Jump to content
The Education Forum

Transcripts of Doug Horne on Jim Fetzer's podcasts


Recommended Posts

(Todd quoting Rigby):

"and a small circle at the right eye, with the marginal notation ‘0.8 cm.,’ apparently representing damage produced by the two bullet fragments that lodged there. Dr. Humes testified that the fragments measured 7 by 2 mm. and 3 by 1 mm. respectively (2H354). Although he said nothing about damage at the left eye, the diagram shows a small dot at the site, labelled ‘0.4 cm.’ (CE397, Vol XVII, p.45). "

Those are likely the pupil diameters of each eye.

Hi Todd,

Yes, the pupils measured R:8mm and L:4mm as noted in the autopsy report, they got written down on the sheet in centimeters, but pupils are reported in mm.

The hair is reddish brown and abundant, the eyes are blue, the right pupil

measuring 8 mm. in diameter, the left 4 mm.

The notations on the "body" -both front and back views- on the autopsy descriptive sheet, depict only what was seen by observing the outside of the body ... an old appendix scar, a back surgery scar, the locations of the bullet wounds, the cut down incisions, the trach incision, etc ... and the pupil measurements. Nothing to do with any damage seen/found inside the body.

Bests,

Barb :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

ii) Dr. Boswell: Best Evidence, unpaginated photographic section at book's centre, photo 27, “Boswell diagram of skull. The sketch, made at autopsy, is a top view of Kennedy's skull...The record contains no amplification of the area on the forward left side of the skull marked '3 cm.'” The authors of High Treason, p.232, observe: Boswell’s drawing shows a “3 cm wound in the left temple area.”

The 3 cm notation under the boxy drawing of the L eye with a rectangular doodle next to it goes to the size of the crushed vomer ... Boswell testifies about this to the ARRB. It has nothing to do with anything in the temple area. The circle on the right represents the right eye, the hooked line running through it, as noted, goes to there being a fracture thru the floor. It was broken.

Boswell to the ARRB:

Q. Going up further on the diagram, there appears to be a "3 cm" right over what appears to me to be the left eye. Is that correct? First,

Page 66

does that say "3 cm"?

A. Yes. And that's not my writing. Either Jim or--and that doesn't look like his writing, so that may be Pierre. That apparently is the vomer bone, which is crushed and drawn up there. I don't believe that this is in the frontal bone.

Q. When you say "this," you're pointing to the rectangular shape?

A. To the little oblong 3-centimeter specimen there.

Q. Do you know what the 3 centimeters is referring to there?

A. I'm sure it must be--now, that is mine, that 3 centimeters is my writing, and that must be the length of the piece of bone there.

Q. Does that signify a cracked bone or--

A. Crushed, yeah.

Q. Crushed?

A. Mm-hmm.

Q. Could you explain why, at least to me as a lay person, it appears that there is a rectangular drawing near what I would presume to be the area of

Page 67

the right--or the left orbit and it seems to be circular in the right orbit? Is there some explanation for that that you know of?

A. Well, I remember that the fracture through the bone extended from the frontal bone and through the floor of the orbit. Why that is round and this one is square over here, I don't know.

Q. In the center of the circle on the right orbit, it appears that there is a hook-shaped line that crosses through the center of the circle and then goes on to the front of that. Do you see that circle?

A. Yes.

Q. Does that signify a crack in the floor of the orbit? Is that the purpose of that line?

A. Yes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 10 years later...
On 2/11/2010 at 2:06 PM, Paul Rigby said:

Dr. Robert Shaw: "The third bullet struck the President on the left side of the head in the region of the left temporal region and made a large wound of exit on the right side of the head" [Letter from Dr. Shaw to Larry Ross, "Did Two Gunmen Cut Down Kennedy?", Today (British magazine), 15 February 1964, p.4]

 

Yet another bombshell hiding in plain sight. The theory of one or more temple wounds is more alive than ever.

 

I found this link to the quote, but a scan of the original magazine issue would be better: http://www.reminiscethis.co.uk/history?start=3

Edited by Micah Mileto
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:

Yet another bombshell hiding in plain sight. The theory of one or more temple wounds is more alive than ever.

 

I found this link to the quote, but a scan of the original magazine issue would be better: http://www.reminiscethis.co.uk/history?start=3

Hi Micah,

I have the original article, with the front cover of the issue prefacing it, in a colour PDF (which means the scan is big). If you want a copy, let me have an email address & I'll forward it to you.

Paul

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Paul Rigby said:

Hi Micah,

I have the original article, with the front cover of the issue prefacing it, in a colour PDF (which means the scan is big). If you want a copy, let me have an email address & I'll forward it to you.

Paul

Thank you, Paul. I'm trying to see if I can make a perfect essay on this, putting the finishing touches on it and hoping it can  be out on the anniversary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...