More Evidence for Harvey & Lee -- Oswald was missing a MOLAR, but his exhumed body was not!

[Mervyn Hagger]

5 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Jack Ruby shot Russian-speaking HARVEY Oswald, and it is HARVEY who is buried in Rose Hill Cemetery in Fort Worth.  American-born LEE Oswald, whose identity HARVEY shared, lost one or two upper front teeth in a schoolyard fight and was missing a molar.  From the exhumation photos, HARVEY had all his teeth.  It is all explained here:

HarveyandLee.net

Jim - then what became of Lee?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Has most everything you've posted on you anti-H&L website been reviewed and approved by experts? If not, why should anybody take anything you've written seriously?

Oh I know... because not everything requires expertise to understand. Common sense is often all that is needed.

It's two different things Sandy. My articles are mostly summaries of established facts. I am not an expert, anyone could do what I have done. You are elevating yourself to the level of expert in forensic dentistry-that is the difference. And if common sense is all that is need, why should these people go to medical school?

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

It will be soon.

 

That is fine if you are able to do that. But any expert (that is not promoting an agenda) will look at the totality of the evidence in this case and that is what you guys do not do. So, it will be a high standard to actually prove your case. But I will give you credit for one thing. If you are really trying to find expert opinions that is a step in the right direction and shows you are serious about your beliefs.

[Mervyn Hagger]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

It will be soon.

 

So it was Harvey in the Texas Theatre who was arrested, and Harvey at the press conference the day before Harvey was shot by Ruby and therefore Harvey was put into the ground. So where was Lee during all of these events, and where is Lee right now?

[Jim Hargrove]

33 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

So it was Harvey in the Texas Theatre who was arrested, and Harvey at the press conference the day before Harvey was shot by Ruby and therefore Harvey was put into the ground. So where was Lee during all of these events, and where is Lee right now?

A detailed description of the activities of Harvey and Lee on November 22, 1963 can be read here:

http://harveyandlee.net/November/November_22.htm

For about six weeks prior to the assassination, LEE set up HARVEY as the patsy.  A full description can be read here:

http://harveyandlee.net/Patsy/The_Patsy.html

LEE disappeared soon after the assassination.  There are plenty of theories, and some leads, about that.

[Sandy Larsen]

31 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

It's two different things Sandy. My articles are mostly summaries of established facts. I am not an expert, anyone could do what I have done. You are elevating yourself to the level of expert in forensic dentistry-that is the difference. And if common sense is all that is need, why should these people go to medical school?

 

No, I have not elevated myself to forensic dentistry. I did nothing more than what common sense allows when describing what is in those x-rays.

Does someone have to be a physicist to say that water freezes at about 32 degrees Fahrenheit? A meteorologist to say it's snowing outside? A psychologist to note that somebody is happy?

 

Quote

I am not an expert, anyone could do what I have done.

Same here. I told you in my last post that anybody with a lick of common sense and self confidence can see what I see in those x-rays. And they'd be right.

 

Quote

And if common sense is all that is need, why should these people go to medical school?

Because they need to do things that require more knowledge than what you and I have done.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

I don't know much about dentistry, but it just strains credulity that this...

 

after just a few years, can become this....

 

[Sandy Larsen]

Isn't it amazing how Jim can see those molars and premolars? The tipping of the two molars, one hitting the side of the other, but later straightening up so the tops of the two are in alignment? The large gap in the early x-ray, and the small gap in later one? And that he does this without a bit of training in either dentistry or radiology?

Simply amazing!

[Sandy Larsen]

Colin Crow posted the following over on Duncan's forum:

"Just talked with a Prof of Orthodontics. I just related the basic details of a missing premolar and the relevant ages of the individual no mention of who it was. His answer was emphatic....there is no way that the teeth will restraighten once tipped without application of some device to correct it."

 

 

[Mervyn Hagger]

On ‎2‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 5:36 PM, Jim Hargrove said:

A detailed description of the activities of Harvey and Lee on November 22, 1963 can be read here:

http://harveyandlee.net/November/November_22.htm

For about six weeks prior to the assassination, LEE set up HARVEY as the patsy.  A full description can be read here:

http://harveyandlee.net/Patsy/The_Patsy.html

LEE disappeared soon after the assassination.  There are plenty of theories, and some leads, about that.

Jim, I have visited and read these files. I also noted this:

November 23-24, 1963. Following the assassination of JFK, while stalking HARVEY Oswald, Jack Ruby told friends and employees that he could be reached through KLIF Radio.  Jack Ruby and Ft. Worth native David Atlee Phillips were both close friends of Gordon McClendon, owner of radio station KLIF in Dallas. Phillips and McClendon attended school together in Ft. Worth. When Phillips founded the Association of Former Intelligence Officers (AFIO), an organization for retired CIA agents, McClendon was one of the founding charter members. In 1972 an undercover Cuban intelligence agent met with a man who identified himself as "Harold Benson." After a few drinks the subject of President Kennedy's assassination came up. Benson told the agent that he had visited the slain President's grave and had "peed" on it. The Cuban agent later identified a photograph of David Atlee Phlllips as "Harold Benson."

This corresponds with my own interests regarding Benson because I believe this meeting is supposed to have taken place in London. I have a Facebook page dedicated to that issue. Regarding the quotation above: Gordon's last name is McLendon, not McClendon. There is a book which I am trying to dismantle about McLendon and JFK and right now I have posted a tremendous amount of material about it at the Radio Mercur  1958-1962 group page on Facebook. It is in both Swedish and English. I am posting in English.

Edited February 9, 2018 by Mervyn Hagger

[Jim Hargrove]

Mervyn,

Thanks for the correction on McLendon.  I just finished uploading the changes to the web page.

Let's keep this thread on on topic about the dental evidence for Harvey and Lee.  

If you'd like to discuss the potential Ruby/McLendon/Phillips connection some more, there's a thread I started last year that touches on it and some other things.  The most relevant post is here:

 

 

[Jim Hargrove]

On 2/4/2018 at 8:21 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Oswald was missing a MOLAR, but his exhumed body was not!

Lee Harvey Oswald's body was exhumed in 1981 to determine whether it truly was that of Oswald's, or that of a Soviet spy. A panel of experts headed by Dr. Linda Norton determined that the body was indeed that of Lee Harvey Oswald's. The proceedings and findings of the event were recorded in the Norton Report.

I have discovered substantial inconsistencies in the Norton Report which indicate 1) that two different sets of dental x-rays were involved in the analysis, and 2) the teeth of the exhumed Oswald do not fully match the dental records kept of Lee Harvey Oswald by the Marine Corps.

Marine Corps records indicate that Oswald was missing one of his non-wisdom-tooth molars, specifically the front-most molar on his lower right side. According to the Norton Report that tooth had been extracted. And yet the tooth appears to be present among the exhumed teeth.

Tooth Gaps Lead to Tipping Teeth

When a tooth is missing, the teeth behind it will often drift forward and tip down into the gap. If significant bone loss has occurred at the site of the gap, the adjacent tooth can tip over to the point of completely filling the gap. This occurs due to forces applied from the opposing teeth (upper or lower) during mastication. Here are some examples of where this has happened:

 

 

 

 

The Norton Panel Mistakenly Accepted that the Molar was Missing.

I have carefully compared the photographs and x-rays of the exhumed teeth with Oswald's Marine Corps dental records and x-rays and have found them to be largely consistent. But with one exception... the supposedly missing molar. It is my contention that the Norton Panel talked themselves into believing the molar was missing on the exhumed body. It had to. Nearly everything else checked out and there was no way of explaining the lack of a missing molar. The missing molar had been reported on several dental charts, and so it couldn't be a case of mistaken charting.

Let's take a look at where the molar was supposed to have been missing. Here is one view:

 

Tooth #30 is the one that is supposed to be missing. So the Norton Panel numbered the teeth as shown here. There is a small gap there, better seen from a side view:

 

Now admittedly, when I first saw that gap, I wondered if a molar had indeed been extracted and that the two molars behind it somehow shifted over quite a distance without tipping down. Because molars #31 and 32 are not tipping at all. Rather, they are at an angle only because the jawbone that far back is tilted... at the same angle.

For us to accept that tooth #30 had been extracted, we'd have to believe that afterward #31 and 32 moved straight toward #29  by roughly 1/4 inch. Not by tipping, but by moving straight. And that the sockets the roots fit into did the same.

This is hard to believe. Imagine driving a post into the ground and then trying to move it over a significant distance relative to its height. Tipping the post over would be relatively easy, especially with the use of a hammer. But moving it straight over by much would be nearly impossible.

What forces could there have been in Oswald's mouth that could move roots and sockets over by 1/4"?

None, I determined. And so I decided to study missing tooth #30 further. Am I ever glad I did!

My Discovery of the True Missing-Molar X-Ray

As I pondered what I needed for my study, the obvious came to mind quickly. If it were true that the exhumed Oswald had a tooth #30 in place, then there must have been another Oswald who truly was missing #30. What I needed more than anything else was an x-ray from that Oswald showing the missing tooth. With that in hand, I should be able to see a gap where the tooth had been, and possibly a tooth or two behind it tipping down into the gap.

Problem is, in my search for dental records the only x-rays I'd seen were the ones published in the Norton Report.

It occurred to me that I hadn't yet taken a close look at that particular x-ray in the Norton Report taken from the Marine Corps records. I had saved that for last, because it was of the only quadrant of the teeth that appeared suspect. For a fleeting moment I thought, wouldn't it be great if THAT particular x-ray were from the OTHER Oswald? The x-ray that I needed more than any other?

Well, of course, that was too much to hope for. But I took a look anyway.

Ha! I couldn't believe my eyes at first, but I actually had -- printed right there in the Norton Report -- the x-ray of the teeth surrounding tooth #30 from the other Oswald! The x-ray I needed more than any other.

And, as I expected, this x-ray shows definite signs of a missing molar. Here it is:

Marine Corps

I could see right away the large gap left behind from molar #30, and the adjacent molar tipping down into it. The reader may not see these things himself, given his unfamiliarity with this material. I will demonstrate them momentarily.

For the remainder of this presentation I will compare this x-ray from the Marine Corps to the one of the exhumed body and show that they are not from the same person.

Preparation for My Comparison

In order to make the x-ray comparison easy to follow, I created one composite x-ray and made a few minor adjustments, as I will describe here. All the photos and x-rays come from the following high quality scan of the Norton Report:

Norton Report

The photos are on pages 27 through 30, and the x-rays on page 31.

The x-rays printed in the report are notated with black and white text, arrows, and lines. Please ignore these. My notations will be in color.

What I did for the Marine Corps x-ray was separate the upper teeth from the lower a little so that they can easily be distinguished. In addition, there is one tooth whose roots are darkened, and I pasted there a copy of the same tooth from the exhumed x-ray in order to make the roots visible. I gave it a shade of red so that it would be remembered that it is not on the original x-ray. I ended up with this:

Marine Corps X-Ray

For the x-ray of the exhumed teeth, I had to combine two adjacent x-rays into one. They share a molar in both, so I was able to align them perfectly. I then rotated the whole image so that it was at the same angle as the photograph depicting the same (exhumed) teeth.

Unfortunately the original x-rays are cut off and don't show the complete roots. But this doesn't affect my analysis.

Exhumation X-Ray

For the corresponding photograph, I combined the upper and lower teeth onto one image, using the above composite x-ray as a guide for alignment.

Exhumation Photo

Notice how well the teeth in the exhumed x-ray match those in the exhumed photograph, as they should.

To aid in the comparisons, I drew in the jawlines the best I could make out. Here they are:

Marine Corps

 

Exhumation

Now I can proceed to compare the Marine Corps x-ray to the exhumed teeth x-ray.

Marine Corps X-Ray versus Exhumation X-Ray

Molar Tipping

Lets look at the degree of tipping of the molars adjacent to the #30 molar extraction site. The green lines illustrate the degree of tipping relative to the jawline:

Marine Corps

Tipping of both remaining molars in the Marine Corps x-ray is easily seen. However, tipping is not so great as to close the gap left behind from the missing molar. I estimate that there is still a 1/4 inch gap remaining between crowns of teeth #29 and #31.

 

Exhumation

There is no tipping of the molars at all in the exhumed teeth They are perfectly square with the jawline. This is in stark contrast to the tipping that is so prominent in the Marine Corps x-ray.

Notice also how the left-most molar in the Marine Corps x-ray is tipping down into the side of molar to its right. In contrast, the tops of the two molars in the exhumed x-ray align nicely with each other. That is, one molar is not tipping down into the other.

One has to wonder how the expected tipping we see in the earlier Marine Corps teeth could have corrected itself to the point of what we see in the exhumed teeth. Downward forces from the upper teeth should have kept those teeth tipped over.

Gap Spacing

In this caparison, I want to imagine straightening up the tipping teeth and re-inserting the lost molar. Is there actually enough room for the molar to fit in? There should be! Following are images I prepared for this exercise.

First let's look at one of the example x-rays I showed earlier:

In this example, significant jaw bone loss has allowed not only the molar on the left to tip right down into the gap, but also has allowed the tooth on the right to tip down a little. As can be seen, If both teeth are straightened up, the original molar will fit in the resulting space. Note that the axis of rotation/tipping is the root of the tooth.

Now let's look at Oswald's Marine Corps x-ray:

Again we see that a missing molar will easily fit once the tipped teeth are straightened up.

But what about the exhumed teeth?

Remember, those two molars on the left are not tipped. But even if we pretend they are and allow more space for the missing molar by "straightening" them up, there is still simply no room for that missing molar to fit in!

This is yet another indication that there was never an adjacent molar that had been extracted. There was no missing molar among the exhumed teeth.

Another Differences Between the Marines X-Ray and Exhumation X-Ray

There is one other difference between the teeth of the Marine Corps Oswald and the exhumed Oswald that is quite glaring. And that is the root style of one of the molars.

Here are examples of molars whose roots are spread out, normal, and narrowed to the point of being fused together:

Lets compare the root spread of what is supposed to be the same tooth in the Marine Corps x-ray and the exhumed teeth x-ray:

Marine Corps
 

Exhumation

These are obviously not the same tooth. The tooth from the Marine Corps has a narrow root spread, and the one from the exhumed body has a medium/wide spread. They are teeth from two different Oswalds.

 

Conclusions

The Marine Corps x-ray examined here does NOT belong to the exhumed body of Lee Harvey Oswald. In order for us to accept that it does, we would have to believe the following:

1. Oswald had his first lower molar on his right side extracted some time before entering the Marine Corps.
2. Subsequently the two molars behind it began tipping over into the gap of the missing molar.
3. In the five year span from when the Marine Corps x-ray was taken to the death of Oswald, the two tipping molars inexplicably straightened themselves back up.
4. In addition to straightening up, the two molars -- root, socket, and all -- moved about 1/4 inch straight into the gap left by the extraction. They did this without any forces applied at the necessary points, in the necessary direction, and with the necessary force to attain such a movement. (As could be done by an orthodontist using braces.)
5. And in the meantime, the roots AND socket of one of those molars spontaneously straightened up, changing themselves from having a narrow root style to a medium-wide one.

The last three items in this list simply do not belong to the realm of possibility.

Yet if we unlink the Marine Corps x-ray from the exhumation x-ray, it all makes sense. The Marine Corps x-ray is precisely what we'd expect to see after a #30 molar extraction. The exhumation x-ray is not. And it's completely understandable that the root shapes of those two molars are different.

We are left with no other choice than to conclude that the Marines Corps x-rays came from a different Oswald than the Oswald whose remains were exhumed from the tomb. And that the Marine Corps Oswald was the one with the missing molar.

We conclude therefore that there were two Lee Harvey Oswalds. The one in the Marines and the one shot by Jack Ruby. (This is not to say, however, that the Oswald shot by Ruby had not served in the Marines as well.)

 

Can anyone really dispute this?

Just wondering....

[Bruce Fernandez]

Jim, let's ask if anyone can dispute "any" of this. Since the MSM won't pay any attention, how about "we all" flood our local media with this or something other that you might recommend.

[Thomas Graves]

20 minutes ago, Bruce Fernandez said:

Jim, let's ask if anyone can dispute "any" of this. Since the MSM won't pay any attention, how about "we all" flood our local media with this or something other that you might recommend.

 

Bruce,

 

With all due respect, what is your definition of evil, evil, evil "Main Stream Media"?

Anything rated as having a "High" degree of factual reporting according to mediabiasfactcheck. com?  (LOL)

How about "Left-Center" biased MSNBC and CNN,  "Right-Center" biased RT, and "Right" biased Fox News, all of which are rated as having only "Mixed" factual reporting according to that website?

Or do you tend to think evil, evil, evil "Main Stream Media" is pretty much everything that ISN'T on either the "Conspiracy-Pseudoscience" or "Questionable Sources" list of that website?

 

--  Tommy 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Jim Hargrove]

1 hour ago, Bruce Fernandez said:

Jim, let's ask if anyone can dispute "any" of this. Since the MSM won't pay any attention, how about "we all" flood our local media with this or something other that you might recommend.

We’re doing quite a bit of work behind the scenes that I’d like to reserve for a while.  We’re currently discussing how best to adapt Sandy’s posts for a permanent article or two on HarveyandLee.net, among other things.  We might have some other news within a few weeks, but we’ll have to see how fast things go.  Thanks for asking.