Robert G. Grossman

[John Simkin]

Dr. Robert G. Grossman, and Dr. Kemp Clark were the two neurosurgeons at Parkland Hospital who examined President Kennedy in Trauma Room #1. Grossman was not asked to testify before either the Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations. On BBC Radio 4 he gave only his third public interview on the JFK assassination. He was asked why he never spoke out at the time. He replied that other doctors who did speak out at the time received letters making threats against their children. Grossman seems to be attempting to justify his silence by claiming that he thought these letters were coming from individuals who thought they had not done enough to save Kennedy.

Grossman did not have much of interest to say. Once he arrived in the Trauma Room the neck wound had already been destroyed. He also did not see the back wound. He said that the head wound was different to anything he had seen before and had clearly been made by a very powerful bullet. Grossman also described the taking of the body by the Secret Service. Despite efforts by the staff to keep it the SS made it clear that they wanted control of the body. Grossman justifies this action by suggesting that the SS were in a state of shock because of their failure to protect the president.

I will post details of the interview when he goes online.

[Michael Hogan]

Dr. Robert G. Grossman, and Dr. Kemp Clark were the two neurosurgeons at Parkland Hospital who examined President Kennedy in Trauma Room #1. Grossman was not asked to testify before either the Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations. On BBC Radio 4 he gave only his third public interview on the JFK assassination. He was asked why he never spoke out at the time. He replied that other doctors who did speak out at the time received letters making threats against their children. Grossman seems to be attempting to justify his silence by claiming that he thought these letters were coming from individuals who thought they had not done enough to save Kennedy.

Grossman did not have much of interest to say. Once he arrived in the Trauma Room the neck wound had already been destroyed. He also did not see the back wound. He said that the head wound was different to anything he had seen before and had clearly been made by a very powerful bullet. Grossman also described the taking of the body by the Secret Service. Despite efforts by the staff to keep it the SS made it clear that they wanted control of the body. Grossman justifies this action by suggesting that the SS were in a state of shock because of their failure to protect the president.

I will post details of the interview when he goes online.

BRYAN, Texas, Aug. 31 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Brazos Valley residents, neuroscience researchers, and interested clinicians will each have opportunities to hear from nationally recognized clinicians and researchers on the topic of Traumatic Brain Injury during the Texas Brain and Spine Institute's Fourth Annual Neuroscience Symposium on September 10, 2010.

The keynote speaker for the public session is Robert G. Grossman, M.D. whose presentation is entitled "The Assassination of John F. Kennedy - A Neurosurgeon's Eyewitness Account of the Events of November 22, 1963."

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/traumatic-brain-injury-is-the-focus-of-tbsi-annual-neuroscience-symposium-101902393.html

In 2003, David Lifton wrote a long article about Dr. Grossman:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/grossman.htm

From a 2003 CNN story about Dr. Grossman:

Excerpt:

HOUSTON, Texas (CNN) -- At first, the young neurosurgeon thought it was a prank.....

....Grossman, now chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston,

has kept remarkably quiet over the past 40 years about the events of that day.

He says he worried initially that speaking about his involvement might put his children in danger.

He'd heard about the growing public interest in the controversial autopsy findings and conspiracy theories

and preferred to keep out of the limelight.

Grossman was not asked to testify before Warren Commission that investigated the assassination, and he didn't

read the Warren Report until just a few years ago...

The wounds that Grossman examined 40 years ago have become central to a discussion of what exactly happened

that day -- who shot the president, when, and from where.

Now, at 70, Grossman is trying to provide answers to some of those questions.

He was recently asked to contribute to a medical journal a scientific paper that analyzes Kennedy's wounds from

a neuro-forensic perspective and has spent much of the past five years gathering information and revisiting details of the event.

Why now? Well, absent the fear for his small children -- they are now grown -- Grossman hopes to dispel some of the myths

that surround the Kennedy assassination.

"I believe the preponderance of evidence shows that Kennedy was shot from behind," he says.

That conclusion would support the findings of the Warren Commission, which concluded that Kennedy had been shot by

a 6.5 mm Italian-made Mannlicher-Carcano rifle fired by a single assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, from the sixth floor

of the Texas School Book Depository....

....The Warren Commission found no evidence to support the existence of a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.

In 1979, the House Select Committee on Assassinations disagreed, saying Kennedy "was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy."

"There are many theories, some extreme, about what happened to the president," Grossman says. "If we can put to rest some of the

wilder conspiracy theories, I think it's healthy to do so."

Through his research, Grossman has come to agree with most of the conclusions of the Warren Report, though he says his mind is open to

different conclusions should new evidence surface.

When asked whether the event defined his life in any way, Grossman responds quickly and assuredly, "No, it really did not. I just happened to be there."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/11/21/jfk.physician/index.html

[Bernice Moore]

DR.ROBERT GROSSMAN SCROLL DOWN...

http://127.0.0.1:4664/cache?event_id=182950&schema_id=2&q=DR%2EROBERT+GROSSMAN&s=L7oKNPt92S54M4Avjm2ekuctKjY

AN AFTERWORD BY DOUG HORNE:

http://www.jfklancer.com/backes/horne/Backes5.html

Horne corresponded with me via email and pointed out a few details.

1.) I prepared the initial list of draft questions for each of the 10 ARRB depositions related to JFK's autopsy; Gunn would then review the list of questions, restructure it, and sometimes add a few questions. However, ultimately it was he and he alone who had control over which questions were asked or not asked. Only Gunn could speak to the witness during the depositions. There are many questions that were asked which I know he would not have pursued had I not pressed certain issues (such as questions about the cranial x-rays related to the work of David Mantik); similarly, there are many follow-up questions I wanted asked (and so indicated by furiously writing notes to Gunn during the depositions) that he did NOT ask. Some were crucial, and constitute what I call critical failures in questioning. (I could have been much more critical of him at JFK Lancer than I was, but I decided to offer what I considered "minimal" criticism of Gunn...and time did not permit me to go into the kind of detail I would have to have gone into in order to explain further criticisms. But all of these additional details will be in my book.)

2.) The Cuba records I worked with do not really illuminate the Missile Crisis or Anti-Castro plots, but they DO ILLUMINATE the following: U.S. Military pretexts for overt invasion of Cuba with U.S. forces, U.S. Military contingency plans for a coup in Cuba, and U.S. Military attempts to foment (create) a military "coup" in Cuba which, combined with pretexts ("incidents"), might have justified a 1963 or 1964 invasion of Cuba---in short, evidence of the U.S. Military's repeated attempts during the JFK administration to MAKE NATIONAL POLICY over Cuba. [The ARRB releases prove, in my view, that the Pentagon was not a disinterested party simply carrying out the administration's policy decisions re: Cuba.] Order the Military Documents

And yes, we reverified Newman's hypothesis about a planned withdrawal from Spring 1963-Fall 1963, and immediate escalation of the Vietnam War after JFK's death.

3.) I worked not only with Oswald's IRS Tax Records, but also concentrated on his employment history and earnings records (at the repeated request of Armstrong and Hewitt letters sent to the ARRB in 1996 and 1997). Better late than never. Armstrong and Hewitt were very unhappy at the JFK Lancer Conference with my massive memo on the subject, because the documents I examined showed Armstrong's theories about fake W-2 forms of a double Oswald to be unsubstantiated." (Memo dated Sept 1998.) Order the Horne Tax Records Memo

4.) Reason it's important to note that temporal bone meets the occipital bone (I forgot to mention) is because Baxter, on 11/22/63, described the head wound as "temporal-occipital." [This still means back of the head behind right ear.]

5.) About his moment of epiphany -- Although Gunn told me he agreed with my hypothesis [on the two brain exams] when I explained it to him, he failed to ask Humes or Boswell a direct question about this...was there, or wasn't there? VERY DISAPPOINTING. He blew it. Nor did he aggressively pursue the S[ibert] & O['Neill] report with them after they denied seeing any evidence of head surgery. I begged him to during the Humes deposition., and he wouldn't even read the S. & O. report to Humes, or have Humes read it and comment on it. I couldn't believe it.

6.) There were other people in the room during the depositions, but they rotated. Jeremy and I were were the only two people present at ALL 10 autopsy-related depos, and the only 2 people involved in their preparation and execution.

7.) Due to lack of time [at Lancer], I forgot to mention the most IMPORTANT observation of Finck in the Blumberg Report, other than the dates of exam # 2: Finck says the brain looked different than it did at autopsy (!!!!!!!!), but benignly (or stupidly--or cowardly) interprets this as a "fixation artifact." Yeah, right.

8.) Joe---great article. You might want to add comments from Saturday morning's presentation, such as the fact that I was frozen out of, and consciously excluded from, the Dallas Doctors' deposition(s) by Gunn, who was suffering from a bad case of sour grapes ("not invented here" syndrome, i.e., "poor loser"), and by the new, last ditch, 11th hour upper management at the ARRB, who either didn't believe in doing the deposition at all (read: Laura Denk and Tracy Shycoff), or who simply didn't care one way or another who was present (read: Jack Tunheim), and copped-out and deferred to Laura Denk on this matter, who in turn was deferring to Jeremy Gunn. Everyone I mentioned above played "Ostrich" (with head in the sand). Thus, preps (and invitations and logistic setup or lack thereof) were left to Ron Haron, our third and final General Counsel, who was not at all versed in the complexities of the medical evidence, in the sensitivities of the Kennedy family and Burke Marshall, and who was working directly with Gunn (his former boss), and was essentially ignoring my recommendations re: priorities (Kemp Clark), and re: getting the doctors to come to Washington at all costs (even if subpoenas were necessary).

It was Haron's idea to depose 5 at once (a disaster)---he sold that to Gunn, over my objections. Anyway, the rest is history...without the autopsy photos (the only reason to do the depo in the first place), it was largely an empty gesture, and a public relations exercise. It was Laura Denk who told me that the Board members were more inclined on technical merit NOT to do the depos., but decided to go ahead and do them because of the adverse publicity if they didn't. (Not really a surprise that the Board was not convinced on merit, since Gunn had not shown them my detailed Feb 11, 1998 "memo of conscience" at all, and since Denk supposedly presented my "pro" arguments to the Board, but without me being present to ensure if the one-page summary she had asked for was properly or effectively presented.)

You might want to mention that I still consider the ARRB's work to be a glass that is about three-quarters full, and one-quarter empty, in regard to the medical evidence. The glaring exceptions are the Dallas Doctors depos. fiasco, and certain key questions unasked, and not pursued, by Gunn, even after the depos as he could have in writing.

There is a major file in the Archives on every step in this terrible "Dallas Doctors" fiasco in my personal files (box # 2) which is a step-by- step, blow- by-blow, account of what did and did not transpire, and the emotions I was feeling at the time. It is a pretty ugly story---of spiteful revenge, and of government incompetence.

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

I wrote to Doug Horne with questions:

You discuss Robert Grossman's observations of JFK's wounds as he saw them at Parkland. He describes a sort of flap of bone in the right parietal area that Dr. Clark showed him. It was not a hole, but like the total loss of bone and scalp in the occipital region.

Now, arguably this could be the flap we see in the Z-film, that some refer to as "the blob", that Jackie said, or it is ascribed to her that she closed this. If indeed it's real, and it's there, and closed by Jackie, then that might be why several at Parkland do not see this at all. Apparently, Clark lifts this flap and shows it to Grossman, though I would think someone else would notice Clark doing this. However, my point is could this be the flap we see in Lifton's BE as autopsy #4 photograph? I think it might be. If so, we then have a consistency with the Z film, Jackie, two doctors at Parkland, people at Bethesda and an autopsy photograph. This could argue for authenticity of the autopsy photograph, at least in regard to the flap. I do think it's been monkeyed with to hide the wound in the occipital region. And I do think there was body alteration. I'm sort of playing devil's advocate here as Livingstone in his book "Killing Kennedy" uses HSCA documents, the same HSCA documents that were buried and show that Bethesda people did see wounds similar to what was observed at Parkland, and therefore there was no body alteration. I think he is wrong, and ignoring a lot, but I want to be prepared to respond to such questions. I think that can be done fairly easily. I'm just sharing where I am at the moment.

If the flap is real and had to be lifted up like Clark did to see it, then the Parkland doctors who did not see it are the problem, not the autopsy photograph, at least in regard to the flap. Right?

There may be consistency with regard to location but size and shape are probably different at Bethesda,. i.e., larger.

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

His responses:

9. I completely agree with ALL of your points with regard to the possible convergence between the Z-Film flap and the uplifted parietal bone described by Grossman. Now, if you will check our exhibit, as he drew it, it looks more posterior than the flap in that autopsy photograph, but then that could be because of a slightly imprecise memory of what he saw. I agree with you that even if the side flap in the autopsy photo is real, the back of the head has been "monkeyed up" somehow to make it look intact---either by manipulation of real scalp, or by manipulation of someone else's scalp. And like you, I do believe the body was altered. I no longer believe the autopsy photos were altered---I saw no evidence of that at Rochester.

10. The "Military Review" (of the autopsy report) is a report dated January 26, 1967 that has no official title; this is slang used by Lifton and I. The report was signed by Humes, Boswell and Finck----and Finck was recalled from Vietnam to participate in writing/signing it. It supposedly relates the catalog or inventory of photos signed by Humes, Boswell, Stringer and Ebersole on Nov 10, 1966 (only 1.5 months prior) to the contents of the 1963 autopsy report. That's what the Justice Department wanted...to relate the autopsy photos to the autopsy report from 1963. It's a very strange document, for many reasons. It is ARRB Exhibit "MD 14." I'm sure you have it. As I pointed out Saturday morning at Lancer, it reverses certain wound descriptions (photos 17, 18, 44 and 45) in the Nov 10, 1966 inventory from "entry" to "exit" !!!!! Truly remarkable. It also contradicts Humes' sworn W.C. testimony that there was no wound of exit in the margins of the large skull defect. Boswell told us he thought Humes wrote it; Humes said, under great duress, "I don't know who wrote this." It sounds to me like it was written in legalese, by attorneys. It wasn't signed until SIX DAYS after the 3 pathologists met to write it. Most strange. I assume someone else weighed in on its contents.

Part One

Part Two

Part Two b

Part Three

Part Four

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

DOUG HORNE, SENIOR STAFF MEMBER OF THE ARRB

Prior to his duties at the Review Board, he was a Surface Warfare Officer in the Navy for 10 years; and that was followed by 10 more years working for the Department of the Navy as a Federal civil servant.

Horne was stationed on three warships homeported out of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. During his naval service, he spent time overseas in Saudi Arabia (in Jubail, on the Persian Gulf).

Doug is widely read and has an avid interest in history and has a B.A. in History from Ohio State ('74). He has been reading books about the Kennedy assassination since 1966. He also attended three assassination symposia: ASK 93, in Dallas; and COPA 94 and 95 in Washington. In the fall of 1994, Doug attended the first public ARRB hearing in Washington, at which time he met David Marwell---then the newly-appointed ARRB Director---and expressed an interest in working for the ARRB staff full time. Shortly thereafter, Doug sent in his application, which was subsequently accepted.

In mid-1995, Doug resigned from his permanent "Federal civilian" position with the Department of the Navy in Hawaii and took a position with the Review Board staff as a Senior Analyst on the Military Records Team. He worked with the Review Board for over three years rising to a Supervisory Analyst position and becoming Chief Analyst for Military Records. He had responsibilities in a number of key areas:

Medical Evidence: Doug was present at all 10 depositions of autopsy participants---including the three autopsy doctors (Humes, Boswell, and Finck)---and in fact was the research assistant for the preparation of those 10 depositions. He also made a trip to Dallas in connection with interviewing some of the Dallas medical personnel. Doug has seen the Bethesda autopsy photographs and X-rays at the National Archives on about 15 occasions.

Records re US foreign policy: As Chief Analyst for military records, Doug was deeply involved in formulating the search criteria for and then implementing the acquisition and release of military records on the formulation of US foreign policy re Cuba and Vietnam. The former pertain to the various plans for the ouster of Castro; the latter, to the escalation of the Vietnam War.

Zapruder film: Doug worked with Kodak in preparation of a technical report on the Z film; and on the digitization of the autopsy photographs. In carrying out those duties, Doug went to Rochester and worked with various Kodak employees when that work was done. He also had extensive liaison responsibilities with the LMH company; and is one of the few individuals to see the original Zapruder film as it was taken from archival storage and photographed by the LMH company in preparation for its release this past summer.

IRS. Doug had primary responsibility in the area of working with the IRS and the Social Security Administration with regard to the examination of Oswald's tax, earnings, and employment history; and addressing various questions raised by those records.

Other: Doug wrote a variety of memos and analyses relating to the chain of possession of the autopsy photographs, the planning of the trip to Texas, and the Zapruder film.

He has a comprehensive "insider's view" as to how the ARRB operated in its relationships with various government agencies as well as with the Kennedy assassination research community.

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

FROM JFK LANCER: Debra Conway, Tom Jones, and George Michael Evica, the 1998 Conference Chair, thank both Doug Horne and Joe Backes for making this extremely important research available. Please send the address of this article to everyone and help us pass on the information. Thanks.

.

b

Edited September 2, 2010 by Bernice Moore

[Micah Mileto]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiOmXYdft7w

 

3 minutes into this video, Dr. McClelland claims that Grossman was indeed there.