Jump to content
The Education Forum

Small wound(s) in the front of JFK's head


Micah Mileto
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here is a pdf version: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i7VkiCR50DhuXRpVjrYJj4BHoeH9Rs-W/view?usp=sharing

 

This does not include the Dealey Plaza witnesses because they was already handled perfectly in Pat Speer's online book A New Perspective on the Kennedy Assassination, Chapter 18c: Reason to Doubt. They were almost certainly describing the LARGE head wound, not any small wounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Thanks, Micah. This should prove interesting. 

Thanks. While your website perfectly illustrates that the Dealey Plaza witnesses were describing the large head wound and not any small head wounds, there is a lot it doesn't include about the Parkland witnesses. Drs. Robert Shaw and David Stewart both claimed to have heard the other staff members discussing a wound in the left temple. Dr. Jenkins, at the very least, said there was blood on the left temple, that he placed his finger there, and that he suspected a wound there. Dr. McClelland said that he heard Jenkins say "there's a wound in the left temple" (in another version of the story, he said he just heard Jenkins say "there's a wound here" while seeing the finger on the temple, and thought he was pointing to a small wound). Dr. Ronald Jones inexplicably told the ARRB that him and Dr. Lito Porto having some knowledge of a wound in the left temple, a story which he never told before or after since (Jones is still alive from what I understand, but I couldn't find a working phone number to contact him). Gene Akin, even if you want to call him a xxxx, did claim to see an "entry wound" in the "forehead", and also claimed a temple wound was seen by Dr. Kemp Clark. A couple of early newspaper articles printed unsourced claims that a wound in the left temple/forehead was seen.

Edited by Micah Mileto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Micah Mileto said:

Thanks. While your website perfectly illustrates that the Dealey Plaza witnesses were describing the large head wound and not any small head wounds, there is a lot it doesn't include about the Parkland witnesses. Drs. Robert Shaw and David Stewart both claimed to have heard the other staff members discussing a wound in the left temple. Dr. Jenkins, at the very least, said there was blood on the left temple, that he placed his finger there, and that he suspected a wound there. Dr. McClelland said that he heard Jenkins say "there's a wound in the left temple" (in another version of the story, he said he just heard Jenkins say "there's a wound here" while seeing the finger on the temple, and thought he was pointing to a small wound). Dr. Ronald Jones inexplicably told the ARRB that him and Dr. Lito Porto having some knowledge of a wound in the left temple, a story which he never told before or after since (Jones is still alive from what I understand, but I couldn't find a working phone number to contact him). Gene Akin, even if you want to call him a xxxx, did claim to see an "entry wound" in the "forehead", and also claimed a temple wound was seen by Dr. Kemp Clark. A couple of early newspaper articles printed unsourced claims that a wound in the left temple/forehead was seen.

If you're gonna be thorough on the Parkland witnesses to make reference to a left head wound than you might want to include Father Oscar Huber. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

If you're gonna be thorough on the Parkland witnesses to make reference to a left head wound than you might want to include Father Oscar Huber. 

Huber has his own chapter, seen above. I feel sure that Huber wasn't talking about the right side of the head. The left side of the head was of course covered in blood and hair, which might have made it difficult to see any wounds that might exist, but Huber was quoted as saying there was a "blotch of blood" or a "blood clot" on the "left forehead". So, an area on the left front of the head where there was a small coagulation of blood that resembled a wound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great work!

Dr. Jones is still working but he has declined to make any further statements. he said the last piece he wrote in 2014 in American College of Surgeons publication is his final statement on the matter. he consistently declined to participate in any further conferenes or respond to any more questions.

We have been trying to contact Dr.Porto who has moved back to his native country. I had an extensive interview with Dr. Curtis who said his supervisor Dr. Walker saw a temple wound. He also said the Dr. Kemp lifted up the JFK's head to show the senior doctors who had come into the room (but not treating JFK) why he had determined JFK's wound was not survivable.

Specter interviewed the doctors before deciding whose testimony to take. This was no doubt to screen out those whose testimony would not be helpful. This is probably why r. Porto was not deposed.

Specter used a number of tactics to intimidate the doctors. when those did not work, he would go off the record or would simply ignore an inconvenient response and pursue his line of quesiton. this is how one "manufactures" a record.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Great work!

Dr. Jones is still working but he has declined to make any further statements. he said the last piece he wrote in 2014 in American College of Surgeons publication is his final statement on the matter. he consistently declined to participate in any further conferenes or respond to any more questions.

We have been trying to contact Dr.Porto who has moved back to his native country. I had an extensive interview with Dr. Curtis who said his supervisor Dr. Walker saw a temple wound. He also said the Dr. Kemp lifted up the JFK's head to show the senior doctors who had come into the room (but not treating JFK) why he had determined JFK's wound was not survivable.

Specter interviewed the doctors before deciding whose testimony to take. This was no doubt to screen out those whose testimony would not be helpful. This is probably why r. Porto was not deposed.

Specter used a number of tactics to intimidate the doctors. when those did not work, he would go off the record or would simply ignore an inconvenient response and pursue his line of quesiton. this is how one "manufactures" a record.     

That's crazy. Is there any more info about the Dr. Curtis interview you're ok with sharing at this time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 9 months later...
On 11/24/2020 at 8:53 AM, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Great work!

Dr. Jones is still working but he has declined to make any further statements. he said the last piece he wrote in 2014 in American College of Surgeons publication is his final statement on the matter. he consistently declined to participate in any further conferenes or respond to any more questions.

We have been trying to contact Dr.Porto who has moved back to his native country. I had an extensive interview with Dr. Curtis who said his supervisor Dr. Walker saw a temple wound. He also said the Dr. Kemp lifted up the JFK's head to show the senior doctors who had come into the room (but not treating JFK) why he had determined JFK's wound was not survivable.

Specter interviewed the doctors before deciding whose testimony to take. This was no doubt to screen out those whose testimony would not be helpful. This is probably why r. Porto was not deposed.

Specter used a number of tactics to intimidate the doctors. when those did not work, he would go off the record or would simply ignore an inconvenient response and pursue his line of quesiton. this is how one "manufactures" a record.     

Is there any primary source on that Dr. Curtis interview you can share at this time, audio, video, notes, anything?

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...