Cliff Varnell Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 (edited) I might be wrong on this, but didn't the HSCA's photographic panel fail to find evidence of alteration in photos that they knew were faked? You might be wrong about that, yes. The HSCA found evidence of shoddiness in the preparation of the autopsy photos. From Vol 7 of the HSCA findings: Among the JFK assassination materials in the National Archives is a series of negatives and prints of photographs taken during autopsy. The deficiencies of these photographs as scientific documentation of a forensic autopsy have been described elsewhere. Here it is sufficient to note that: 1. They are generally of rather poor photographic quality. 2. Some, particularly close-ups, were taken in such a manner that it is nearly impossible to anatomically orient the direction of view. 3. In many, scalar references are entirely lacking, or when present, were positioned in such a manner to make it difficult or impossible to obtain accurate measurements of critical features (such as the wound in the upper back) from anatomical landmarks. 4. None of the photographs contain information identifying the victim; such as his name, the autopsy case number, the date and place of the examination. In the main, these shortcomings bespeak of haste, inexperience and unfamiliarity with the understandably rigorous standards generally expected in photographs to be used as scientific evidence. In fact, under ordinary circumstances, the defense could raise some reasonable and, perhaps, sustainable objections to an attempt to introduce such poorly made and documented photographs as evidence in a murder trial. Furthermore, even the prosecution might have second thoughts about using certain of these photographs since they are more confusing than informative. Unfortunately, they are the only photographic record of the autopsy. Not all the critics of the Warren Commission have been content to point out the obvious deficiencies of the autopsy photographs as scientific evidence. Some have questioned their very authenticity. These theorists suggest that the body shown in at least some of the photographs is not President Kennedy, but another decedent deliberately mutilated to simulate a pattern of wounds supportive of the Warren Commissions' interpretation of their nature and significance. As outlandish as such a macabre proposition might appear, it is one that, had the case gone to trial, might have been effectively raised by an astute defense anxious to block the introduction of the photographs as evidence. In any event, the onus of establishing the authenticity of these photographs would have rested with the prosecution. "Deficiencies as scientific documentation"..."difficult or impossible to obtain accurate measurements of critical features"..."these shortcomings bespeak of haste, inexperience and unfamiliarity with the understandably rigorous standards generally expected in photographs to be used as scientific evidence"..."the onus of establishing the authenticity of these photographs would have rested with the prosecution." Edited January 16, 2013 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now