Pat Speer- I am confused (so what else is new?)...re: JFK head wound

[John Crites]

They may have signed off to the photos but they testified contrary to what they observed.

Who saw this exactly this way?

Gotta be exactly or we continue to have evidence of a cover up.

[Andric Perez]

Once again Pat... Not a soul says anything was wrong from the man's ear forward on either side...

That's false.

That's Zapruder above. In addition to him and the other witnesses mentioned by Speer, Vincent Palamara posted a letter in this forum from Parkland doctor Donald Seldin stating ""The bullet struck the President in the forehead and literally exploded in his skull, so that the entire frontal, parietal and temporal bones were shattered."

Also, D. Jenkins told the WC that "there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process."

The zygomatic process is forward relative to the ear. The fact that Jenkins said "left temporal area" shouldn't be used as an excuse to dismiss his testimony, because McClelland once claimed to see a wound on the left side too, yet this does not keep back-of-the-head theorists from considering him to be a kick-ass witness anyway. Jenkins is supposedly a kick-ass witness as well, owing to his title of Parkland doctor.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Andric Perez

[Robert Prudhomme]

Looking at this photo, I would expect to see most of JFK's forehead destroyed.

[Pat Speer]

They may have signed off to the photos but they testified contrary to what they observed.

Who saw this exactly this way?

Gotta be exactly or we continue to have evidence of a cover up.

Yes, there is evidence of a cover-up. But not because someone altered the photos...

A red mark believed to be dried blood is on Kennedy's scalp in the back of the head photo. Everyone present at the autopsy agreed there was no bullet hole there, and that that is not a bullet hole in the photo. They all said, furthermore, that the photo was authentic.

This raises the question of WHY did someone come along later and say that showed a bullet hole...and why so many believed them.

[John Crites]

Your position is well taken and well researched as always, but;

Of course its dried blood, but that photo represents the HSCA's declaration of where the bullet entered the back of the head.

To back it up, they produced the drawing below to further Their evidence.

The autopsy doctors never saw this. And the HSCA tried everything possible to get Humes and Boswell to change the location from the massive hole lower right to the cowlick area.

So the previously published picture was used at that time for the purpose of proof of a wound in the cowlick area. Sure makes the line of fire from the 6th floor more plausible.

So that photo is fake. They (the autopsy doctors) may have signed off on it, but they never saw a wound where the HSCA said there was.

In fact, even Posner got into the act, in 1993 telling Congressman Conyers (and Committee) and that he magically got Humes and Boswell to change what they said for years and that they changed their testimony to obviously match that photo and attached drawing.

We never will agree, but that photo is a fake. And Doctors signing off on something they never saw;

well that's par for this course - one of them burned his notes when he found out Oswald was shot .Who would take him seriously?

[

[David Josephs]

Once again Pat... Not a soul says anything was wrong from the man's ear forward on either side...

That's false.

That's Zapruder above. In addition to him and the other witnesses mentioned by Speer, Vincent Palamara posted a letter in this forum from Parkland doctor Donald Seldin stating ""The bullet struck the President in the forehead and literally exploded in his skull, so that the entire frontal, parietal and temporal bones were shattered."

Also, D. Jenkins told the WC that "there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process."

The zygomatic process is forward relative to the ear. The fact that Jenkins said "left temporal area" shouldn't be used as an excuse to dismiss his testimony, because McClelland once claimed to see a wound on the left side too, yet this does not keep back-of-the-head theorists from considering him to be a kick-ass witness anyway. Jenkins is supposedly a kick-ass witness as well, owing to his title of Parkland doctor.

Nice Andric...

Ask a snotty Q about Audrey Bell... I go ahead and address it

and you go with the one person who confirms a shot from the front which shattered bone... NOT that bone was missing as is shown in those farce xrays you and Pat think are authentic. He described what the lateral xray TRIES to show happened in the back... a small hole, radiating cracks resulting in a huge opening in the front...

Yes Andric, those that were there say he was hit in the right temple just like Zap... the cracks would of course radiate from that wound yet a hole is seen in the right rear, the occipital bone... by a host of people in a post you seem to have also missed...

Dr. Jenkin's "wound"... (let's try to remember his head was blown up, k?) is what to you? a bone fragment flying out his head? Father Huber called it a terrible wound as well... not a bullet hole... Only McClellend - as cause of death, right?... maybe THAT shot caused the hole in the right rear while the right temple shot simply exploded his skull into fractures.... one exploding one FMJ very high speed... ??

Either way the WCR's evidence is a crock...

there were shots from the rear/side that missed JFK and hit JC,

one hit from the back represents all the HITS from the rear, imo.

Jenkins is a "kick-ass witness" and precisely since he was less than 2 feet from the man less than 20 minutes after the incident... that he reversed himself for Posner is, well, understandable I guess... "if they kill a POTUS y'know..."

.

McClellend writing LEFT Temple... is what it is. I have to think he meant right since to the two others who saw that wound, it was not called out as a bullet hole. What is more telling here is that the entire RIGHT SIDE popping open and missing ala the xrays is not even noted by this ER Dr.

Do you have anything other than "wound" to go on as all I've read is supposition that it was a shot there.

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

Pat,

doesn't one of your slides ask why the tearing of the scalp around the wound you're describing now, does not occur like it does in the example you offer - or did I read that wrong?

If you argue blood splatter back and the opening of the skull and scalp, that should be a clean thru and thru hole right there... and 100% proof of a shot from behind hitting him... THE primae facia case for the FBI and all they need do is stick a probe thru that hole into his head... take a photo, take an xray and we be DONE...

Medical proof of a shot entering from the rear and out the side of his head...

But they didn't do that Pat... how come?

Edited January 14, 2014 by David Josephs

[Andric Perez]

Once again Pat... Not a soul says anything was wrong from the man's ear forward on either side...

That's false.

That's Zapruder above. In addition to him and the other witnesses mentioned by Speer, Vincent Palamara posted a letter in this forum from Parkland doctor Donald Seldin stating ""The bullet struck the President in the forehead and literally exploded in his skull, so that the entire frontal, parietal and temporal bones were shattered."

Also, D. Jenkins told the WC that "there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process."

The zygomatic process is forward relative to the ear. The fact that Jenkins said "left temporal area" shouldn't be used as an excuse to dismiss his testimony, because McClelland once claimed to see a wound on the left side too, yet this does not keep back-of-the-head theorists from considering him to be a kick-ass witness anyway. Jenkins is supposedly a kick-ass witness as well, owing to his title of Parkland doctor.

Nice Andric...

Ask a snotty Q about Audrey Bell... I go ahead and address it

and you go with the one person who confirms a shot from the front which shattered bone... NOT that bone was missing as is shown in those farce xrays you and Pat think are authentic. He described what the lateral xray TRIES to show happened in the back... a small hole, radiating cracks resulting in a huge opening in the front...

Yes Andric, those that were there say he was hit in the right temple just like Zap... the cracks would of course radiate from that wound yet a hole is seen in the right rear, the occipital bone... by a host of people in a post you seem to have also missed...

Dr. Jenkin's "wound"... (let's try to remember his head was blown up, k?) is what to you? a bone fragment flying out his head? Father Huber called it a terrible wound as well... not a bullet hole... Only McClellend - as cause of death, right?... maybe THAT shot caused the hole in the right rear while the right temple shot simply exploded his skull into fractures.... one exploding one FMJ very high speed... ??

Either way the WCR's evidence is a crock...

there were shots from the rear/side that missed JFK and hit JC,

one hit from the back represents all the HITS from the rear, imo.

Jenkins is a "kick-ass witness" and precisely since he was less than 2 feet from the man less than 20 minutes after the incident... that he reversed himself for Posner is, well, understandable I guess... "if they kill a POTUS y'know..."

.

McClellend writing LEFT Temple... is what it is. I have to think he meant right since to the two others who saw that wound, it was not called out as a bullet hole. What is more telling here is that the entire RIGHT SIDE popping open and missing ala the xrays is not even noted by this ER Dr.

Do you have anything other than "wound" to go on as all I've read is supposition that it was a shot there.

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

Pat,

doesn't one of your slides ask why the tearing of the scalp around the wound you're describing now, does not occur like it does in the example you offer - or did I read that wrong?

If you argue blood splatter back and the opening of the skull and scalp, that should be a clean thru and thru hole right there... and 100% proof of a shot from behind hitting him... THE primae facia case for the FBI and all they need do is stick a probe thru that hole into his head... take a photo, take an xray and we be DONE...

Medical proof of a shot entering from the rear and out the side of his head...

But they didn't do that Pat... how come?

David, you used a blanket statement: "Not a soul" saw "damage" to an area in front of the ear. That's what got you in trouble. Blanket statements such as "everyone in the room," "always," "nothing" etc. are a hallmark of back-of-the-head theorists and should be avoided when possible.

Under scrutiny, your blanket statement now turns into "Not a Josephs-approved, non-Dealy-Plaza soul not being quoted by Posner says there was damage non-small damage to the front of either ear."

But there's more. Here's what Parkland doctor Adolph Giesecke told the Warren Commission:

Dr. GIESECKE - It seemed that from the vertex to the left ear, and from the browline to the occiput on the left-hand side of the head the cranium was entirely missing.

And if we assume that Giesecke meant the right side, then we can add him to the list of witnesses who prove your blanket statement wrong.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Andric Perez

[Cliff Varnell]

But not because someone altered the photos...

So Kennedy was shot in the back from below according to the abrasion ring on the "back wound" in Fox 5, and JFK's clothing acted in a manner contrary to the nature of reality so the holes in the clothes could line up with this bizarre artifact.

Right, Pat?

You can repeat your conclusions until the sky begs for mercy -- but you cannot defend this intellectually.

[Don Jeffries]

Pat,

The fact that Humes, Boswell and Finck identified the photos as being legitimate was hardly surprising. After all, this was their autopsy. And since not a single aspect of their autopsy is free from suspicion, again I ask- why would you believe the photos and x-rays resulting from this "Bowery bum" fiasco are legitimate?

[David Josephs]

Once again Pat... Not a soul says anything was wrong from the man's ear forward on either side...

That's false.

That's Zapruder above. In addition to him and the other witnesses mentioned by Speer, Vincent Palamara posted a letter in this forum from Parkland doctor Donald Seldin stating ""The bullet struck the President in the forehead and literally exploded in his skull, so that the entire frontal, parietal and temporal bones were shattered."

Also, D. Jenkins told the WC that "there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process."

The zygomatic process is forward relative to the ear. The fact that Jenkins said "left temporal area" shouldn't be used as an excuse to dismiss his testimony, because McClelland once claimed to see a wound on the left side too, yet this does not keep back-of-the-head theorists from considering him to be a kick-ass witness anyway. Jenkins is supposedly a kick-ass witness as well, owing to his title of Parkland doctor.

Nice Andric...

Ask a snotty Q about Audrey Bell... I go ahead and address it

and you go with the one person who confirms a shot from the front which shattered bone... NOT that bone was missing as is shown in those farce xrays you and Pat think are authentic. He described what the lateral xray TRIES to show happened in the back... a small hole, radiating cracks resulting in a huge opening in the front...

Yes Andric, those that were there say he was hit in the right temple just like Zap... the cracks would of course radiate from that wound yet a hole is seen in the right rear, the occipital bone... by a host of people in a post you seem to have also missed...

Dr. Jenkin's "wound"... (let's try to remember his head was blown up, k?) is what to you? a bone fragment flying out his head? Father Huber called it a terrible wound as well... not a bullet hole... Only McClellend - as cause of death, right?... maybe THAT shot caused the hole in the right rear while the right temple shot simply exploded his skull into fractures.... one exploding one FMJ very high speed... ??

Either way the WCR's evidence is a crock...

there were shots from the rear/side that missed JFK and hit JC,

one hit from the back represents all the HITS from the rear, imo.

Jenkins is a "kick-ass witness" and precisely since he was less than 2 feet from the man less than 20 minutes after the incident... that he reversed himself for Posner is, well, understandable I guess... "if they kill a POTUS y'know..."

.

McClellend writing LEFT Temple... is what it is. I have to think he meant right since to the two others who saw that wound, it was not called out as a bullet hole. What is more telling here is that the entire RIGHT SIDE popping open and missing ala the xrays is not even noted by this ER Dr.

Do you have anything other than "wound" to go on as all I've read is supposition that it was a shot there.

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

Pat,

doesn't one of your slides ask why the tearing of the scalp around the wound you're describing now, does not occur like it does in the example you offer - or did I read that wrong?

If you argue blood splatter back and the opening of the skull and scalp, that should be a clean thru and thru hole right there... and 100% proof of a shot from behind hitting him... THE primae facia case for the FBI and all they need do is stick a probe thru that hole into his head... take a photo, take an xray and we be DONE...

Medical proof of a shot entering from the rear and out the side of his head...

But they didn't do that Pat... how come?

David, you used a blanket statement: "Not a soul" saw "damage" to an area in front of the ear. That's what got you in trouble. Blanket statements such as "everyone in the room," "always," "nothing" etc. are a hallmark of back-of-the-head theorists and should be avoided when possible.

Under scrutiny, your blanket statement now turns into "Not a Josephs-approved, non-Dealy-Plaza soul not being quoted by Posner says there was damage non-small damage to the front of either ear."

But there's more. Here's what Parkland doctor Adolph Giesecke told the Warren Commission:

Dr. GIESECKE - It seemed that from the vertex to the left ear, and from the browline to the occiput on the left-hand side of the head the cranium was entirely missing.

And if we assume that Giesecke meant the right side, then we can add him to the list of witnesses who prove your blanket statement wrong.

Keep avoiding the issue Andric... it's a weak technique to attack what you perceive to be a weak portion of the argument when you know full well that NOT A SOUL describes what the BS xrays try to push...

and you will be asked repeatedly to post images of ANYONE in DALLAS holding the TOP FRONT of their head when asked about JFK's injury... as opposed to the bullet's entry point.

I got into trouble? Funny, I dont FEEL like I'm in trouble...

Was Giesecke in DP too?

Looks to me like Boswell didn't even BOTHER with the back of the head.... his drawing and the photo matches perfectly... to the altered wounds created by Humes - you honestly believe that the ER would attempt to trach tube a man with the entire top of his head gone?

Dr. Giesecke is a great example of one voice in many... and I see why you only posted the one sentence... what follows:

Mr. SPECTER - Was that the left-hand side of the head, or the right-hand side of the head ?

Dr. GIESECKE - I would say the left, but this is just my memory of it.

Mr. SPECTER - That's your recollection ?

Dr. GIESECKE - Right, like I say, I was there a very short time really.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any other wound or bullet hole below the large area of missing skull ?

Dr. GIESECKE - No; when I arrived the tracheotomy was in progress at that time and so I observed no other wound except the one on the cranium.

Mr. SPECTER - On the cranium itself, did you observe another bullet hole below the portion of missing skull ?

Dr. GIESECKE - No, sir; this was found later by Dr. Clark--I didn't see this.

Mr. SPECTER - What makes you say that that hole was found later by Dr. Clark?

Dr. GIESECKE - Well, this is hearsay--I wasn't there when they found it and I didn't notice it.

Mr. SPECTER - Well, Dr. Clark didn't observe that hole.

Dr. GIESECKE - Oh, he didn't--I'm sorry.

Mr. SPECTER - From whom did you hear that the hole had been observed, if you recollect?

Dr. GIESECKE- Oh--I must be confused. We talked to so many people about these things--I don't remember.

THAT's the point Andric... you reach for any low hanging fruit you can grasp and post it as it it negates what everyone else in Dallas sees...

Do us a favor Andric... please post that famous graphic where all the witnesses are holding the top/front of their heads when asked where the wound THEY SAW was...

All I have is this which is taken from the Boswell drawing and notes... Try to notice WHERE ON THE HEAD the injuries are noted and what that means...

There is both a wound thru the FLOOR of the skull as well as a wound that basically seperates the brain from it's enclosure... if you have not read Lifton about what a craniotomy looks like you are woefully uninformed when it comes to the anotomy of the skull and brain and how autopsy's work.

But PLEASE - ANDRIC, post a photo where a wound witness is holding the area of the head missing in the xrays... from the Coronal suture FORWARD virtually all across the skull..

Zap, Kilduff, Brehm, Hill, Moorman, Hudson, etc, etc.. WHO WERE THERE talk of a shot or shots coming from the front...

McClellend and the ER docs see a hole in the middle/right rear - ER PROFESSIONALS

Nurse Bowron/Bell etc and the ER STAFF sees a hole in the middle/right rear - MORE ER PROS

Hill see this wound within 10 seconds of it happening

Jackie holds the back of his head on

I can post dozens of accounts of the wounds being in the MIDDLE/RIGHT REAR by everyone up until Kellerman steals the body...

There are even those in MD who see JFK in his DALLAS state and describe as such...

But YOU and PAT - who were not there, did not see the man, did not experience the day - KNOW BETTER because you both believe the WCR medical evidence is authentic when it can't even work with itself...

You keep saying the same thing expecting a different result - that's called insanity Andric.

One last thing for you and Pat... Pat quotes REED as a reliable source... agreed? So when did the casket arrive and when did those xrays get taken - BEFORE or AFTER HUMES cuts the forehead open?

Does this jive with the other 6:35 arrival witnesses?

Q: Okay. Could you describe the casket that you saw in the hallway?

A: It was a typical military, aluminum casket. Stainless steel or aluminum, whatever. I guess, then it was stainless steel.

Q: Did -What kind of handles did the casket have?

A: Just the normal stainless steel handles.

Q: Would you describe it as a ceremonial casket?

A: No.

Q: What else did you observe from where you were with regard to any incisions or operations on the head?

EDWARD REED: Well, after about 20 minutes, Commander Humes took out a saw, and started to cut the forehead with the bone - with the saw.

Mechanical saw. Circular, small mechanical - almost like a cast saw, but it’s made –

Q: Sure.

A: - specifically for bone.

Q: And what did you see next?

A: We were asked to leave at that time.

Q: Do you know why you went asked to leave?

A: Because we were - No more assistance - our assistance was not needed. X-rays were done. And someone decided that we weren’t needed, and they asked us to leave.

Q: Did you see any incisions on the chest at all?

A: None

Q: Did you ever see JFK’s body again?

A: No, I did not.

CUSTER tells us he does not take xrays for about an hour after seeing JFK for the first time and AFTER the Y-incision... So REED is gone and CUSTER is asked back in, between 7-7:30 to start taking xrays... WHICH IS NOT POSSIBLE SINCE THE Y-incision had not yet been done. (Hint: you might read the pertinent testimonies from the ARRB Andric... alot of interesting material is unearthed)

Andric, we don't have any xrays of JFK prior to Humes' work on the skull... so how would we know what the wound in DALLAS looks like other than asking people in DALLAS?

The only way those xrays work is is HUMES does indeed cut thru the forehead prior to the xrays... FINCK arrives at around 8:30 to already developed xrays of the head

If Humes already has Head xrays when he calls FINCK - he calls after 7:30 and before 8pm...

REED leaves before the xrays and beofer the Y-incision

CUSTER takes his xrays AFTER the Y-incision...and AFTER Finck arrives(?)

Please explain how these xrays are representative of DALLAS injuries.. and please stay on topic here Andric... you have 2 things to do

1) post ANYTHING from ANYONE showing them pointing to the TOP FRONT of their head when describing JFK's injury

2) Given the timeline of the xrays and ARRB testimony - how can these xrays and photos be indicative of DALLAS - if he was that injured in Dallas he was DOA-Parkland and beyond saving.... yet that is not what they say

Dr. FINCK. I interpreted myself but now to say what was the briefing at the time in detail, I unfortunately cannot do it. I remember, however, that on the phone Dr. Humes told me that he had good X ray films of the head. That I remember. What he told me when I arrived in the autopsy room in addition to that, I don't remember.

(WCR) Commander HUMES - The president's body was received at 25 minutes before 8, and the autopsy began at approximately 8 p.m. on that evening. You must include the fact that certain X-rays and other examinations were made before the actual beginning of the routine type autopsy examination

(HSCA) Dr. HUMES. well, the President's body, as I recall, arrived about 7:30 or 7:35 the evening and after some preliminary examinations, about 8 or 8:15. Just very briefly, in what order or sequence did you conduct the autopsy?

Dr. HUMES. Well, the first thing we did was make many photographs which we knew would obviously be required for a wide variety of purposes, took basically whole body X-rays and then proceeded with the examination of the two wounds that we very shortly detected were present, starting with the wound in the head and proceeding to the wound in the back of the neck, upper thorax.

(ARRB)Q. During the autopsy, was the room quiet and hushed or noisy and bustling? How would you describe the scene?

A. It varied. We were there for a long time. We were there from about 6:00 or 6:30 in the evening until 5 o'clock the next morning.

Edited January 14, 2014 by David Josephs

[Ray Mitcham]

Testimony of Humes to the AARB

" Mr Gunn: " Dr. Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy?"

Dr Humes "I didn't look at my watch, if I even had a watch on, but I would guess it was 6:45 or 7 o'clock, something like that, approximately."

Huh?

Edited January 14, 2014 by Ray Mitcham

[Pat Speer]

But not because someone altered the photos...

So Kennedy was shot in the back from below according to the abrasion ring on the "back wound" in Fox 5, and JFK's clothing acted in a manner contrary to the nature of reality so the holes in the clothes could line up with this bizarre artifact.

Right, Pat?

You can repeat your conclusions until the sky begs for mercy -- but you cannot defend this intellectually.

Actually, the wound in the photo is on a part of the shoulder with a forward slope. If the forward slope was greater than the angle of descent of the bullet, the bottom part of the bullet would strike first, and leave an abrasion ring at the bottom of the defect. This is easily demonstrated. Hold your right palm upright. Point your left finger at a downward angle into the palm. The top part of the finger hits first. Now tilt the right palm away from the finger. As you do so you will quickly reach a point where the bottom part of the finger hits first.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Pat Speer

[Pat Speer]

Pat,

The fact that Humes, Boswell and Finck identified the photos as being legitimate was hardly surprising. After all, this was their autopsy. And since not a single aspect of their autopsy is free from suspicion, again I ask- why would you believe the photos and x-rays resulting from this "Bowery bum" fiasco are legitimate?

They prove there was more than one shooter. Why should I NOT believe them? I mean, what kind of a conspiracy to convince us there was no conspiracy fakes evidence that prove a conspiracy?

Isn't that a wee bit counter-productive?

[David Josephs]

Pat,

The fact that Humes, Boswell and Finck identified the photos as being legitimate was hardly surprising. After all, this was their autopsy. And since not a single aspect of their autopsy is free from suspicion, again I ask- why would you believe the photos and x-rays resulting from this "Bowery bum" fiasco are legitimate?

They prove there was more than one shooter. Why should I NOT believe them? I mean, what kind of a conspiracy to convince us there was no conspiracy fakes evidence that prove a conspiracy?

Isn't that a wee bit counter-productive?

No sir, the work done by Humes on the skull which was photographed and xrayed does NOT prove anything about a 2nd shooter. The only thing the medical evidence proves is that the wound in DALLAS and the wounds as recorded in Bethesda are no where near the same and that any evidence for frontal shots was obliterated with the conclusion that one bullet from behind did ALL the damage recorded.

The fact that there are entrance wounds on the front of the body and that JC was not hit with the SBT - and all the DP/Parkland witnesses who say so - PROVES there was more than one shooter.

The medical evidence as prepared offers no such thing until it is put within the context of the event.

The EVIDENCE proves conspiracy Pat, nothing else... Unless you know a bit about what happened in DP and what ALL the witnesses say you would have a tough time finding evidence of a shot from the front in the WCR evidence.

The report and every report since has confirmed only one thing - Oswald shot three times from the rear.

The medical conspiracy/cover-up had much more to do with hiding who did it and how, than proving Oswald did it... it doesn't SHOW anything it HIDES everything.

Maybe help us out here Pat and show us one thing in the medical record which proves multiple shooters - that you can PROVE was seen in Dallas and not created in the morgue.

and that you would believe the conspiracy was created to convince us there was no conspiracy is just sad...

The conspiracy was designed to be seen thru so that we would spend 50+ years doing what we are doing while the perpetrators continue to do their thing - us none the wiser.

To this day we still have very little real idea who did what, when and how... and Oswald is still guilty in the history books.

I'd say the conspiracy worked just fine Pat... you should not believe them because they are not believable, they can't be authenticated, and it's as plain as the nose on your face...

I sure hope you get around to finding that out... you defending the WCR medical evidence is just weird.

Edited January 15, 2014 by David Josephs

[Pat Speer]

For the benefit of those still uncertain why I reject the accuracy of the so-called McClelland drawing, and the proposition there was a "blow-out" wound on the back of Kennedy's head involving chiefly the occipital bone, I have prepared a timeline of descriptions of Kennedy's head wounds. It's quite illuminating, IMO.

At approximately 12:45 P.M., within 15 minutes of Kennedy's being shot, assassination witness William Newman, who was less than 30 feet to the side of Kennedy when the fatal bullet struck, was interviewed live on television station WFAA. This was 45 minutes before the announcement of Kennedy’s death. Newman told Jay Watson: “And then as the car got directly in front of us, well, a gun shot apparently from behind us hit the President in the side, the side of the temple.” As he said this, he pointed to his left temple, with his only free hand. (Newman was holding one of his children with his right hand.) Subsequent statements would clarify that Newman was talking about Kennedy’s right temple. (Newman continues to claim he saw a large wound at this location, and has never wavered.)

Around this same time, news photographer and assassination eyewitness James Altgens wrote a dispatch for the Associated Press. He declared: "There was a burst of noise - the second one I heard - and pieces of flesh appeared to fly from President Kennedy's car. Blood covered the whole left side of his head.” Now, this is undoubtedly confusing. Newman pointed to his left temple around the same time Altgens said he saw blood on the left side of Kennedy’s head.

Within a few minutes, outside Parkland Hospital, however, Charles Roberts of Newsweek interviewed Senator Ralph Yarborough, who’d arrived at Parkland Hospital just after President Kennedy, and had witnessed his removal from the limousine. In his 1967 book The Truth About the Assassination, Roberts, working from his original notes, recalled that he asked the Senator where Kennedy had been shot, and that a horrified Yarborough responded "I can't tell you," as he unconsciously held "his hand to the right side of his head, where he had seen blood streaming from the President."

At 1:17, approximately 30 minutes after Jay Watson interviewed her husband, Watson interviewed Gayle Newman, who'd been standing right beside her husband and had had an equally close look at the President's wound. She reported: "And then another one—it was just awful fast. And President Kennedy reached up and grabbed--it looked like he grabbed--his ear and blood just started gushing out." As she said this she motioned to her right temple with both of her hands. In 1969, while testifying at the trial of Clay Shaw, Mrs, Newman would make the implications of this even more clear, and specify that Kennedy "was shot in the head right at his ear or right above his ear…" (Mrs. Newman has also never wavered from seeing a wound at this location.)

Around this time, Darwin Payne of the Dallas Times-Herald tracked down assassination witness Abraham Zapruder at his office in the Dal-Tex Building. Notes found in the Herald’s archives, almost certainly based on Payne’s interview of Zapruder, and reported in Richard Trask’s Pictures of the Pain, reflect “Abraham Zapruder…heard 3 shots///after first one Pres slumped over grabed stomac…hit in stomac…two more shots///looked like head opened up and everything came out…blood spattered everywhere…side of his face…looked like blobs out of his temple… forehead…” And this wasn’t the only time Zapruder described the wounds shown in his film—before he’d seen his film. Around 2:10, less than forty minutes after the announcement of Kennedy's death, Zapruder took his turn before the cameras on WFAA, and confirmed the observations of the Newmans. Describing the shooting, Zapruder told Jay Watson: “Then I heard another shot or two, I couldn't say it was one or two, and I saw his head practically open up, all blood and everything (at this time, Zapruder grabbed his right temple), and I kept on shooting. That's about all, I'm just sick, I can't…”

At 1:33 p.m. on November 22, 1963, Assistant Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff announced President Kennedy’s death from Parkland Hospital. He told the country: “President John F. Kennedy died at approximately one o’clock Central Standard Time today here in Dallas. He died of a gunshot wound in the brain…Dr. George Burkley [Kennedy's personal physician] told me it is a simple matter…of a bullet right through the head. (At this time, Kilduff pointed to his right temple) . . . It is my understanding that it entered in the temple, the right temple.” As Dr. Burkley had seen Kennedy in the Dallas emergency room and was later to tell the HSCA that Kennedy’s wounds didn’t change between Dallas and Bethesda, the site of the autopsy, Kilduff’s statements are a clear indication that the large head wound Burkley observed at Parkland Hospital is the same wound, in the same location, later observed at Bethesda. That no one at the time of Kilduff's statement had noted a separate bullet entrance anywhere on Kennedy's head, moreover, suggests that Burkley had seen but one wound, a wound by the temple, exactly where the Newmans, Zapruder, and presumably Yarborough had seen a wound.

At 2:16 PM CST, Dr.s Malcolm Perry and William Kemp Clark, two of the Parkland Hospital physicians who'd tried to save President Kennedy, appeared at a press conference. Note that it has been over an hour since they last saw the President’s body. (Their words come from a transcript discovered years later at the Lyndon Johnson Library.)

Dr. Malcolm Perry, who had performed a tracheostomy on the President in an effort to save his life: (When asked if a bullet had passed through Kennedy's head) "That would be conjecture on my part. There are two wounds, as Dr. Clark noted, one of the neck and one of the head. Whether they are directly related or related to two bullets, I cannot say...There was an entrance wound in the neck. As regards the one on the head, I cannot say." (When asked the direction of the bullet creating the neck wound) "It appeared to be coming at him." (When asked the direction of the bullet creating the head wound) "The nature of the wound defies the ability to describe whether it went through it from either side. I cannot tell you that." (When asked again if there was one or two wounds) "I don't know. From the injury, it is conceivable that it could have been caused by one wound, but there could have been two just as well if the second bullet struck the head in addition to striking the neck, and I cannot tell you that due to the nature of the wound. There is no way for me to tell...The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat; yes, that is correct. The exit wound, I don't know. It could have been the head or there could have been a second wound of the head. There was not time to determine this at the particular instant."

So, let’s see. Perry seems to think the wound was toward the top of the skull, as it “defies the ability to describe whether it went through it from either side.” If it was an obvious exit wound on the far back of the skull, as so many have come to believe, it would have suggested a shot from the front.

Well, then, what about Dr. Clark?

Dr. William Kemp Clark, who had examined the President's head wound and pronounced him dead: "I was called by Dr. Perry because the President... had sustained a brain wound…It was apparent that the President had sustained a lethal wound. A missile had gone in or out of the back of his head, causing extensive lacerations and loss of brain tissue." (When asked to describe the course of the bullet through the head) "We were too busy to be absolutely sure of the track, but the back of his head...Principally on his right side, towards the right side...The head wound could have been either the exit wound from the neck or it could have been a tangential wound, as it was simply a large, gaping loss of tissue."

Okay. Clark seems to think the wound was toward the back of the head, on the right side.

At 3:30 PM CST, Dr.s Perry and Kemp once again spoke to the press, this time on the phone to local reporters unable to attend the official press conference. Connie Kritzberg of The Dallas Times-Herald was one of these reporters. Her article on the President's wounds was published on 11-23. She wrote: “Wounds in the lower front portion of the neck and the right rear side of the head ended the life of President John F. Kennedy, say doctors at Parkland Hospital. Whether there were one or two wounds was not decided. The front neck hole was described as an entrance wound. The wound at the back of the head, while the principal one, was either an exit or tangential entrance wound. A doctor admitted that it was possible there was only one wound. Kemp Clark, 38, chief of neurosurgery, and Dr. Malcolm Perry, 34, described the President's wounds. Dr. Clark, asked how long the President lived in the hospital, replied, "I would guess 40 minutes but I was too busy to look at my watch." Dr. Clark said the President's principal wound was on the right rear side of his head…The doctors were asked whether one bullet could have made both wounds or whether there were two bullets. Dr. Clark replied. "The head wound could have been either an exit or a tangential entrance wound." The neurosurgeon described the back of the head wound as: "A large gaping wound with considerable loss of tissue." Dr. Perry added, "It is conceivable it was one

wound, but there was no way for me to tell. It did however appear to be the entrance wound at the front of the throat."

Dr. Clark later wrote a report. He signed this at 4:15. Note that this is now three hours after he’d last seen the President. He wrote: “I arrived at the EOR at 1220 - 1225 and The President was bleeding profusely from the back of the head. There was a large (3 x 3cm) amount of cerebral tissue present on the cart. There was a smaller amount of cerebellar tissue present also. There was a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the parietal region. Much of the skull appeared gone at brief examination. The previously described lacerated brain was present.” (A 12-1-63 article on the assassination in the Philadelphia Bulletin would make the surprising claim that the bullet striking Kennedy on the back of his head “hit at a shallow angle, ripping off a piece of skull 'perhaps the diameter of a teacup,' said Dr. William Kemp Clark, a neurosurgeon." This supported that the wound in Clark’s impression was at the top of the back of the head and that Clark was indeed comfortable with his original claim the wound was a tangential wound of both entrance and exit, even if fired from behind. This probability is borne out, moreover, by the fact Clark would later tell the Warren Commission he accepted that the fatal shot was fired from behind, and would only break his public silence on these matters to complain about conspiracy theorists trying to get him to say the shot came from the front.)

Dr. James Carrico, the first doctor on the scene, completed a similar report at 4:20. He wrote: “Two external wounds were noted. One small penetrating wound of ant. neck in lower 1/3. The other wound had avulsed the calvarium and shredded brain tissue present with profuse oozing.” After describing some medical procedures, he noted further “attempt to control slow oozing from cerebral and cerebellar tissue via packs instituted. “ (Carrico had thereby indicated that he’d thought the wound was on the back of the head. He would later defer to the accuracy of the autopsy photos and insist he’d been mistaken about seeing cerebellum.)

At 4:30, Dr. Perry created his own report. He wrote: “A large wound of the right posterior cranium was noted, exposing severely lacerated brain. Brain tissue was noted in the blood at the head of the carriage.” A few days later, journalist Jimmy Breslin would interview Dr. Perry and quote him as follows: "The occipito-parietal, which is a part of the back of the head, had a huge flap." Well, this is interesting. This flap can be seen in the autopsy photos, only a few inches forward of this location. (Perry would later defer to the accuracy of the autopsy photos.)

At 4:30 anesthesiologist Marion Jenkins completed his report. “These described resuscitative activities were indicated as of first importance, and after they were carried out attention was turned to all other evidences of injury. There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital), causing a great defect in the skull plate so that there was herniation and laceration of great areas of the brain, even to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound. There were also fragmented sections of brain on the drapes of the emergency room cart. With the institution of adequate cardiac compression, there was a great flow of blood from the cranial cavity, indicating that there was much vascular damage as well as brain tissue damage.” Hmmm. Jenkins had thereby suggested that the wound was on the right back of the head, roughly behind the ear. (Jenkins would later defer to the accuracy of the autopsy photos, and insist he’d been mistaken about seeing cerebellum.)

Dr. Charles Baxter also submitted a detailed report on Kennedy’s wounds. He wrote: “On first observation of the remaining wounds the rt temporal and occipital bones were missing and the brain was lying on the table, with extensive lacerations and contusions.” He later concluded: “Due to the excessive and irreparable brain damage which was lethal, no further attempt to resuscitate the heart was made.” Although Dr. Baxter’s report supported Dr. Jenkins’ report, it seems likely Dr. Baxter soon realized he’d been mistaken as to the location of the head wound. On 3-24-64, long before anyone was talking about the difference in the wound descriptions of those viewing Kennedy in Parkland and Bethesda, Dr. Baxter testified that he observed a "temporal parietal plate of bone laid outward to the side," and that "the right side of his head had been blown off." Well, heck, this was more consistent with the statements of the Newmans and Zapruder than with his fellow physicians. Dr. Baxter was also asked to read his earlier report into the record. While doing so, however, he read the line "the rt temporal and occipital bones were missing" as the "temporal and parietal bones were missing." It seems clear then he’d decided the wound was too high (and possibly too forward) on the head to involve occipital bone. (Dr. Baxter, no surprise, would later defer to the accuracy of the autopsy photos.)

Still, yes, this is strange. Although Dr. Baxter apparently changed his mind over the next few months, the initial reports of these five Parkland doctors suggested the wound was at or behind Kennedy’s right ear. Dr. Clark had suggested it was towards the top of the back of the head, where the occipital and parietal bones converge, and Dr.s Jenkins and Baxter suggested it was a bit lower and more to the side, where the occipital and temporal bones converge. Dr.s Carrico and Perry were more vague.

Should one think the statements of the Parkland doctors on 11-22-63 all suggested the wound was on the back of the head behind the ear, however, one would be wrong.

Dr. Robert McClelland’s report was signed at 4:45. He asserted: “When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea…The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. “

So yeah, that’s right, Dr. McClelland, who has since become a star “back of the head witness” for those believing the large head wound was low on the back of the head behind the ear, originally claimed the wound was a massive wound…of the left temple. Well, this suggests that he, as James Altgens before him, got his left confused with the President’s left.

And that’s not the only indication McClelland failed to see a “blow-out” wound on the back of Kennedy’s head, as claimed by so many. McClelland was the prime source for the 12-18-63 article by Richard Dudman published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, in which the Secret Service's visit to the Parkland doctors, and its attempt to get them to agree Kennedy's throat wound was an exit, was first revealed. There, McClelland told Dudman that after being told of the wound on Kennedy's back "he and Dr. Perry fully accept the Navy Hospital’s explanation of the course of the bullets." There, he told Dudman "I am fully satisfied that the two bullets that hit him were from behind." There, he told Dudman "As far as I am concerned, there is no reason to suspect that any shots came from the front."

And, should one refuse to believe McClelland would change his impressions at a later date, to fit what the other doctors were saying, there’s this… The January 1964 issue of the Texas State Journal of Medicine featured an article entitled Three Patients at Parkland. It was based upon the Parkland doctors' 11-22 reports, and repeated their descriptions of Kennedy's wounds and treatment word for word. Well, almost. In one of its few deviations, it changed Dr. McClelland's initial claim Kennedy was pronounced dead "at 12:55" to his being "pronounced dead at 1:00." This was an obvious correction of an innocent mistake. In what one can only assume was another correction of an innocent mistake, moreover, it re-routed Dr. McClelland's initial claim "The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple" to the more acceptable "The cause of death, according to Dr. McClelland was the massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the right side of the head."

It’s highly unlikely such a change would have been made without McClelland’s permission. It seems likely then that McClelland first wrote that the wound was of the left temple, and then realized he’d got it backwards, and began telling people it was on the right side, and then only over time began swearing it was on the far back of the head.

So what of the other witnesses to describe the President’s head wound on 11-22?

Secret Service agent Glen Bennett, who’d been riding in the back seat of the follow-up car just behind Kennedy, jotted down some notes on the flight back from Dallas. He noted in this report that the fatal bullet "hit the right rear high of the President’s head."

Secret Service agent George Hickey, who’d been riding next to Bennett, wrote a more detailed report on what transpired in Dallas. In the first of two reports, dated 11-22-63, he noted: "it seemed as if the right side of his head was hit and his hair flew forward." He wrote a second report on 11-30-63. There, he observed that after the first shot, Kennedy “was slumped forward and to his left, and was straightening up to an almost erect sitting position as I turned and looked. At the moment he was almost sitting erect I heard two reports which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound from the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them. It looked to me as if the president was struck in the right upper rear of the head. The first shot of the second two seemed as if it missed because the hair on the right side of his head flew forward and there didn’t seem to be any impact against his head. The last shot seemed to hit his head and cause a noise at the point of impact which made him fall forward and to his left again.”

Secret Service agent Sam Kinney, the driver of the follow-up car, also wrote a report on 11-22. He asserted: "At this time, the second shot was fired and I observed hair flying from the right side of his head.”

Well, these statements were a little vague. They do, however, make clear that a bullet did not explode from the left side or middle of the back of Kennedy’s head.

Well, then, who else?

Motorcycle officer James Chaney, who had been riding just a few yards off Kennedy's right shoulder, was interviewed by WFAA on the night of the shooting. He related: "We heard the first shot. I thought it was a motorcycle backfiring and uh I looked back over to my left and also President Kennedy looked back over his left shoulder. Then, the, uh, second shot came, well, then I looked back just in time to see the President struck in the face by the second bullet." Hmmm…Chaney was looking at the back of Kennedy’s head. His thinking Kennedy was struck in the face suggests the explosion he saw was in front of Kennedy’s ear, not behind.

Riding at Chaney’s right was Douglas Jackson. Jackson's notes, written on the night of the assassination and published in 1979, relate: "I looked back toward Mr. Kennedy and saw him hit in the head; he appeared to have been hit just above the right ear. The top of his head flew off away from me." Jackson then escorted the limousine to Parkland, where he saw the President’s body removed from the limo. He wrote: "I got off my motor, stepped over to the presidential limousine. An agent opened the car door and started to get Mrs. Kennedy out but Mrs. Kennedy said no. It's no need she said and raised up from over Mr. Kennedy. I could see the top of his head was gone, his left eye was bulged out of socket. The agent said "Oh no!" and started crying, pulled his coat off and placed it over Mr. Kennedy's head."

Two days later, on November 24, Bobby Hargis, the motorcycle cop riding off Mrs. Kennedy's left shoulder, published an eyewitness account in the New York Sunday News. He wrote: "As the President straightened back up, Mrs. Kennedy turned toward him, and that was when he got hit in the side of the head, spinning it around. I was splattered by blood.”

Over the next week, a number of other reports were written.

On 11-27-63, Secret Service agent Paul Landis wrote the first of two reports on the assassination. He noted: "I heard a second report and saw the President’s head split open and pieces of flesh and blood flying through the air." His 11-30 report concurred: “It was at this moment that I heard a second report and it appeared that the President's head split open with a muffled exploding sound.” Well, this is an interesting use of words. Split open. One might gather from this that this split involved the back of the head. But, if so, one would have to assume it involved the top of the back of the head.

Hurchel Jacks, the driver of Vice-President Johnson's car in the motorcade, arrived at the hospital just moments after the limousine and the follow-up car, and witnessed the removal of the President's body from the limo. On 11-28-63, less than a week after the assassination, he filed a report (18H801) and noted: "Before the President's body was covered it appeared that the bullet had struck him above the right ear or near the temple.”

Sitting directly behind Kennedy at the time of the shooting was Secret Service agent Emory Roberts. If a bullet hit Kennedy on the back of the head, or erupted from the back of his head, he would have been the one to notice. Instead, in an 11-29-63 report, he wrote "I saw what appeared to be a small explosion on the right side of the President’s head, saw blood, at which time the President fell further to his left."

An even more important witness broke her silence on 11-29-63. On this day, Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy granted an interview to Presidential historian Theodore White, and briefly discussed her husband’s wounds. (White’s notes on this interview were released on 5-26-95, and subsequently published in the September 1995 Kennedy Assassination Chronicles) Mrs. Kennedy related: “his last expression was so neat; he had his hand out, I could see a piece of his skull coming off; it was flesh colored not white—he was holding out his hand—and I can see this perfectly clean piece detaching itself from his head; then he slumped in my lap.” She later described the immediate aftermath of the shots: "All the ride to the hospital, I kept bending over him saying, "Jack, Jack, can you hear me, I love you, Jack." I kept holding the top of his head down trying to keep the..." She later described the condition of Kennedy’s head upon arrival at the hospital. White’s notes relate: "From here down"--and here she made a gesture indicating her husband's forehead--"his head was so beautiful. I'd tried to hold the top of his head down, maybe I could keep it in...I knew he was dead."

Okay, so there are now 5 witnesses—Burkley, McClelland, Jackson, Jacks, and Mrs. Kennedy--who claimed to see a wound on the front or top of Kennedy’s head at Parkland Hospital. Amazingly, that’s the same number as have claimed to see a wound on the back of his head. And Baxter was soon to change his mind.

The next day, 11-30, yet another important witness chimed in. Secret Service agent Clint Hill, who’d climbed up on the back of the limo as the shots rang out, related: "As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lieing in the seat." Hill’s report returned to this later. When describing the aftermath to Kennedy's autopsy in his report, he related "At approximately 2:45 A.M., November 23, I was requested by ASAIC to come to the morgue to once again view the body. When I arrived the autopsy had been completed and ASAIC Kellerman, SA Greer, General McHugh and I viewed the wounds. I observed a wound about six inches down from the neckline on the back just to the right of the spinal column. I observed another wound on the right rear portion of the skull." (Many years later, in numerous interviews and television appearances, Hill would clarify just what he meant by the “right rear portion” and would point to a location above his right ear.)

So, that’s it. While many people studying the Kennedy assassination have convinced themselves there was a “blow-out” wound involving chiefly occipital bone low on the back of Kennedy’s head, there is virtually nothing to support this in the earliest statements regarding Kennedy’s wounds…

IT IS A MYTH.

Edited January 15, 2014 by Pat Speer