Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Autopsy photo mystery


Recommended Posts

One of the most debated issues in JFK forums is that of the apparent discrepancy between the recollections of various witnesses, including the Parkland doctors vs. what we see in this and other autopsy photos.

JFK_Autopsy_Photo_1.jpg?t=1286625456

Many people have concluded from this that the autopsy pix were forgeries. But there is actually, a much better explanation for what we see in these photos and it came from the same man whose hand we see in the above picture.

Dr. Thornton Boswell was asked about this photo in his ARRB testimony.

Q. ..at least with some of the photographs, is it your testimony that the scalp was pulled in a way different from how it was when you first saw it in order to better illustrate either wound of entry or exit?

A. Yes. The scalp was essentially loose. In the usual autopsy, you have to cut underneath the scalp in order to reflect it. In this case, the scalp was mobile so that you could pull it forward to obscure the wound or pull it back to make the wound completely lucid.

and..

A. I know this--the flap is stretched forward here, because if this fell back down--with him in this sort of recumbent position, yes, this scalp would fold down and cover this wound.

Q. So you're saying that on the fourth view, which are the photographs that are in your hand right now, the scalp has been pulled back and folded back over the top of the head in a way different from the way that they appeared in the third view, the superior view of the head?

A. Yes.

Q. Is that fair?

A. In the previous one, it was permitted just to drop. In this one, it's pulled forward up over the forehead, toward the forehead...

and..

A. There was a big wound sort of transverse up like this from left posterior to right anterior. The scalp was separated, but it was folded over, and you could fold the scalp over and almost hide the wound. When you lifted the scalp up, you could really lay it back posteriorally, and there was a lot of bone still attached to the scalp but detached from the remainder of the skull. And I think these parts back here probably reflect that.

Boswell's statement that "there was a lot of bone still attached to the scalp but detached from the remainder of the skull.", is enormously important because the bone that was still attached, could only have been the large skull piece that we see in the Xrays which is clearly, broken away from the rest of the skull.

That skull piece was blown out and flipped to the rear, taking with it hair and scalp, which folded back over its inner surface, forming a large and very grotesque protrusion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65inNE7dCUE

Edited by Robert Harris
Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see the video but that's basically it, Robert, regarding the massive rear wound. Others have commented on a peculiar flatness to the scalp in that photo in the area in question. (Probably a stereoscopic pair woud show just that).

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...