New medical winess? RFK aide John Nolan interviewed by Lamar Waldron

[Micah Mileto]

On 11/22/2021, researcher Lamar Waldron shared some information that allegedly came from John Nolan, who had been the attorney and former administrative assistant to then-Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (Thom Hartmann Program, 11/22/2021). Nolan, who passed away on 11/18/2017, helped negotiate Cuba’s release of prisoners from the failed Bay of Pigs invasion (Washington Post, 12/27/2017, John E. Nolan Jr., lawyer who helped negotiate Bay of Pigs prisoner release, dies at 90 by Bart Barnes). Waldron reported on an alleged “contingency plan” put in place by Robert F. Kennedy, where if a U.S. government representative were to die possibly from an assassination, the autopsy would be done by the military, in case information might need to be controlled for the purposes of national security. Waldron authored the books Ultimate Sacrifice, 2005 with co-author Thom Hartmann, Legacy of Secrecy, 2008 with Hartmann, Watergate: The Hidden History, 2012, and The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination, 2013. Waldron’s statements and theories have been criticized by other researchers, mainly because many of his sources were left unnamed (Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi, 2007; Kennedysandking.com, 3/28/2009, Lamar Waldron, with Thom Hartmann, Legacy of Secrecy by James DiEugenio; Kennedysandking.com, 4/25/2009, Lamar Waldron, Ultimate Sacrifice by James DiEugenio; Kennedysandking.com, 6/16/2009, Lamar Waldron, with Thom Hartmann, Legacy of Secrecy - Update by James DiEugenio; Kennedysandking.com, 11/29/2009, Lamar Waldron, with Thom Hartmann, Legacy of Secrecy by William Davy). On 11/22/2021, Waldron appeared on a podcast hosted by his co-author Thom Hartmann, where he claimed that one of his major sources was John Nolan (Thom Hartmann Program, 11/22/2021). Besides this information given by Waldron, there is no other publicly-known evidence that Nolan said these things. This same basic information, without the name of John Nolan being mentioned, had been explained in Waldron and Hartmann’s 2008 book Legacy of Secrecy:

 

[...Chapter Fourteen]

 

However, Bobby also had someone—an individual whom we spoke with in 1992—assisting him in dealing with Burkley and the autopsy room. The presence of this very sensitive, confidential source at the autopsy has been confirmed by an official account, and his credibility is not only clear based on the public record, but has been vouched for by numerous associates of John and Robert Kennedy. These include Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Harry Williams, and Bobby’s trusted FBI liaison Courtney Evans.

 

It’s significant that our source who assisted Bobby at the autopsy was fully knowledgeable not only about the JFK-Almeida coup plan, but also about the Cuba Contingency Plans designed to protect it. The bottom line is that whatever went on at the autopsy most likely happened with the full knowledge, and probably at the ultimate direction, of Bobby Kennedy. […]

 

[…]

 

In addition to the unusual timing discrepancies, there were also easy-to-document differences between how JFK’s body looked at Parkland and how it looked (and was photographed) at the start of his autopsy in Bethesda. The most obvious example is JFK’s throat wound, where the tracheotomy incision had been made. Dallas’s Dr. Perry said that his small, neat incision was only 2–3 centimeters. However, photos of JFK’s body at the start of the autopsy show a very ragged incision, spread open in the middle, that was at least two or three times larger. JFK’s official autopsy report (now known to be at least the second completed, and possibly the third) says the incision was 6.5 centimeters when the autopsy began, while the lead autopsy physician, Dr. Humes, said under oath that it was 7–8 centimeters.13 The throat incision was not enlarged during the official autopsy, because, as assisting autopsy physician Dr. Pierre Finck later testified, the doctors had been ordered not to.14

 

How did the small, neat incision in JFK’s neck more than double in size to a wound so ragged that the autopsy physicians didn’t even realize there had been a bullet hole there? Some experts have suggested a solution that would also account for the timing inconsistencies regarding the start of the autopsy, as well as the missing brain and other evidence. They say there could have been a brief, hurried, unofficial “national security autopsy” before the start of the official one. They point out that on the night of November 22, the official autopsy results and evidence were expected to be used in Oswald’s trial, and would have to be turned over to his defense.

 

If Bobby Kennedy and other top officials were worried that evidence of another shooter from the front could have generated calls to invade Cuba and a conflict with the Soviets, this line of reasoning suggests they might have wanted to learn as much as possible before the “official” autopsy began. The greatly enlarged throat wound certainly appeared as if someone had hurriedly explored it to see if a bullet was still lodged inside.

 

While the official autopsy was jammed with officers and other personnel, such a national security autopsy might have been conducted with only a few people present. This scenario could also explain other discrepancies that have been documented. […]

 

Lamar Waldron, in his 11/22/2021 appearance on the Thom Hartmann Program, also gave information on the throat wound which he apparently attributed to Nolan (Link):

 

Waldron: […] So, all those questions about the autopsy, as far as I'm concerned, now they've all been answered because when- so- so John Nolan, it was really- we were going to get together for lunch in Washington, he was going to leave his, you know the biggest law firm in Washington, he was a senior partner, meet me for lunch, we were going to talk, you know, and- and the only reason he was talking to me, he made it clear, was because he was still friends with Harry Williams after all those years, they were still close. He trusted Harry, and if Harry said I was okay to talk to, he would- he would give me an hour of his time. Okay, so- so- then I get to Washington, I call him, I say so ‘we need to make some lunch plans’, ‘No no, can't. No, I can't meet you for lunch, you- you just come to the office, okay?’. So I said ‘Okay, I'll come to the office’, and then he's like ‘No no no, we can't do that, somebody might see you here’. And- and again, this is- you know, this is- because we're going to be talking about a plan that's been kept secret since 1963, this is 1992. And then he's like I- I just can't see you, I'm like ‘Look I flew all the way up here, Harry said you'd be a good guy to talk to, so- so he agrees to give me a phone interview. Okay. We start talking. Every time and I'm- I'm- I'm at- I'm not the Mayflower where we usually stay but I'm at the- I think the Grand Hyatt where we would do our communication seminars. And every time I would get- Yeah, we’d talk about general stuff, and you know he was a Korean veteran, my dad was a Korean veteran. He was about the same age when he was working for Robert Kennedy that I am- I was when I was talking to him on the phone. So yeah, I was looking for those things in common, and but whenever I would get close to talking about the coup plan, oh, the worst crackling would come on the phone and we would get cut off. I mean it didn't happen once, it didn't happen twice, it didn't happen three times, it didn't happen four times, it happened at least six times. Finally the last time I- ‘cause I'm- he's- you know, somebody doesn't want us to talk about this. So I go outside, luckily there's a bellhop, I whip out a ten or twenty dollar bill, say ‘Look, get me a phone out of one of these other rooms, plug it in, in here. Just take my phone, put it in the other room, you know. So the bellhop does that, bellman I should say and- and sure enough, no more problems. There was just something funny about that phone. And so he confirms everything Harry had told us about the coup plan, he confirms that E. Howard Hunt and James McCord were the top two CIA agents assigned to help Harry, not to give Harry orders but to help Harry. Which, by the way, E. Howard Hunt, who was a big racist, super resented. And- and then Bernard Barker was was E. Howard Hunt's assistant for the coup plan. And so he's confirming all this stuff, and- and- and then we start talking about the autopsy, and- and he says, you know, ‘Well, Bobby had me meet him in Washington, and then Bobby was up in the seventeenth fam- seventeenth floor family suite at Bethesda Naval Hospital. I was down in and just outside the autopsy room on a phone, and I was relaying Bobby Kennedy's orders to the White House physician Admiral Burkley, who was in the autopsy room the whole time, and then Admiral Burkley was giving orders to the autopsy physicians, sometimes through the commanding officer of Bethesda Naval Hospital. So sometimes it would go, you know, it would literally- Bobby is seventeenth floor with Jackie, he's on the phone with Nolan, Nolan's relaying what Bobby wants to Admiral Burkley the white house physician, Admiral Burkley is then either relaying those orders directly in some cases to the autopsy physicians or to the commanding officer-

 

Hartmann: Now- now-

 

Waldron: -to Bethesda,

 

Hartmann: If I-

 

Waldron: -who is then relaying Bobby's wishes to the autopsy physicians

 

Hartmann: If I could just-

 

Waldron: -pretty much said ‘Yeah, Bobby Kennedy controlled the autopsy’.

 

Hartmann: Right, and in fact, if I can just insert real quickly here, at that point in time, Bobby Kennedy believed he knew who had killed his brother.

 

Waldron: Oh right, right. And he was assuming-

 

Hartmann: And he thought he- and he thought he had some role in it.

 

Waldron: Well, Bobby Kennedy thought that yes, somebody somehow connected with the coup plan had turned part of the coup plan against JFK.

 

Hartmann: Right. And this had to be covered up no matter what, ‘cause this was still a live plan.

 

Waldron: And get this, Bobby Kennedy was part of the cover-up. As John Nolan confirmed, in a document you guys at the Kennedy Library in Massachusetts confirmed, and then I got twenty more pages, since September of 1963, a secret subcommittee of the national security council overseen by- on the orders of Bobby Kennedy, was making plans for what to do if an American official was assassinated and it seemed in any any way somehow related to Cuba. Because they were worried what if Castro found out about the coup plan and tried to retaliate, so since mid-September, this secret subcommittee has representatives from- from the State Department, from the CIA, from- from the department of the Army in the form of Alexander Haig and Joseph Califano, they were making these plans. So-

 

Hartmann: Right. In fact, again if i could interrupt, just to clarify, this- this is after the after the Cuban missile crisis, and their fear was that if Castro found out that Kennedy was going to try to assassinate him on December first 1963, number one he could thwart it, but number two, if it happened or if it got publicized, it could cause Russia to intervene again and it could lead to World War Three, it could lead to the extinction of the entire world, or a large chunk of it.

 

Waldron: Exactly. ‘Cause we had almost had World War Three the year before, and they worried about things like ‘well maybe the U.S., I mean maybe Cuba might blow up an airliner. But like i said, their biggest- one of their biggest worries was that ‘what if an American official got assassinated before the coup plan and there looked like there was some Cuban connection’, so Nolan, so so we've only got about 21, I believe it's 21 pages of what are probably close to a thousand pages of official U.S. government plans for what to do with American officials- we've got 21 pages, the rest of those are supposed to be released December 15th, of course they won't be. But John Nolan saw every one of those pages. He saw every one of them, so he's telling me, he said ‘look, that's why JFK’s body didn't have the autopsy done in Dallas’, and he- he gave me this example, and by the way you won't find Nolan's name in any of our books, he is referred to as a ‘Kennedy aide’. So he's not named, you know, because this is one of the first detailed times we're ever talking about this, his name is not in print.

 

Hartmann: He just passed away.

 

Waldron: Well, he- he passed away actually passed away, actually he passed away almost two years ago.

 

Hartmann: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought-

 

Waldron: But- but then- You know, then we had COVID, I didn't want to rush right out and do it, and I mentioned him on your show exactly one other time with no real detail. So- so what Nolan gave me this incredible example, he said ‘Look, what if- what if- what if a week before the coup plan, it looked like the U.S. ambassador to Panama had been shot on a street in Panama city in Panama, you know, was that Castro trying to send us a message? What would we need to do? Well, you sure wouldn't want the U.S. ambassador's autopsy done in a Panamanian hospital, you would want to take it to a secure military facility. You would want to, you know, you'd have where the autopsy would be done not by profit doctors but by military doctors subject to military commitment.

 

Hartmann: Once again, Lamar, the reason why they were doing this was they were afraid that if the American public found out that a- a U.S. official had been assassinated by- by Castro, that would create so much pressure on the Kennedy administration to attack Cuba in retaliation, much like we attacked Afghanistan after 9/11.

 

Waldron: Exactly.

 

That- that that- that attack on Cuba would be inevitable and that would provoke World War Three and that had to be stopped at all- at all-

 

Waldron: Exactly right, Tom. That's exactly right. So- so you know, you know, ‘cause- ‘cause Nolan said ‘Look, what if we attack Cuba then it turns out it was just a common mugging or- or the ambassador had been shot by a jealous lover’. So he said ‘We have to control the autopsy, we have to control all of the medical evidence, we have to control the release of any information about that autopsy. And there were other things too, I mean just in general, anything about that murder had to be filtered and carefully weighed in terms of national security. So I'll tell you again, one more thing about Nolan then we're going to move into somebody else secret that we've never named before.

 

[…]

 

Waldron: […] and all of this stuff, um- I- I- I should have mentioned this. So this is this is good for just some of your listeners, okay. Um- and so, um- when I flew up to Washington, you know, still expecting to, you know, probably meet John Nolan for lunch, and if not that, you know, go to his office at his huge law firm, the most powerful law firm in Washington, which means one of the most powerful law firms in all of America. Um- I- I- I had a piece of luggage, I- I've been getting ready to like buy some really nice luggage, and you told me not to, do you remember why you told me not to buy a nice luggage?

 

Hartmann: I don't.

 

Waldron: So you were traveling all over the world helping your- uh- with the children's homes that you worked with.

 

Hartmann: Yeah.

 

Waldron: Salem. And- and you said look, you know, most airports are fine, but some aren't, and- and the fancier and more expensive looking your luggage is- because I was going to get, you know, some designer luggage at Marshall's like on a huge markdown that they had, and he said, you know, if somebody's looking- because in those days, they didn't even match the tags, you were at baggage claim, you could pick up a bag and literally walk out. This is before 9/11, right?

 

 

Hartmann: Um-hum.

 

Waldron: And- and you told me, you said ‘look, the- the fancier your bag looks, the more likely it is to get stolen’.

 

Hartmann: Yeah.

 

Waldron: I'm like, ‘okay, that's good’, so I had the most old, beat up, big suitcase you can imagine, I had lots of books and documents and notes in it. In fact, it was so old and beat up that the two clasps that held it, one was like a combination clasp that still worked, the other one, there was no way to open that clasp with the combination at all, but if you hit that clasp at a certain spot it would spring open. So, I- first, there's like a big delay in the flight getting off. Then, get to Washington, you know, still plenty of time for Nolan, and- um- uh- we all get to wait on our bags on that flight. We wait an hour almost for our bags. Now, you traveled more than I, an hour's a long time to wait for your bags, right?

 

Hartmann: Um-hum. Yeah.

 

Waldron: Yeah, then the bags start coming down the conveyor belt, they have all been opened and closed and searched. I mean, there's like underwear and lingerie and nightgowns hanging out of the bags, some are half closed, some are, you know, fully closed, but you can just see, you know, there's clothes hanging out the sides. Somebody had literally searched every bag on that flight, including mine except for the fact they couldn't open that bad clasp, okay? So- so my bag was literally the only- the bag they really wanted to search was the only bag that couldn't get searched.

 

Hartmann: Well, you're assuming [laughs].

 

Waldron: Yeah, well, get- get this next story that it's just- just for the people-

 

Hartmann: Thirty seconds.

 

Waldron: -right now. So, so I go and check into the Grand Hyatt. I go to the private archive, the Assassination Archives and Research Center, I highly recommend, which is an online thing now, but in those days, it was old building near Ford Theater, had the old wire cage elevator. I go there and- and- and I decide I'm gonna, you know, save money, get some exercise. I'm gonna, you know, it's- it's not that cold, I'm gonna- I'm gonna walk back to the hotel. You know, do a little sightseeing on the way. I don't know Washington. The- the Assassination Archives and Research Center is not in the safest part of Washington, it's not a bad part. I take a wrong turn and I get lost, and I'm wondering around an increasingly run-down crime- uh- ridden parts of Washington. I don't- don't know where to go, someone starts following me. I get really worried I'm going to get mugged, I turn into an alley. At the opening of the alley as a well-dressed man in a trench coat in a business suit, middle age, he says ‘the Grand Hyatt, go two blocks this way and then take a right and go another block’

 

Hartmann: [laughs] Amazing.

 

[...]

 

Hartmann: […] Um, it's- So, lamar pick up the story.

 

Waldron: So- so- so two more crucial things about Nolan. So, one of the big controversies about the autopsy is that in Dallas, the Dallas doctors- when a bullet wound is made in the body, it generally- you have a small entrance wound, and the bullet expands inside the body, and- and you have a large exit wound. So in Dallas, the doctors saw what- what you know, at least one of them said was- was a small entrance wound. It basically- just below his Adam's apple in the hollow of his throat, okay. And JFK was having trouble breathing because half of his brain had been blown out, so they did a small two to three centimeter tracheotomy incision over that- that small bullet hole. So you can still tell it was a bullet hole, but there was a small tracheostomy incision to try desperate- to try to aid JFK's breathing. When the body- when the official autopsy started at Bethesda and there- there's a photograph of JFK's body, that two to three centimeter little neat tracheotomy incision over the small bullet hole had been at least doubled in size, almost tripled in size, and now instead of being a neat little incision that a doctor had carefully done, it's this huge jagged wound, almost as if, as many people pointed out, someone had gone into that wound and enlarged it looking for the bullet that made that wound, okay. So, but- but the Dallas autopsy doctors, that wound was so big- I'm sorry, the Bethesda autopsy doctors ‘cause there were no Dallas autopsy doctors, the three main Bethesda autopsy doctors, they didn't even know there was a bullet wound there, there was just this big gaping wound they assumed was a- a crude quickly done tracheotomy thing that was- that was, you know, two or three times the size it was in Dallas, and so what was that all about? Yeah, when was that made? ‘cause they didn't make it at the autopsy, it was that way when the autopsy- the official autopsy started. So I asked John Nolan, I said ‘Look, some investigators and writers have- have theorized that there was a very brief and rushed national security autopsy before the main autopsy’, the official autopsy which, at that time, Oswald was still alive, so you know, the official autopsy would probably wind up being used at Oswald's trial. You know, that's- that's an official legal thing. But- but so I- I just asked John Nolan ‘Was there- was there like a little brief unofficial national security autopsy before the main autopsy got- doctors got there, and before, you know, the official autopsy began’, and- and- and John Nolan, being one of America's top lawyers, said- he didn't say ‘Well, what's the national security autopsy?’, he didn't say ‘No, there was no national security autopsy’, he said ‘Well, you know, there were just so many national security considerations that- that's- that's- that's- that's why things had to be done a certain way’. And he said ‘It was part of all those plans we had been making, you know, in case an American official was assassinated’. So I think to me, yeah he- he didn't deny it, and-

 

Hartmann: And- and-

 

Waldron: -he talked about the national- so yeah, there was a brief national security autopsy […]

 

[...]

 

Hartmann: […] Lamar Waldron, the- the guy that the Chicago tribune called one of the- one of the best investigative journalists in the United States. He's the author of numerous books, he and I together wrote Ultimate Sacrifice and Legacy of Secrecy about the Kennedy Assassination, Legacy of Secrecy also goes into the Bobby Kennedy and- and Martin Luther King assassinations, and his most recent book on this, which he did himself, which is like the most updated version of all this is titled Watergate: The Hidden History- excuse me, The- The Hidden History of the JFK Assassination, he also wrote Watergate: The Hidden History which is a brilliant book, maybe you're noticing a theme here. So- so just to recap very quickly, we have a coup plot against Castro that was hatched in 1963 after the Bay Of Pigs, after the Cuban missile crisis. This is with Juan Almeida, the commander of the Cuban army, who has said he will assist in taking out Castro, and he will help take over the country if the U.S. will provide him with support. He cuts this deal with Bobby Kennedy himself through the intermediary of Harry Williams, who Lamar and I interviewed extensively on- on a couple of occasions, on multiple occasions actually. The- the coup plot is- is ongoing. They were going to have a Soviet-associated patsy take the credit for the assassination of Castro in Cuba on December 1st 1963, and then I don't know, I'm- I’m sure I'm missing- Oh, and then we talked to Dean Rusk and he confirmed that this was- was going on, he was Kennedy’s Secretary of State. We talked to Harry Williams, he confirmed it. Lamar was talking about talking with John Nolan who was Bobby Kennedy's closest aide, best friend or one of his best friends, and he confirmed that there was actually essential or- or sort of confirmed that there was essentially a cover-up. Lamar, my recollection is that I found a document in the Kennedy Library after I met with Dave Powers, you know, who was in the car behind Kennedy, he was Kennedy's right-hand man.

 

Waldron: Right that- that- that was- that was the first page-

 

Hartmann: And it had Al Haig’s name on it.

 

Waldron: -the Cuba contingency plan. So those are those plans Bobby had the secret subcommittee the national surety council start making in September. Later on, I got like 20 more pages from an army-

 

Hartmann: Right, and so this plan was in place in case Castro got wind of this new attempt to assassinate him on December 1st 1963 if he heard about it in advance and- and decided to take revenge on the United States, by killing our ambassador to Panama was the example John Nolan gave you-

 

Waldron: Exactly.

 

Hartmann: -then we would- we would cover that up by getting that ambassador's body to Washington DC and essentially mutilating it in an autopsy if necessary-

 

Waldron: Well-

 

Hartmann: -and controlling all the information.

 

Waldron: Exactly. Because the goal would be, as Nolan explained, and- and then the documents indicate but Nolan just, you know, was bluntly explained, he said ‘Look, you know, the point is you- you had to control the flow of information to keep the- the U.S. president from being forced into an invasion of Cuba’.

 

Hartmann: Correct.

 

Waldron: You know, and until you-

 

Hartmann: By the American public.

 

Waldron: -this, you know.

 

Hartmann: Right. Right, if the word got out the Castro just killed the American ambassador to Panama, the- the pressure for another invasion of Cuba would be so great, and John Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy were both concerned that, number one, that would get in the way of their- their December 1st ‘63 effort to kill Castro, and number two, it could provoke World War Three, Russia would intervene.

 

Waldron: Exactly. So we've got so close, so close to that-

 

Hartmann: Right. So they- so they change the entrance wound in the front of Kennedy’s throat to an exit wound to make it look like he was shot from behind-

 

Waldron: Well, well, they didn’t- they didn’t actually, I mean, they were ba- I mean, from- from everything I have read since, couple to what Nolan said, someone was literally- and, you know, they may have only had 15 or 20 minutes, people should know that the honor guard that's supposed to escort JFK's- the hearse with JFK's body from Air Force One to- to Bethesda lost it, so there- there are, you know, 30, 45 minutes like totally unaccounted for, there are all these different times as to when the autopsy supposedly started, so it looks like- so- so they weren't mutilating it just to hi- I mean, somebody had a very limited amount of time, and so I- I think they were literally- you know, so it was a little entrance wound, little tracheotomy incision, they wanted to see where that bullet went.

 

Hartmann: Yeah.

 

Waldron: You know. So- so that's what, you know, so that- that was- so the fact that it was horribly mutilated and large was kind of a byproduct, and so the autopsy doctors announced they didn't even know there was a wound in the front of the throat, you know they didn't find that out until Sunday. […]

 

[Eddy Bainbridge]

Hi Micah,

I find the concept of the contingency plan extremely persuasive, especially because Larry Hancock is confirming its existence (if not its significance). Your recent posting of an early autopsy (Dr Kemp Clark?) article also fits with the idea of a pre-autopsy to remove frontal shot evidence. 

 

I would like to know your view of the strength of frontal throat shot evidence.  To me it comes in comes packages ; Evidence of a frontal shot, and highly unpersuasive evidence of a rear shot capable of exiting at the throat. Are you persuaded by a bullet hitting the neck and ricocheting into the chest and damaging the lungs (A Robert Prudhomme view I remember)?

[Mervyn Hagger]

Bobby knew he was playing a dangerous game managing the SGA (Augmented), and the Mafia boss in New Orleans simply seized the opportunity and bumped off his brother Jack.

When that happened Bobby had his legs cut from underneath him.

Not only that, he could not explain what he was doing and what AMWORLD was all about. Bobby Kennedy was caught in the web of lies spun by his brother JFK and powerless to do anything about his murder.

LBJ and Hoover knew what RFK was up to in Miami, and they had to slam a lid on this mess as fast as possible.

They called it the Warren Report, and only a few diehards like David Von Pein promote its rubbish. Whether David really believes it depends upon whether he is being paid to say that he does. After all, the CIA needs someone to act as their defender of nonsense, and David is doing a darn good job.

[Micah Mileto]

7 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Micah,

I find the concept of the contingency plan extremely persuasive, especially because Larry Hancock is confirming its existence (if not its significance). Your recent posting of an early autopsy (Dr Kemp Clark?) article also fits with the idea of a pre-autopsy to remove frontal shot evidence. 

 

I would like to know your view of the strength of frontal throat shot evidence.  To me it comes in comes packages ; Evidence of a frontal shot, and highly unpersuasive evidence of a rear shot capable of exiting at the throat. Are you persuaded by a bullet hitting the neck and ricocheting into the chest and damaging the lungs (A Robert Prudhomme view I remember)?

The last news article I posted claimed that Kennedy was covered in "an expendable paper shroud" at Parkland and that his head was wrapped in "several plastic bags".

 

Dr. Clark said he didn't see the throat wound before the tracheotomy was begun.

 

Even though I have spent years cataloging evidence for a frontal shot, I am still more interested in a theory like Pat Speer with all shots coming from behind. Who knows, maybe it could've been geometrically possible for a single shooter to cause all wounds by having both high and low velocity ammunition in the chamber of an automatic weapon. 

[Eddy Bainbridge]

Hi Micah, thankyou for replying. My own view is that Pat Speer's analysis to demonstrate a rear headshot is very convincing. His view that there were two rear headshots gets sketchy , and his bouncing head theory is a very hard sell. If you are unconvinced by Z-film alteration then it is fair to say Mr Speers view is a fairly coherent explanation. I find too many plausible pieces of evidence that are incompatible with the extant Z film.

[Micah Mileto]

On 8/19/2023 at 2:40 PM, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Micah, thankyou for replying. My own view is that Pat Speer's analysis to demonstrate a rear headshot is very convincing. His view that there were two rear headshots gets sketchy , and his bouncing head theory is a very hard sell. If you are unconvinced by Z-film alteration then it is fair to say Mr Speers view is a fairly coherent explanation. I find too many plausible pieces of evidence that are incompatible with the extant Z film.

What's harder for you to accept, an EOP entrance wound, a temporal-parietal tangential wound, or the Harper fragment not being occipital bone?

[Eddy Bainbridge]

That's a tough set of questions!

I tend to believe the Autopsy Doctors found an entrance headwound where they said they did . I think the location is challenged because the extant Z film doesn't make sense at that location, if Kennedy's head was slumped on impact then the location makes sense.

The tangential wound theory to me is really weak. Yes I have seen the photos of tangential wounds, so I can accept the possibility, I can't see any other strong evidence. I find the blurry location supposedly identified for such a wound very unconvincing and the need to ignore swathes of eyewitnesses. The apparent skull flap doesn't aid the theory.

On the Harper Fragment I am very impressed by John Hunt's work on this. The HSCA expert discussion on its location is entirely unhelpful, except that it shows the Harper fragment's location is not persuasively identified. Again referring to my doubts about the Z film; the location of the Fragment makes more sense if it was ejected from the rear of the head whilst JFK was face down. A good case can be made that the head explosion was forcefully upwards and back, with a shower of debris forwards.

I would very much like to know your views on the same questions?

My additional question is : What do you make of the apparent fragment trail from front to back on the  head xray?

[Michael Crane]

Holy Moly,

Just stumbled onto this thread.

16 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

My additional question is : What do you make of the apparent fragment trail from front to back on the  head xray?

It's my position that we cannot discount what Jerrol Custer said about Ebersole ordering him to tape fragments to the x-rays.

*And hey....what about that 6.5 fragment?

Edited September 4, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Eddy Bainbridge]

3 minutes ago, Michael Crane said:

Holy Moly,

Just stumbled onto this thread.

It's my position that we cannot discount what Jerrol Custer said about Ebersole ordering him to tape fragments to the x-rays.

*And hey....what that 6.5 fragment?

Hi Michael, I strongly recommend you read what Pat Speer has to say about this fragment on his website. I think it is extremely significant as evidence of a rear head shot. It also disappoints me that Jim DiEugenio doesn't appear to give credence to Pat's explanation of its location near the eye socket (not stuck on the back). They are two important views on the assassination and it does not reflect well on whoever is wrong about this (in my view Jim D).