The Back Wound

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

Just curious. Where is the testimony of the [Connallys] in these discussions? If I recall correctly, they both said the [Governor] was hit AFTER JFK, not simultaneously. These seem to have been totally eliminated from your arguments. What else has been left out?

Are you saying they weren't there? Maybe you think they fabricated their stories to create book opportunities??

Well for heaven's sake, Bob, those two links you're referring to are just two small parts in my "Assassination Arguments" series. Quite obviously, those links aren't meant to cover everything connected to the JFK case.

I posted those links because they contained some info about the "other bullets" that allegedly were found after the assassination (which was the sub-topic that this thread had drifted into at that particular moment). So I don't know why you would expect to find information about John or Nellie Connally in those two links.

Now, if you want to talk specifically about the Connallys, I've got lots of links to accommodate you. Here are just a few examples:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/What Did John Connally See?

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1257.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-900.html

http://amazon.com/Let's Talk About John Connally---He Was Both The BEST And WORST Witness

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by David Von Pein

[Bob Ness]

11 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Well for heaven's sake, Bob, those two links you're referring to are just two small parts in my "Assassination Arguments" series. Quite obviously, those links aren't meant to cover everything connected to the JFK case.

 

Uh yeah. Not certain what I was thinking... OT

[Gil Jesus]

22 hours ago, Eddy Bainbridge said:

Hi Gil, I found your collection of evidence very impressive but I have a question. You propose that Hulme's manipulated the measuring to change the position of the back wound , but you also state he changed the story after the autopsy when he had spoken to Perry. Are you saying he changed his measurements after the autopsy? or are you saying he recorded the measurements in the autopsy knowing what he was trying to hide?

He didn't change the story after autopsy, that was my attempt at sarcasm. To think Humes would see a tracheostomy, not wonder why it was done and then not call Dr. Perry until the next day when the body was gone, is silly. The original story is that he didn't know about the throat wound until Saturday. That's a lie. Parkland nurse Audrey Bell told the ARRB that Dr. Perry told her he was up most of the night of the assassination with "Bethesda" arguing over whether the wound was an entrance wound or an exit wound.

https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/audrey-bell-arrb-3_20_97.mp4

In his Warren Commission testimony, Perry slipped and said that he spoke to Humes on Friday before Arlen Specter led him to Saturday morning.

Mr. PERRY. Dr. Humes called me twice on Friday afternoon  separated by about 30 minute intervals as I recall. The first one, I somehow think I recall the first one must have been around 1500 hours, but I'm not real sure about that. I'm not positive about that at all, actually.

Mr. SPECTER. Could it have been Saturday morning ? ( 6 H 16 )

At another time Perry testifies that he thought he spoke to Dr. Humes on Friday, but now "understands" it was on Saturday.

"I was under the initial impression that I talked to him on Friday, but I understand it was on Saturday." ( 3 H 380 )

Humes knew about the throat wound Friday evening when he spoke with Dr. Perry. Yes, he recorded the measurements in the autopsy knowing what he was trying to hide, IMO. That's why the conflict with Dr. Perry. Humes called Perry twice on Saturday morning and suddenly Perry didn't have anything to say at the next press conference.

https://gil-jesus.com/wound-of-entry/

Dr. Perry was caught between the truth and a lie and knew it was a position from which he could not win.

So publicly he gave into the lie while privately holding on to the truth.