ERROR RECALL

[Thomas H. Purvis]

While digging through this junk again, it was discovered that in "speaking off the cuff" in regards to spectrographic analysis of the clothing worn by JFK, that I have stuck my foot into my mouth as regards the exact examinations conducted on each piece of JFK's clothing.

In order to set the record straight, (primarily as regards examination of the coat vs. examination of the shirt), I am providing my original draft typewritten notes/draft of my discussions with Frazier; Gallgher; Heilman; and Heiberger.

As a summary:

1. Absolutely no spectrographic analysis was conducted on the coat.

2. The hole in the back of the shirt was examined and found to have copper around it's edges.

3. No examination of any "slit" in the front of the shirt was conducted.

4. Henry Heiberger was not even aware of any such defect as a "slit" in the front of the shirt.

5. The "abraised" area of the tie was X-rayed and found to contain metallic residue.

*Previously, it was indicated that the coat was examined and that copper residue was found around the back entrance hole.

This is completely incorrect, and comes merely from reliance on memory of all of those long ago conversations.

The next attachments represent the "absolute" information relayed to me from those FBI Agents who had responsibility for examination of the evidence and who were later called to testify before the WC.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

While digging through this junk again, it was discovered that in "speaking off the cuff" in regards to spectrographic analysis of the clothing worn by JFK, that I have stuck my foot into my mouth as regards the exact examinations conducted on each piece of JFK's clothing.

In order to set the record straight, (primarily as regards examination of the coat vs. examination of the shirt), I am providing my original draft typewritten notes/draft of my discussions with Frazier; Gallgher; Heilman; and Heiberger.

As a summary:

1. Absolutely no spectrographic analysis was conducted on the coat.

2. The hole in the back of the shirt was examined and found to have copper around it's edges.

3. No examination of any "slit" in the front of the shirt was conducted.

4. Henry Heiberger was not even aware of any such defect as a "slit" in the front of the shirt.

5. The "abraised" area of the tie was X-rayed and found to contain metallic residue.

*Previously, it was indicated that the coat was examined and that copper residue was found around the back entrance hole.

This is completely incorrect, and comes merely from reliance on memory of all of those long ago conversations.

The next attachments represent the "absolute" information relayed to me from those FBI Agents who had responsibility for examination of the evidence and who were later called to testify before the WC.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

While digging through this junk again, it was discovered that in "speaking off the cuff" in regards to spectrographic analysis of the clothing worn by JFK, that I have stuck my foot into my mouth as regards the exact examinations conducted on each piece of JFK's clothing.

In order to set the record straight, (primarily as regards examination of the coat vs. examination of the shirt), I am providing my original draft typewritten notes/draft of my discussions with Frazier; Gallgher; Heilman; and Heiberger.

As a summary:

1. Absolutely no spectrographic analysis was conducted on the coat.

2. The hole in the back of the shirt was examined and found to have copper around it's edges.

3. No examination of any "slit" in the front of the shirt was conducted.

4. Henry Heiberger was not even aware of any such defect as a "slit" in the front of the shirt.

5. The "abraised" area of the tie was X-rayed and found to contain metallic residue.

*Previously, it was indicated that the coat was examined and that copper residue was found around the back entrance hole.

This is completely incorrect, and comes merely from reliance on memory of all of those long ago conversations.

The next attachments represent the "absolute" information relayed to me from those FBI Agents who had responsibility for examination of the evidence and who were later called to testify before the WC.

Certainly glad that I got this down in writing years ago!

My Father suffers from full altzheimers, and from the looks of things, I too may be headed in that direction.

This certainly places the second hole in the back of the coat, which is located up at the coat collar, in a slightly different perspective.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

While digging through this junk again, it was discovered that in "speaking off the cuff" in regards to spectrographic analysis of the clothing worn by JFK, that I have stuck my foot into my mouth as regards the exact examinations conducted on each piece of JFK's clothing.

In order to set the record straight, (primarily as regards examination of the coat vs. examination of the shirt), I am providing my original draft typewritten notes/draft of my discussions with Frazier; Gallgher; Heilman; and Heiberger.

As a summary:

1. Absolutely no spectrographic analysis was conducted on the coat.

2. The hole in the back of the shirt was examined and found to have copper around it's edges.

3. No examination of any "slit" in the front of the shirt was conducted.

4. Henry Heiberger was not even aware of any such defect as a "slit" in the front of the shirt.

5. The "abraised" area of the tie was X-rayed and found to contain metallic residue.

*Previously, it was indicated that the coat was examined and that copper residue was found around the back entrance hole.

This is completely incorrect, and comes merely from reliance on memory of all of those long ago conversations.

The next attachments represent the "absolute" information relayed to me from those FBI Agents who had responsibility for examination of the evidence and who were later called to testify before the WC.

P.S. Just in case anyone gives a RA, I do know how to spell syndrome also.

[Jack White]

This material is in the wrong thread and should be in Ashton's

thread regarding the throat wound.

Jack

[Thomas H. Purvis]

This material is in the wrong thread and should be in Ashton's

thread regarding the throat wound.

Jack

Well!

Since:

1. I am the one who has the information (for whatever it's worth or lack thereof).

2. I am the one who erroneously became confused on the topic matter and had indicated that the coat was examined, when in fact it was not the coat.

3. I am the one who is posting that my on failure to reference back to the written documents and information which are in my possession, is responsible for this confusion.

Then:

Until such time as we fall under a Dictatorial Regime, then, just as I long ago made a topic which dealt with the clothing examination of JFK, then I would also assume that if it was so desired, I could start a topic which was entitled "MUFFINS", and thereafter post it under it if I so desired.

The attached documents represent the factual elements of the conversations between myself and FBI Agents Frazier; Gallagher; Heilman; Heiberger; (and one other whom I do not recall his name at the time, and who only assisted Gallagher with the NAA and knew nothing of the clothing examination).

They are being provided in order that historically, someone will take note of them, and irrelevant as to whether it is or is not believed.

Even were the information false, it would still be as good as the complete "hearsay" manner in which the clothing examination evidence was presented by the Warren Commission.

And:

At last account, FBI Agent Robert Frazier was still living in McLean, VA, and just in event anyone here wants to conduct "real" research, then they had might best contact him to either verify or negate what I have stated as Agent Frazier is most certainly getting on up in age.

P.S. In event that he still collects "JFK Assassination" books, let me know and I will send him some additional ones that I have acquired over the years.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Gary;

Although you may not have been around, this is why I had to, some time ago, dig out the "original" of my conversations with Frazier; Gallagher; Heiberger; Heilman; etc.

In speaking without going back to the old notes, i had erroneously stated that JFK's coat was examined.

According to Heiberger, & everyone else, it was not.