Jump to content
The Education Forum

NEW;;''the throat wound ''


Recommended Posts

Although the Parkland doctors briefly speculated that the bullet creating the throat wound had entered the chest, the consensus was that the head wound was an exit for the bullet entering the throat, i.e. that a bullet traversed the length of the neck.

This was a factor in my acceptance that this was indeed what happened.

Not following you. And if you are suggesting that the bullet entered the neck and then ended up inside Kennedy's skull? What head wound are you describing?

First day evidence was the best evidence - supported by a myriad of 'events' connected to the whitewash. Jenkins waffling is an all too familiar approach.

"Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia."

After studying the medical evidence for several years full time, I came to the conclusion the throat wound was indeed related to the head wound.

Seriously?

So, one of two things occurred prior to the bullet exiting the head:

Either:

1) The round that entered the throat circa Z190 took six seconds to exit,

Or:

2) JFK started reacting to a wound in his throat several seconds before

he was shot in the throat.

Either one is ridiculous...

The Parkland doctors suspected the large head wound was an exit for an entrance in the throat.

The Parkland doctors didn't have the opportunity to view the Zapruder film

or review the witness testimony of Nellie Connally, Jackie Kennedy, Clint Hill,

Linda Willis or Roy Kellerman -- all of whom describe JFK reacting to a hit well

before the head shots.

I suspect the throat wound was an exit for the bullet creating the small entrance near the EOP.

Totally ignoring the neck x-ray, the Zapruder film, Altgens 6, and the testimony of

the folks listed above.

Since the Clark Panel and Lattimer, etc, concluded there was a bullet path visible on the x-rays coming from what they thought was the back wound up above, and since we now know the back wound was really at or below the level of the throat wound,

What can be proven is the back wound was at T3.

Show us where JFK's jacket was elevated more than a fraction of an inch

in Dealey Plaza, Pat. Show us how a tucked-in custom-made dress shirt

rides up more than a fraction of an inch.

Tell us how 15 or so witnesses -- most of whom had a good, prolonged view of

the body -- all got the back wound wrong. Was it a mass hallucination, Pat, or

mere incompetence?

it seems likely the X-rays suggest the missile creating the throat wound descended within the neck.

Are you unaware of the damage shown in the neck x-ray?

Bruised lung tip, hair-line fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and a

subcutaneous air-pocket overlaying C7 and T1. That's a straight front to back

path from between the 3rd and 4th trach rings to C7/T1.

There was no exit. There was no bullet recovered. These are irrefutable facts, Pat.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Item: in looking at the stabilized Zapruder and Costella's edit for this thread, it seems to me that the motions of JFK's hands and arms, especially the right hand between (circa) frames 240-320, give lie to the notion that JFK is paralyzed by a toxin.

Watch as Kennedy's right hand unclenches, drops limply through reaction to trauma, then rises to the level of his throat again - as if the pain there is so intense (possibly felt more as his head declines), he is guarding the area in a childlike expression of woundedness.

The right hand remains throat-high until the head wound, after which it seems to reach out involuntarily. Hardly the motor behavior of a man paralyzed by more than painful and shocking wounds.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although the Parkland doctors briefly speculated that the bullet creating the throat wound had entered the chest, the consensus was that the head wound was an exit for the bullet entering the throat, i.e. that a bullet traversed the length of the neck.

This was a factor in my acceptance that this was indeed what happened.

Not following you. And if you are suggesting that the bullet entered the neck and then ended up inside Kennedy's skull? What head wound are you describing?

First day evidence was the best evidence - supported by a myriad of 'events' connected to the whitewash. Jenkins waffling is an all too familiar approach.

"Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia."

After studying the medical evidence for several years full time, I came to the conclusion the throat wound was indeed related to the head wound.

Seriously?

So, one of two things occurred prior to the bullet exiting the head:

Either:

1) The round that entered the throat circa Z190 took six seconds to exit,

Or:

2) JFK started reacting to a wound in his throat several seconds before

he was shot in the throat.

Either one is ridiculous...

The Parkland doctors suspected the large head wound was an exit for an entrance in the throat.

The Parkland doctors didn't have the opportunity to view the Zapruder film

or review the witness testimony of Nellie Connally, Jackie Kennedy, Clint Hill,

Linda Willis or Roy Kellerman -- all of whom describe JFK reacting to a hit well

before the head shots.

I suspect the throat wound was an exit for the bullet creating the small entrance near the EOP.

Totally ignoring the neck x-ray, the Zapruder film, Altgens 6, and the testimony of

the folks listed above.

Since the Clark Panel and Lattimer, etc, concluded there was a bullet path visible on the x-rays coming from what they thought was the back wound up above, and since we now know the back wound was really at or below the level of the throat wound,

What can be proven is the back wound was at T3.

Show us where JFK's jacket was elevated more than a fraction of an inch

in Dealey Plaza, Pat. Show us how a tucked-in custom-made dress shirt

rides up more than a fraction of an inch.

Tell us how 15 or so witnesses -- most of whom had a good, prolonged view of

the body -- all got the back wound wrong. Was it a mass hallucination, Pat, or

mere incompetence?

it seems likely the X-rays suggest the missile creating the throat wound descended within the neck.

Are you unaware of the damage shown in the neck x-ray?

Bruised lung tip, hair-line fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and a

subcutaneous air-pocket overlaying C7 and T1. That's a straight front to back

path from between the 3rd and 4th trach rings to C7/T1.

There was no exit. There was no bullet recovered. These are irrefutable facts, Pat.

Anyone that would make the conclusion, after examination that this was a wound of entry does one thing. Shows their absolute ignorance of wound ballistics. This is obviously a wound of an exiting fragment.

I am very interested to see what Mr. Varnell surmises in regard to this wound.

Ice bullet? Flachette?

I would be very interested to do a quick run up of the energy transfer required and expected movement of the target.

One thing is for certain, this was no entry of a projectile(bullet) of any type I have ever heard of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Item: in looking at the stabilized Zapruder and Costella's edit for this thread, it seems to me that the motions of JFK's hands and arms, especially the right hand between (circa) frames 240-320, give lie to the notion that JFK is paralyzed by a toxin.

Watch as Kennedy's right hand unclenches, drops limply through reaction to trauma, then rises to the level of his throat again - as if the pain there is so intense (possibly felt more as his head declines), he is guarding the area in a childlike expression of woundedness.

The right hand remains throat-high until the head wound, after which it seems to reach out involuntarily. Hardly the motor behavior of a man paralyzed by more than painful and shocking wounds.

Mr. Andrews,

First and foremost pleasure to make your acquaintance.

Unless I am missing something here, how can a man be paralyzed by a toxin, and still be moving his arms?

Most men that I have seen with injuries to the throat, do not just raise their hands to the level of the throat, they grab it. This clearly did not happen. Further if we are discussing a projectile that passed close to the spine, creating pressure with a secondary wound channel, then the reactions of the target itself would be very unpredictable.

Edited by Mike Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone that would make the conclusion, after examination that this was a wound of entry does one thing. Shows their absolute ignorance of wound ballistics. This is obviously a wound of an exiting fragment.

Anyone who would make such a conclusion without answering the points

I've outlined in my previous post shows their absolute ignorance of the facts

of the case.

I'll put these to you again, Mr. Williams:

Did JFK start reacting to a throat wound more than 5 seconds before

he sustained a throat wound?

Or:

Did it take 6 seconds for the round to exit after striking circa Z190?

I am very interested to see what Mr. Varnell surmises in regard to this wound.

We've already had this discussion, Mr. Williams.

I surmise nothing. I cite from the credible historical record.

I see you've lost your jaunty hail-fellow-well-met routine.

Ice bullet? Flachette?

Such was the conclusion of the prosectors the night of the autopsy.

From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's sworn affidavit:

(quote on)

Some discussion did occur concerning the disintegration of the bullet. A general

feeling existed that a soft-nosed bullet struck JFK. There was discussion concerning

the back wound that the bullet could have been a "plastic" type or an "Ice" [sic]

bullet, one which dissolves after contact.

(quote off)

From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's sworn affidavit:

(quote on)

The doctors also discussed a possible deflection of the bullet in the body caused

by striking bone. Consideration was also given to a type of bullet which fragments

completely....Following discussion among the doctors relating to the back injury, I

left the autopsy room to call the FBI Laboratory and spoke with Agent Chuch [sic]

Killion. I asked if he could furnish any information regarding a type of bullet that

would almost completely fragmentize (sic).

(quote off)

3 doctors examine a corpse and reach a "general feeling" that is corroborated

by a neck x-ray, several photos and a film taken during the crime, and the testimony

of the people with the best view of the victim.

Only in the JFK assassination would the preliminary conclusions of such

doctors be summarily dismissed.

I would be very interested to do a quick run up of the energy transfer required and expected movement of the target.

Here's a lead provided by Steve Kober, a follow-through on the research

of Tom Wilson.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=15516&hl=

Put on your research pants, Mr. Williams, and check out devices that

fire blood soluble rounds.

One thing is for certain, this was no entry of a projectile(bullet) of any type I have ever heard of.

That's what you get for not reading the evidence I cite.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/New_Scans/flechette.txt

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Item: in looking at the stabilized Zapruder and Costella's edit for this thread, it seems to me that the motions of JFK's hands and arms, especially the right hand between (circa) frames 240-320, give lie to the notion that JFK is paralyzed by a toxin.

Watch as Kennedy's right hand unclenches, drops limply through reaction to trauma, then rises to the level of his throat again - as if the pain there is so intense (possibly felt more as his head declines), he is guarding the area in a childlike expression of woundedness.

Please explain how this is inconsistent with a paralytic reaction? He went

from desperately grabbing at his collar to hardly moving at all.

Sure looks like paralysis to me!

Care to explain why he stopped grabbing at his throat?

The right hand remains throat-high until the head wound, after which it seems to reach out involuntarily. Hardly the motor behavior of a man paralyzed by more than painful and shocking wounds.

Please view the following:

JFK was clearly grabbing or clutching at his throat in the sequence

studied above.

Nellie Connally described him as "grabbing" at his throat.

Linda Willis described him as "clutching" his throat.

And then he STOPPED grabbing at his throat. And we're to believe that

it is a mere coincidence that JFK stopped grabbing at his throat about

2 seconds after he was struck, the same amount of time it took for

CIA-tested paralytics to take affect?

And when we add this to the mix...

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=15516&hl=

Me, I'm not a co-incidence theorist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless I am missing something here, how can a man be paralyzed by a toxin, and still be moving his arms?

If you look at the Zapruder film you see him desperately grabbing for his throat,

and then he stopped grabbing at his throat roughly two seconds after being

shot there.

This action is consistent with the prosectors preliminary conclusion.

Most men that I have seen with injuries to the throat, do not just raise their hands to the level of the throat, they grab it. This clearly did not happen.

No, Mr. Williams, that is clearly what happened.

Nellie Connally, Linda Willis, and Clint Hill testified under oath that JFK

was grabbing at his throat, just like we see in the Zap.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although the Parkland doctors briefly speculated that the bullet creating the throat wound had entered the chest, the consensus was that the head wound was an exit for the bullet entering the throat, i.e. that a bullet traversed the length of the neck.

This was a factor in my acceptance that this was indeed what happened.

Not following you. And if you are suggesting that the bullet entered the neck and then ended up inside Kennedy's skull? What head wound are you describing?

First day evidence was the best evidence - supported by a myriad of 'events' connected to the whitewash. Jenkins waffling is an all too familiar approach.

"Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia."

After studying the medical evidence for several years full time, I came to the conclusion the throat wound was indeed related to the head wound.

Seriously?

So, one of two things occurred prior to the bullet exiting the head:

Either:

1) The round that entered the throat circa Z190 took six seconds to exit,

Or:

2) JFK started reacting to a wound in his throat several seconds before

he was shot in the throat.

Either one is ridiculous...

The Parkland doctors suspected the large head wound was an exit for an entrance in the throat.

The Parkland doctors didn't have the opportunity to view the Zapruder film

or review the witness testimony of Nellie Connally, Jackie Kennedy, Clint Hill,

Linda Willis or Roy Kellerman -- all of whom describe JFK reacting to a hit well

before the head shots.

I suspect the throat wound was an exit for the bullet creating the small entrance near the EOP.

Totally ignoring the neck x-ray, the Zapruder film, Altgens 6, and the testimony of

the folks listed above.

Since the Clark Panel and Lattimer, etc, concluded there was a bullet path visible on the x-rays coming from what they thought was the back wound up above, and since we now know the back wound was really at or below the level of the throat wound,

What can be proven is the back wound was at T3.

Show us where JFK's jacket was elevated more than a fraction of an inch

in Dealey Plaza, Pat. Show us how a tucked-in custom-made dress shirt

rides up more than a fraction of an inch.

Tell us how 15 or so witnesses -- most of whom had a good, prolonged view of

the body -- all got the back wound wrong. Was it a mass hallucination, Pat, or

mere incompetence?

it seems likely the X-rays suggest the missile creating the throat wound descended within the neck.

Are you unaware of the damage shown in the neck x-ray?

Bruised lung tip, hair-line fracture of the right T1 transverse process, and a

subcutaneous air-pocket overlaying C7 and T1. That's a straight front to back

path from between the 3rd and 4th trach rings to C7/T1.

There was no exit. There was no bullet recovered. These are irrefutable facts, Pat.

Cliff, virtually every "point" you make is discussed and dismissed in chapter 11 on my webpage. You might want to read it sometime.

FWIW, I give you some well-deserved props in chapter 12. You are right. The clothing entrance proves the back wound was too high to support a single-bullet scenario. You are wrong, however, to push that the wound was at T3.

As far as Kennedy receiving his throat wound before 312/313... who said it came at 312/313?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cliff - of course he's grabbing at his throat. I believe he's hit there, frontally, just after the Stemmons sign. Why are his fists clenched, instead of clutching the throat? Possibly a near-simultaneous back wound.

My point is that he is not paralyzed as if by curare. His hands descend, he turns toward Jackie. The hands go back up to throat level. Upon the head wound, the right hand flails forward, resembling a reach forward (it isn't one). I don't find these motions, nor his head and body movements, showing what others describe as paralysis.

Let's not forget that this was the leader of a country, on parade. Dignity in movement would have been self-programmed in him. This was also a brave man, who knew the dangers he was heading into. Did he fail to shield his wife? So did Connally. Kennedy's throat and back wounds were more traumatic - thus more shocking to him - and the throat wound more debilitating, causing him to fight for consciousness and forget all but his duty before the public.

He stopped grabbing for his throat because he was losing consciousness. That's when the right arm descends, and the wrist begins to go limp. Fighting for consciousness, both hands come up as if to protect the throat, and he turns to Jackie for support and attention.

Consciously, and perhaps more unconsciously than even he might have predicted, he bore his wounds with dignity, and held himself upright until the fading of sensation. That's the only "paralysis" that I see. The hand and body motions demonstrate not only continued ability to move, but also a reticence to move too much as the bullets struck him in front of a crowd.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. V.,

I'm not exactly sure of what you mean by " jaunty hail-fellow-well-met routine".

And certainly we have had this conversation before.

If you look at the Zapruder film you see him desperately grabbing for his throat,

and then he stopped grabbing at his throat roughly two seconds after being

shot there.

Can you show me where this happens? I do see his hands come up but I see no grabbing of the throat what so ever. I never see at any point where his hands go below the plane of the chin.

Nellie Connally, Linda Willis, and Clint Hill testified under oath that JFK

was grabbing at his throat, just like we see in the Zap.

Then you should have no problem quickly showing this as it is happening. At no time does JFK "grab" his throat.

Please view the following:

JFK was clearly grabbing or clutching at his throat in the sequence

studied above.

It certainly does not show him grabbing his throat. It does just as Gil has expressed, he is pulling his tie over with one hand, and has his other hand in front of his mouth. Something I might add would be very uncommon for someone who was hit in the throat. Men hit in the throat almost always grab their throat. This is something we never see in the Zapruder film.

The autopsy doctors also discussed that this may have been an exiting fragment. Which seems to make much more sense.

I have to admit, I find the whole ice/poison bullet concept to be best left to the "conspiracy elite" and Hollywood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cliff - of course he's grabbing at his throat. I believe he's hit there, frontally, just after the Stemmons sign. Why are his fists clenched, instead of clutching the throat? Possibly a near-simultaneous back wound.

My point is that he is not paralyzed as if by curare. His hands descend, he turns toward Jackie. The hands go back up to throat level. Upon the head wound, the right hand flails forward, resembling a reach forward (it isn't one). I don't find these motions, nor his head and body movements, showing what others describe as paralysis.

Let's not forget that this was the leader of a country, on parade. Dignity in movement would have been self-programmed in him. This was also a brave man, who knew the dangers he was heading into. Did he fail to shield his wife? So did Connally. Kennedy's throat and back wounds were more traumatic - thus more shocking to him - and the throat wound more debilitating, causing him to fight for consciousness and forget all but his duty before the public.

He stopped grabbing for his throat because he was losing consciousness. That's when the right arm descends, and the wrist begins to go limp. Fighting for consciousness, both hands come up as if to protect the throat, and he turns to Jackie for support and attention.

Consciously, and perhaps more unconsciously than even he might have predicted, he bore his wounds with dignity, and held himself upright until the fading of sensation. That's the only "paralysis" that I see. The hand and body motions demonstrate not only continued ability to move, but also a reticence to move too much as the bullets struck him in front of a crowd.

Dave,

Excellent post. I do not believe he is grabbing his throat at all, but other than that I agree 100%. I must have misunderstood your previous post, about the toxin, I thought you were subscribing to this madness.

Best,

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The throat wound can be questioned, inasmuch as Dr. Perry described it as an entry wound, but the trach incision obliterated it to such an extent that no one at Bethesda could be expected to have given an accurate observation about it. However, there is no reason to blindly accept that Perry was "mistaken" in his initial statement, much as all those other witnesses were "mistaken" about so many things that day.

The location of the back wound should be beyond dispute at this point. I'm sure Cliff must be tired of belaboring the point, and I'm tired of supporting him every time he does, while many here ignore the imporance of it. There is no better evidence than the bullet holes in JFK's shirt and coat, which line up precisely. Add to that the fact that Boswell's original autopsy face sheet placed the back wound in the same location, Burkley's death certificate located it there, and Sibert and O'Neill described it being in the same location in their FBI report, and you have perhaps the most documented fact in this entire case.

Still, you have people twisting physics by saying it was possible for the bullet to exit from JFK's throat. Was JFK's head bent over some 5 inches at that point? What would the bullet have hit, after it exited from his throat in some fantastic way- his jaw? His nose? It certainly would have had to hit some part of his face, because he'd have to be bent over that far in order for a shot that low to exit his throat.

But I'm not being serious, because there is no way that a bullet can enter 5-6 inches down on a person's back and exit from his throat, especially when the shooter is in an elevated position. The mere discussion of it is ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cliff, virtually every "point" you make is discussed and dismissed in chapter 11 on my webpage. You might want to read it sometime.

You have the ability to cut and paste your rebuttals, if you had any. We've had

this discussion before and you never move beyond repeating the same assertions.

Again: where in the Dealey Plaza photos does JFK's jacket elevate 2 inches?

Again: how does a tucked-in custom-made dress shirt ride up two inches when

none of them have 2 inches of slack?

Please feel free to quote from your website.

FWIW, I give you some well-deserved props in chapter 12. You are right. The clothing entrance proves the back wound was too high to support a single-bullet scenario. You are wrong, however, to push that the wound was at T3.

Clint Hill was wrong? How so? The man was sworn to do a solemn task -- bear witness

to the nature and location of John F. Kennedy's wounds.

But instead of honoring Clint Hill for magnificently performing his duty to his country

we have the likes of a thousand pet theorists who insist the guy screwed the pooch

and didn't know the difference between 6 inches and 4 inches.

The man was a trained observer and he nailed the location of the wound

within 1/4 of the bullet holes in the clothes -- the clothes you can't show were

bunched up two inches.

As far as Kennedy receiving his throat wound before 312/313... who said it came at 312/313?

I guess I don't follow your argument. I thought you said you've concluded that

the throat wound was related to the head wound, which, last I looked, occurred

around Z313...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But instead of honoring Clint Hill for magnificently performing his duty to his country

we have the likes of a thousand pet theorists who insist the guy screwed the pooch

and didn't know the difference between 6 inches and 4 inches.

This may be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

So if the man was off by 2 inches then his magnificent performance of his duty is lessened?

How absolutely ridiculous.

Im sorry Cliff you tend to be a bit to "as the world turns" for me.

I guess there are drama queens and then there are DRAMA queens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...