to the WC is ambiguous due to the questions she is asked. IMO, she appears to be uncertain as to which point in time Specter's questions are referring to. I have the transcript for her 1993 interview with Harrison Livingstone. She clearly states that she saw the throat wound while examining JFK in the limo. I've found a few additional comments from this book ("Killing the Truth") that offer an explanation as to why her statements differ from her 1964 WC testimony. I have this book on order, but have never read it. Once I search this book I'm hoping to find more evidence regarding her alleged "conflicting" testimony. IIRC she stated in 1964 as well as in 1993, that while in the limo she couldn't find a pulse 'anywhere'. This indicates that she checked at more than one location. It seems almost a certainty she checked for a pulse at his carotid artery. In doing so she would be in an ideal position to observe the throat wound IF it was above the collar. She makes a reference that as a nurse she was doing whatever 'First Aid' she could despite the massive head wound. It's not unreasonable to think that she might have loosened his tie, and even gone so far as to unbutton his collar button to aid his breathing. Is this when she first saw the throat wound or did she see it with his shirt buttoned and tie in place? Hopefully the comments in Livingstone's book will clarify some of these issues. The second problem is the physical location of the throat wound as indicated by the doctors/nurses/photographs may be too low to have been seen while clothed. The consensus of the medical people is that the throat wound was located just below the Adam's Apple. I don't wear my necktie on or above my necktie - does anyone? IMO, photographs of JFK on 11-22-1963 show that he did not either. In a 1997 video interview, Carrico states that the wound was AT the collar line, even poking his finger BEHIND the top of his collar in demonstration. It is regularly stated that in his WC testimony he says the words 'the wound was located above the collar.' He puts his had to his throat, begins to speak, and Dulles jumps on him, and states 'the wound was "ABOVE the collar". Carrico attempts to speak, and Dulles immediately cuts him off. But, all of this is irrelevant. Later in WC testimony, Carrico unequivocally states that he was "too busy then" and did NOT see the throat wound until AFTER removal of JFK's clothing. He repeats this same statement in his 1997 interview. Thus, when Carrico states the location of the throat wound RELATIVE to the collar line, he is only estimating -- not remembering what he actually observed. Considering all of the above, IMO the best we can say is that the throat wound was very close to the collar line. Again, this is MY OPINION. Tom Tom, Since the close proximity witnesses describe JFK reacting to throat trauma and the Zap film shows JFK reacting to throat trauma -- seems obvious that he was reacting to throat trauma on Elm St. This is all "false mystery" nonsense, frankly and with all due respect. Cliff, My post is questioning the location of the throat wound relative to the shirt collar -- not arguing that there was no throat wound...so your post *appears* to be a non sequitur. Or is this your way of saying that you have no longer have any desire to participate regarding this issue? I can understand that you think the only thing that matters is there *was* a throat wound. With the same considerations and due respect, I don't agree that nothing matters beyond the fact that there was a throat wound. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 JFK was shot in the throat from the front right below his adams apple. That's a provable fact established by the physical evidence and the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photos/film. Cliff, I was away all day yesterday and I've just now returned to this thread. Am I correct that you believe a bullet entered ABOVE his collar line creating the throat wound located just beneath his adam's apple? Personally, I would VERY MUCH like to believe this is what actually happened, because it separates the throat wound, and the shirt slit/tie nick into separate events. The first problem with this idea is, of those who COULD have seen this wound, only Diana Bowron states that she saw this wound PRIOR to the removal of JFK's clothing. Her testimony to the WC is ambiguous due to the questions she is asked. IMO, she appears to be uncertain as to which point in time Specter's questions are referring to. I have the transcript for her 1993 interview with Harrison Livingstone. She clearly states that she saw the throat wound while examining JFK in the limo. I've found a few additional comments from this book ("Killing the Truth") that offer an explanation as to why her statements differ from her 1964 WC testimony. I have this book on order, but have never read it. Once I search this book I'm hoping to find more evidence regarding her alleged "conflicting" testimony. IIRC she stated in 1964 as well as in 1993, that while in the limo she couldn't find a pulse 'anywhere'. This indicates that she checked at more than one location. It seems almost a certainty she checked for a pulse at his carotid artery. In doing so she would be in an ideal position to observe the throat wound IF it was above the collar. She makes a reference that as a nurse she was doing whatever 'First Aid' she could despite the massive head wound. It's not unreasonable to think that she might have loosened his tie, and even gone so far as to unbutton his collar button to aid his breathing. Is this when she first saw the throat wound or did she see it with his shirt buttoned and tie in place? Hopefully the comments in Livingstone's book will clarify some of these issues. The second problem is the physical location of the throat wound as indicated by the doctors/nurses/photographs may be too low to have been seen while clothed. The consensus of the medical people is that the throat wound was located just below the Adam's Apple. I don't wear my necktie on or above my necktie - does anyone? IMO, photographs of JFK on 11-22-1963 show that he did not either. In a 1997 video interview, Carrico states that the wound was AT the collar line, even poking his finger BEHIND the top of his collar in demonstration. It is regularly stated that in his WC testimony he says the words 'the wound was located above the collar.' He puts his had to his throat, begins to speak, and Dulles jumps on him, and states 'the wound was "ABOVE the collar". Carrico attempts to speak, and Dulles immediately cuts him off. But, all of this is irrelevant. Later in WC testimony, Carrico unequivocally states that he was "too busy then" and did NOT see the throat wound until AFTER removal of JFK's clothing. He repeats this same statement in his 1997 interview. Thus, when Carrico states the location of the throat wound RELATIVE to the collar line, he is only estimating -- not remembering what he actually observed. Considering all of the above, IMO the best we can say is that the throat wound was very close to the collar line. Again, this is MY OPINION. Tom Tom, Since the close proximity witnesses describe JFK reacting to throat trauma and the Zap film shows JFK reacting to throat trauma -- seems obvious that he was reacting to throat trauma on Elm St. This is all "false mystery" nonsense, frankly and with all due respect. Cliff, My post is questioning the location of the throat wound relative to the shirt collar -- not arguing that there was no throat wound...so your post *appears* to be a non sequitur. Or is this your way of saying that you have no longer have any desire to participate regarding this issue? I can understand that you think the only thing that matters is there *was* a throat wound. With the same considerations and due respect, I don't agree that nothing matters beyond the fact that there was a throat wound. Tom I thought the issue was where the throat wound was created -- Dealey or Parkland? If that's not the issue -- my bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 (edited) He may have been reacting to what you call "throat trauma" but, how does that establish that the projectile causing this came from the front, Cliff? It was generally described at Parkland as a wound of entrance in spite of all attempts to parse badgered WC testimony. The wound had no exit The Mantik-Seal-of-Approval-Genuine neck x-ray shows an air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes -- that trajectory points to the throat entrance. The neck x-ray destroys the skull fragment/exit scenario. Edited February 1, 2016 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Neal Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I thought the issue was where the throat wound was created -- Dealey or Parkland? If that's not the issue -- my bad. The issue I am addressing is whether the wound was above or below the collar line, but of course that is directly related to the DP v. Parkland issue. IMO, the wound occurred in DP not in Parkland. But there are question marks here dependent upon a throat wound located ABOVE the collar or BELOW. If below the collar, where is the hole in the shirt corresponding to the wound? Do round bullets make a 1/2" vertical slit in a shirt and a 1/5" round hole in the body and leave "No bullet material?" On this basis alone a stronger case is made for an above the collar wound. If above the collar, what made the slit and the nick? Not blunt-nosed scissors...how does a trained RN removing a necktie with a scalpel cut a slit completely through multiple layers of cloth without slicing into JFK's neck? Each option has it's positives and its negatives. Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 He may have been reacting to what you call "throat trauma" but, how does that establish that the projectile causing this came from the front, Cliff? It was generally described at Parkland as a wound of entrance in spite of all attempts to parse badgered WC testimony. The wound had no exit The Mantik-Seal-of-Approval-Genuine neck x-ray shows an air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes -- that trajectory points to the throat entrance. The neck x-ray destroys the skull fragment/exit scenario. Only if the neck x-ray is genuine. Custer seemed to think it wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I thought the issue was where the throat wound was created -- Dealey or Parkland? If that's not the issue -- my bad. The issue I am addressing is whether the wound was above or below the collar line, but of course that is directly related to the DP v. Parkland issue. IMO, the wound occurred in DP not in Parkland. But there are question marks here dependent upon a throat wound located ABOVE the collar or BELOW. If below the collar, where is the hole in the shirt corresponding to the wound? Do round bullets make a 1/2" vertical slit in a shirt and a 1/5" round hole in the body and leave "No bullet material?" On this basis alone a stronger case is made for an above the collar wound. If above the collar, what made the slit and the nick? Not blunt-nosed scissors...how does a trained RN removing a necktie with a scalpel cut a slit completely through multiple layers of cloth without slicing into JFK's neck? Each option has it's positives and its negatives. Tom That sums things up quite well, Tom, although I feel that Ashton has demonstrated quite well that the openings in the shirt collar were not exactly slits. If the wound is below the collar, and there was no metal residue left on the shirt collar material, this only leaves a certain number of options open. 1. We are mistaken about organic residue on bullets, and the bullet (or bullet fragment) exiting JFK's neck was coated in organic matter and left no residue on the collar. 2. Cliff is right and a projectile made from plastic either entered or exited JFK's throat, also nicking the tie and going through the shirt collar. 3. A fragment of bone from JFK's neck exited his throat, nicking his tie knot and passing through his shirt collar on the way through. 4. Ashton is right and everything (wound in throat, hole in collar and nick in tie) was made by an assassin with a 1/4" diameter needle connected to a syringe full of non-traceable poison. I cannot think of any other possibilities, but please add on to this list if you think of anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 He may have been reacting to what you call "throat trauma" but, how does that establish that the projectile causing this came from the front, Cliff? It was generally described at Parkland as a wound of entrance in spite of all attempts to parse badgered WC testimony. The wound had no exit The Mantik-Seal-of-Approval-Genuine neck x-ray shows an air pocket overlaying the right C7/T1 transverse processes -- that trajectory points to the throat entrance. The neck x-ray destroys the skull fragment/exit scenario. Only if the neck x-ray is genuine. Custer seemed to think it wasn't. Mantik says it isn't a matter of doubt -- the neck x-ray is genuine. Custer has been all over the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 1, 2016 Share Posted February 1, 2016 I thought the issue was where the throat wound was created -- Dealey or Parkland? If that's not the issue -- my bad. The issue I am addressing is whether the wound was above or below the collar line, but of course that is directly related to the DP v. Parkland issue. IMO, the wound occurred in DP not in Parkland. But there are question marks here dependent upon a throat wound located ABOVE the collar or BELOW. If below the collar, where is the hole in the shirt corresponding to the wound? Do round bullets make a 1/2" vertical slit in a shirt and a 1/5" round hole in the body and leave "No bullet material?" On this basis alone a stronger case is made for an above the collar wound. If above the collar, what made the slit and the nick? Not blunt-nosed scissors...how does a trained RN removing a necktie with a scalpel cut a slit completely through multiple layers of cloth without slicing into JFK's neck? Each option has it's positives and its negatives. Tom That sums things up quite well, Tom, although I feel that Ashton has demonstrated quite well that the openings in the shirt collar were not exactly slits. If the wound is below the collar, and there was no metal residue left on the shirt collar material, this only leaves a certain number of options open. 1. We are mistaken about organic residue on bullets, and the bullet (or bullet fragment) exiting JFK's neck was coated in organic matter and left no residue on the collar. So JFK reacted to throat trauma prior to having a bullet fragment exit his throat? 2. Cliff is right and a projectile made from plastic either entered or exited JFK's throat, also nicking the tie and going through the shirt collar. Where does this "exit" stuff come from? 3. A fragment of bone from JFK's neck exited his throat, nicking his tie knot and passing through his shirt collar on the way through. So he was shot in the head and reacted to a bullet fragment leaving his throat? Which means the neck x-ray is faked? If you insist on ignoring all the witness testimony and photographic evidence, any scenario is" viable", I guess... 4. Ashton is right and everything (wound in throat, hole in collar and nick in tie) was made by an assassin with a 1/4" diameter needle connected to a syringe full of non-traceable poison. Right, so he reacted to throat trauma ten minutes before Bowron shivved him in the throat. Riiiiight.... I cannot think of any other possibilities, but please add on to this list if you think of anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now