There Was No Bullet Wound in John F. Kennedy's Throat

[Robert Prudhomme]

Diagram showing more details of relationship between thyroid and cricoid cartilages, trachea, thyroid gland and relative location in regards to cervical vertebrae C3, C4 and C6..

Edited March 27, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[Sandy Larsen]

Q1: Does the shape of this throat opening give anyone the IMPRESSION that the wound is located LOWER than it actually is?

The shape makes no difference to me, I ignore it. My problem is, I don't know where in the tracheotomy the wound is supposed to be. I've wondered if the semicircle on the lower margin of the tracheotomy is the lower margin of the wound.

Q2: IF the UPPER margin has been retracted UPWARD from its ORIGINAL location, where are the wrinkle lines that should be visible?

Isn't the neck skin of a forty-five year old supple enough not to show wrinkles? I don't know.

Q3: IF the LOWER margin has been retracted DOWNWARD from its ORIGINAL location, are any wrinkle lines visible in the darkness below the wound?

Why do you say "darkness below the wound?" Are you privy to something that indicates the wound is located above the darkness?

With regard ONLY to the above statements, and including NO OTHER FACTORS:

IMO the UPPER wound margin has returned to its original position, and is only 'distorted' by the camera angle. The LOWER margin has been retracted (pulled) SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER to create the appearance of a LOWER wound location. I agree that it was ALSO WIDENED to create the appearance of an exit wound, but it has ONLY been widened by LOWERING the LOWER INCISION MARGIN.

The bottom margin of the tracheotomy does indeed appear to be pulled down.

Tom

[Michael Walton]

Michael Walton - I'm pretty much with you on your more minimalist approach.

Paul, thank you for being a minimalist. Believe me when I say that I've tried to learn as much as I can about this case and to keep an open mind. I remember when I first read Lifton's book back in 1981 or so (I was 18 at the time) and I was like, Wow!" But as time went on, I've just tried to use the common sense approach to the case and Lifton's theories, for me, just fell by the wayside.

Regarding the Z film, and as I mentioned elsewhere, the Z film is our best evidence for this case showing that the murder was a crossfire. I have always believed it's authentic because:

1. The government was viewing it days, if not hours, after Zapruder turned it over and using 60's technology, it would have been nearly impossible to forge. As a matter of fact, it was incorporated in black and white in their reenactment film they shot (click to see it). In other words, the film was shot by a citizen, the rights were purchased from him, viewed by the government, presented in one of their reenactment films, and when you watch that film at the link above, it's exactly what we see today (except it's in black and white).

2. A single photo can be manipulated like the Oswald backyard photos were; however, here we're talking about 8mm film and each frame is the size of a pinky nail. There's no way they were sitting around moving things around, taking people out (like one ridiculous recent claim I just read on this forum where this guy thought that Ike Altgens was removed from it).

3. The government knew that this film, if seen in full by the general public back then, would have created a firestorm about what it showed and therefore suppressed it from the public for 12 years until as I'm sure you know, Robert Groden got a copy of it on a late-night TV talk show for its first-ever network showing. And as the Wiki page says, "...The public's response and outrage to that television showing quickly led to the forming of the Hart-Schweiker investigation, contributed to the Church Committee Investigation on Intelligence Activities by the United States, and resulted in the House Select Committee on Assassinations investigation." So the government's fears of outrage came true.

This to me (#3) is the biggest proof of all that it's authentic for the very reason that the government tried to keep it away from the public all of that time. I mean, can you imagine, if the U.S. government had been fully behind the vigorous pursuit of the truth of this case that they would have done this? Even today, when a murder takes place and they capture parking lot footage of the suspect, look how fast they show that footage on the local news? But because the Z film showed the truth of what happened and because the government had an entirely different agenda, it was suppressed, thus, proving the film is authentic.

[Tom Neal]

Bob,

I don't see how any of this proves the bullet wound was well below the collar.

I'm out the door to spend the day at the hospital with my son. I'll return after midnight, and post several diagrams depicting the isthmus of the thyroid gland, and how it must be undermined and retracted to reveal the 1st and 2nd tracheal rings. Additionally, I will post the procedure for retraction and when necessary cutting through the Isthmus.

Tom

[Robert Prudhomme]

Bob,

I don't see how any of this proves the bullet wound was well below the collar.

I'm out the door to spend the day at the hospital with my son. I'll return after midnight, and post several diagrams depicting the isthmus of the thyroid gland, and how it must be undermined and retracted to reveal the 1st and 2nd tracheal rings. Additionally, I will post the procedure for retraction and when necessary cutting through the Isthmus.

Tom

Have I missed something here? I thought it was pretty much accepted that Perry made the tracheotomy incision between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings (or 3rd and 4th, I can't quite recall) for the simple fact he wanted to make the incision below the wound in the right side of the trachea.

This brings up another interesting point. Perry did not mention the thyroid gland being damaged by the passage of a projectile, nor did he mention having to cut through the isthmus of the thyroid to gain access to the trachea. If the wound was behind the thyroid gland, why was it so easy to observe?

I don't know where you buy your dress shirts, Tom, but, when I do up the collar on a shirt, the top of the collar is touching my Adam's Apple, also known as the "Laryngeal Prominence" of the thyroid cartilage.

If Perry made the incision between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings, would that not place the incision (and the wound in the trachea) well below the top of the collar?

Edited March 27, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[Ashton Gray]

I thought it was pretty much accepted that Perry made the tracheotomy incision between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings (or 3rd and 4th, I can't quite recall)

AUTOPSY REPORT:

Situated in the low anterior neck at approximately the level of the third and fourth tracheal rings is a 6.5 cm. long transverse wound with widely gaping irregular edges.

That is entirely consistent with the autopsy photos.

for the simple fact he wanted to make the incision below the wound in the right side of the trachea.

TESTIMONY OF PERRY:

Dr. PERRY: I . . . began the tracheotomy making a transverse incision right through the wound in the neck.

Mr. SPECTER: Why did you elect to make the tracheotomy incision through the wound in the neck, Dr. Perry?

Dr. PERRY: The area of the wound, as pointed out to you in the lower third of the neck anteriorly, is customarily the spot one would electively perform the tracheotomy.

This isn't complicated. It's merely made complicated.

Ashton

[Robert Prudhomme]

I thought it was pretty much accepted that Perry made the tracheotomy incision between the 2nd and 3rd tracheal rings (or 3rd and 4th, I can't quite recall)

AUTOPSY REPORT:

Situated in the low anterior neck at approximately the level of the third and fourth tracheal rings is a 6.5 cm. long transverse wound with widely gaping irregular edges.

That is entirely consistent with the autopsy photos.

for the simple fact he wanted to make the incision below the wound in the right side of the trachea.

TESTIMONY OF PERRY:

Dr. PERRY: I . . . began the tracheotomy making a transverse incision right through the wound in the neck.

Mr. SPECTER: Why did you elect to make the tracheotomy incision through the wound in the neck, Dr. Perry?

Dr. PERRY: The area of the wound, as pointed out to you in the lower third of the neck anteriorly, is customarily the spot one would electively perform the tracheotomy.

This isn't complicated. It's merely made complicated.

Ashton

Perhaps you could clear this up for us, Ashton. If the wound in the trachea was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal ring, did Perry make the incision in the trachea at this same level? I guess it goes without saying now that whatever wounded the trachea passed below the thyroid gland.

[Ashton Gray]

If the wound in the trachea was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal ring, did Perry make the incision in the trachea at this same level?

TESTIMONY OF PERRY:

Dr. PERRY: I . . . began the tracheotomy making a transverse incision right through the wound in the neck.

Ashton

[Robert Prudhomme]

If the wound in the trachea was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal ring, did Perry make the incision in the trachea at this same level?

TESTIMONY OF PERRY:

Dr. PERRY: I . . . began the tracheotomy making a transverse incision right through the wound in the neck.

Ashton

Well, you see, this is where I wish Perry had gone into a little more detail. I know he wanted the tracheotomy tube to go below the wound in the trachea, in order to inflate the cuff below the wound and prevent leakage of air through the wound but, while he definitely tells us he made a transverse incision in the neck between the 3rd and 4th tracheal rings, he does not tell us exactly where he made the incision in the trachea itself. We are left to assume he made it between the 3rd and 4th tracheal rings, and that the ragged wound in the trachea was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal rings, but I have not seen anything to verify this.

You realize, of course, that if the wound was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal rings, this places this wound at least as low as the C7 cervical vertebra, if not even lower (possibly at thoracic vertebra T1), accepting, of course, the trachea begins at the level of the C6 cervical vertebra.

I suppose it really does not matter all that much where Perry made the incision in the trachea. The important thing is he identified the throat wound at the 3rd/4th tracheal rings.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[David Josephs]

Seems to me we have a perfectly good explanation in the FIRST AUTOPSY report seen by these men which talks about a fragment causing the hole.

given that this explanation and report are gone in favor of the Silly Bullsh!t theory... one wonders

Mr. Rankin:

Then there‘s a great range of material in

regards to the wound and the autopsy and this point of exit

or entrance of the bullet in the front of the neck, and that all

has to be developed much more than we have at the present time.

We have an explanation there in the autopsy that probably

a fragment came out the front of the neck, but with the elevation

the shot must have come from, and the angle, it seems quite apparent,

since we have the picture of where the bullet entered in

the back, that the bullet entered below the shoulder blade to the

right of the backbone, which is below the place where the

picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt

in front, and the bullet, according to the autopsy didn't strike

any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go through.

So that how it could turn, and --

Rep. Boggs. I thought I read that bullet just went.in a

finger's length.

Mr. Rankin. That is what they first said

[Robert Prudhomme]

Here is a diagram showing a typical tracheostomy tube inserted into a patient's trachea. Note first how much lower the tracheostomy site is than the larynx (vocal cords).

Note also the cuff on the lower end of the inserted tube. This cuff is inflated and prevents air from the tube escaping upward and possibly out the trach site or through a wound in the trachea, as well as to prevention liquid secretions from the tracheostomy site from entering the lungs. As this cuff is obviously much lower than where the incision would be made, it is conceivable a surgeon could make the trach incision between the 1st and 2nd tracheal rings, insert the tube and still have the cuff make a seal below the 3rd/4th tracheal ring site.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme

[Robert Prudhomme]

This diagram shows something that has always troubled me about JFK's throat wound.

See the carotid artery snuggled in so cozily behind the thyroid gland, with the jugular vein snuggled up to it? How did the bullet not rupture one or both of these blood vessels?

[Michael Walton]

The premise of this thread goes as follows:

• Ashton Gray's (AG) theory is that there was no front shot to Kennedy's throat
  
• Instead, AG's theory is that a bullet hit Kennedy in the lower skull, causing a bullet fragment or piece of bone to fly out of the lower throat causing an exit wound
  
• AG believes his theory is 100% absolutely, positively accurate
  
• AG believes that by taking a suit photo and cutting it out and placing it onto a photo of Kennedy's corpse, this proves his theory as being 100% absolutely, positively accurate
  
• To bolster his belief in the above theory, AG challenges all nay-sayers to "accept the challenge," which is to put on a suit and tie and take your finger and feel around on your throat and trachea; doing so will further prove his theory as 100% absolutely, positively accurate
  
• AG believes that all nay-sayers to his theory are either wrong or "whiffing" (meaning your opposing theory to his is incorrect)
  

• An opposing theory to AG's theory such as Michael Walton's (MW) is that there *was* a front shot that entered Kennedy's throat at around Z225 of the Z film
  
• MW believes that there is no medical evidence as stated in the autopsy face sheet showing any bullet entry wound on the lower rear part of Kennedy's skull
  
• MW believes that the Z film, an authentic documentary film of the shooting, shows Kennedy react to a front throat shot, then his body jerks forward; this jerk is caused by the rear back shot slamming into him
  
• MW believes that one hour after Kennedy's death, Dr. Perry, who worked on Kennedy and actually saw the front throat wound, declared that it was a wound of entry at the hospital press conference
  
• MW believes that based on the above, MW's theory is 100% absolutely, positively accurate
  
• MW believes that AG's photo compositions showing a cut out photo of a suit pasted onto a photo of JFK's corpse are misleading and inaccurate
  
• Because MW believes that AG's theory is inaccurate, MW believes it not necessary to accept AG's "challenge" of trying on a suit and tie and feeling around on his throat and trachea because it will prove nothing
  
• MW believes that all nay-sayers to his theory are wrong, but at the same time, people are entitled to believe in whatever they want
  

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

In summary, here are two additional animated GIFs. The first shows a clear photo of Kennedy being in almost the exact same position he was in at Z225. Notice that in the clear photo, there is plenty of room for a sniper in the knoll area to take a shot and hit him in the throat

https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxYXR5WWxkZ05QRkU

The second is a frame-by-frame analysis of the Z film. At Z226, Kennedy starts to react to the front throat shot by throwing up his hands. At 231, you can see Kennedy's head start to bob backward, then in the next frames, it goes forward. His arms and hands remain in the same position and Jackie Kennedy does not shift forward or backward, proving that Kennedy's head bobbing was not cause by a speed change of the limo

This proves that Kennedy was reacting to the front throat shot, then his body shifts forward from the back shot slamming into him. There is no other evidence of a shot hitting Kennedy in the lower rear of his skull. Although he was seriously wounded from the frontal and back shots as described, his brain is still functioning, holding his arms and hands in place until Z313.

https://drive.google.com/uc?id=0B7Hr9Lrku-CxMW9DWWg0RllUUjQ

Edited March 27, 2016 by Michael Walton

[Ashton Gray]

The premise of this thread goes as follows:

• Ashton Gray's (AG) theory is that there was no front shot to Kennedy's throat
• Instead, AG's theory is that a bullet hit Kennedy in the lower skull, causing a bullet fragment or piece of bone to fly out of the lower throat causing an exit woun

No, that is NOT MY THEORY!

I have NEVER STATED ANY SUCH THEORY, NOR DO I SUPPORT ANY SUCH THEORY!

There, whatever you are. I've made it now so even a 5-year-old can read and understand it, so I'm hoping that I've finally managed to reach down to a reading level that you can comprehend.

I asked you above to stop misrepresenting me, and to QUOTE anything you claim I said, but I see you haven't got anything even approaching such a level of decency and integrity, so now I'm blocking you, because I don't waste time with wormy, willful dishonesty.

*PLONK*

Ashton

Edited March 27, 2016 by Ashton Gray

[Ashton Gray]

You realize, of course, that if the wound was between the 3rd and 4th tracheal rings, this places this wound at least as low as the C7 cervical vertebra, if not even lower (possibly at thoracic vertebra T1

Whatever I realize or not is really immaterial, because the quote about the third and fourth tracheal rings is from the autopsy report, and I have not the slightest doubt whatsoever that the three pathologists who signed the document—Hume, Boswell, and Finck—very thoroughly realized what you're asking me if I realize. So I realize what they realized, and the autopsy photos seem, to me, entirely consistent with their observations and assessment.

I honestly don't see this as complicated. It is what it is. I realize that "what it is" doesn't sit well with the Front-Shot Faithful, which is why there are 43 pages to this thread, many of them an effort to insist that it all is something else. Hence all the complication. They can't simply confront the simple and obvious facts of where the wound was, and that the tracheostomy slice went right through it. It violates their religious beliefs.

I suppose it really does not matter all that much where Perry made the incision in the trachea. The important thing is he identified the throat wound at the 3rd/4th tracheal rings.

It matters completely where Perry made the incision, because it was in the EXACT place where it would destroy any later forensic analysis of what that wound was before he sliced through it.

Damn lucky "shot," if you ask me, that could enter at the EXACT place where a tracheostomy incision would be made—and be able to arrive there without going through six layers of tie material. Now, THAT is the REAL "magic bullet."

Ashton

Edited March 27, 2016 by Ashton Gray