Following the Science: The Bevelling Evidence / Proof of a Frontal Head Shot

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

... An entrance wound in the right front near the hairline is evident as described by autopsy witnesses ....

 

I'm a little confused by this, who were those witnesses ?

[Gil Jesus]

2 minutes ago, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

I'm a little confused by this, who were those witnesses ?

James Curtis Jenkins also photographs showing an entrance wound at the hairline were seen by Dennis David and WH photographer Joe O'Donnell.

[Gerry Down]

4 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

James Curtis Jenkins also photographs showing an entrance wound at the hairline were seen by Dennis David and WH photographer Joe O'Donnell.

Mortician Robinson saw this hole. He said this was a small exit wound of one of the many small shards of the bullet that passed from the back to the front of JFKs head. Robinson said he put some wax there to fill it in it was so small.

[David Josephs]

On 2/4/2023 at 8:37 PM, Pat Speer said:

This is what they said happened, and their statements are supported by the autopsy photos, which show the back of the head to be mobile, and the x-rays, which show numerous fractures on the back of the head. 

Based on what you are saying Pat, when the craniotomy process reaches the point they saw the bone off, the brain would just "fall out" since there'd be no bone to hold it in...

What Humes or some other person did to JFK between 6:30 and 8pm is one of the greatest crimes in american history

Gee Pat, what happened to that hour?

Mr. SPECTER - What time did the autopsy start approximately?
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.

Mr. CORNWELL. Approximately what time of the day or night did the autopsy begin?
Dr. HUMES. well, the President's body, as I recall, arrived about 7:30 or 7:35 the evening

BY MR. GUNN:
Q. Dr. Humes, when did you first see the body of President Kennedy?
A. 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.

 

I'm sure you know this document... and that another says 6:30 and the FBI says 7:17...  or are you going to argue about this evidence too?  DO you actually want to debate about what they did to JFK in that hour and change?

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by David Josephs

[Bill Brown]

 

In 1967 the autopsy pathologists (Humes, Boswell, and Finck), the acting chief of radiology (Ebersole) and one of the autopsy photographers (Stringer) viewed the autopsy photographs and/or X-rays and confirmed the photos and X-rays were accurate in the portrayal of the wounds of the President.

The Clark Panel studied the autopsy X-rays and photos and concluded that the head was struck only once and from above and behind.

The Rockefeller Commission studied the autopsy X-rays and photos and concluded that the head was struck only once and from behind.

The HSCA forensic panel studied the autopsy X-rays and photos (and interviewed the Kennedy autopsy personnel in order to verify the validity of the photos and X-rays) and concluded that the head was struck once and only from behind.

 

[David Josephs]

On 2/5/2023 at 6:04 AM, Jean Paul Ceulemans said:

I'm a little confused by this, who were those witnesses ?

I posted McClellend, here is Crenshaw and Malcolm

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by David Josephs

[David Josephs]

 

 

 

Wonder which bullet this is talking about, in addition to what they claimed was CE399

"Lodged behind the President's ear"... yet the xrays showed no metal in the body.  

How dat?

 

 

And if one looks again at the craniotomy process, the scalp is reflected forward and back..

Just like this orientation...  I couldn't put the image underneath, at the extreme back of the head due to photographic limitations.. in reality I would rotate the image toward me in a 3D fashion so the hole is more to the rear than I can depict here

HUMES: To better examine the situation with regard to the skull, at this time, Boswell and I extended the lacerations of the scalp which were at the margins of this wound, down in the direction of both of the President's ears. 

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by David Josephs

[Jonathan Cohen]

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

 

Orienting the photo this way appears to line up the damage precisely with the skull flap on the right side of the head as seen in the Zapruder film, as well as the area of missing bone seen in the x-rays. So what's the issue?

[Pat Speer]

I've been through this stuff literally dozens of times on this forum, and cover it on my website. 

You seem to have mistaken what the doctors said...that pieces of bone fell to the table as they reflected the scalp--with the brain falling out on the table as they reflected the scalp.

You also accept Mantik's orientation of the mystery photo, which is nonsense. There was no massive hole on the left side of the back of the head. He needs it to be there so he can pretend the Harper fragment is occipital. But there is no early eyewitness evidence for such a hole, and such a hole is most certainly not apparent on the photos and x-rays. 

I just skipped over it because well, like I said, I've been through this stuff dozens of times before, but it appears as well that you're pretending there are witnesses who saw an entrance wound above the right eye. This is just not true. McClelland maintained that he saw no such hole, but later came to suspect there was such a hole that was hidden in the hair. And he came to suspect this not because he thought the back of the head was blown out from a frontal entry, but because his viewing of the Zapruder film made him suspect there was a frontal entry. As far as the others cited by Mantik et al, they were witnesses trying to  recall what they saw in the photos decades earlier, or were repeating what they were told decades earlier. There is not one mention of an entrance wound on the front of the head within the 1963-1964 reports and testimony, aside from Father Huber's comment about something he saw, that he later said was blood. There's no there there. 

[David Josephs]

On 2/5/2023 at 2:40 PM, Pat Speer said:

You seem to have mistaken what the doctors said...that pieces of bone fell to the table as they reflected the scalp--with the brain falling out on the table as they reflected the scalp.

When Pat... what time are you talking about... for surely you are aware of the activities that transpired prior to the 8pm start of the autopsy....

You tell me Pat, what is CRENSHAW pointing to in the image above... his butt?

oh and btw - IT WAS A COVER-UP... you think there will be an abundance of evidence stating he was shot in the head from the front...  You know what Todd did to Perry about the throat wound...

Please do play these silly games of "What are you talking about".. since you think everything is on the up-and-up...  explain that TERRIBLE WOUND over his left eye and to the anatomical left... oh, and DARK means gone...  and explain why FATHER HUBER would lie about it?

You also going to work on Dennis David and O'Connor as well...  so many non-involved low level people and the doctors at Parkland saying the same thing... and all you have is that time has passed so they are wrong?   

 

Edited August 22, 2023 by David Josephs

[Pat Speer]

50 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

When Pat... what time are you talking about... for surely you are aware of the activities that transpired prior to the 8pm start of the autopsy....

You tell me Pat, what is CRENSHAW pointing to in the image above... his butt?

oh and btw - IT WAS A COVER-UP... you think there will be an abundance of evidence stating he was shot in the head from the front...  You know what Todd did to Perry about the throat wound...

Please do play these silly games of "What are you talking about".. since you think everything is on the up-and-up...  explain that TERRIBLE WOUND over his left eye and to the anatomical left... oh, and DARK means gone...  and explain why FATHER HUBER would lie about it?

You also going to work on Dennis David and O'Connor as well...  so many non-involved low level people and the doctors at Parkland saying the same thing... and all you have is that time has passed so they are wrong?   

Crenshaw did not see an entrance wound. He surmised there was an entrance wound. As stated, we've been over this before ad nauseam. 

As far as the problems with the timeline...Jenkins et al insisted there was no pre-surgery or whatever. It did not happen. This was concocted by Horne to sell his evolution of Lifton's theory, which Lifton himself. rejected. In Horne's desperation to sell this theory, moreover, he cites Tom Robinson, who told the HSCA he saw an orange-sized hole on the back of the head...at the end of the autopsy. He did not specify this to the ARRB, however, and Horne pretends it was at the beginning of the autopsy. He even acknowledges that Robinson's co-worker saw an orange-sized hole on the back of the head at the end of the autopsy. But--oh my--it doesn't occur to him that they were talking about the same hole? I mean, what does he think happened to the bones brought in mid-way through the autopsy? 

The reconstruction of the skull by the Gawler's people, moreover, was a cosmetic one, not a forensic one. They arranged the bones to simulate an undamaged skull, and hid the remaining gap by placing it at the back of the head. They thought there might be a public viewing, and a giant hole on the top of the President's head would have been unacceptable. 

Edited February 5, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Micah Mileto]

The official interpretation of the skull photographs, with an intact entry and exit hole in the intact skull cannot be true unless the some parts of the back of the skull were somehow separated and then placed back in after the brain removal procedure but before the taking of the photographs The proposed location of the beveled entrance and exit holes in the skull are only 5 inches apart. Therefore the HSCA apparently claimed that Kennedy's whole brain fit through a 5 inch-wide hole, and that is too small.

In a brain removal procedure, not only is adequate room required to sever the brainstem and spinal cord, but also to delicately cut the tentorium cerebelli as well as the cranial nerves. From seeing several medical sources, it would seem like there are three ways you can cut a skull wide enough to remove the brain: a. a lot of the back of the skull is separated, b. a lot of the front of the skull is separated, c. a good portion of both is separated. The HSCA's intended geometry of this photograph apparently doesn't allow for enough room to lift or rotate the brain.

Example: https://i.imgur.com/4nyJKxy.jpg

The required minimal size for a proper skull cavity would envelop the official locations of the wounds in the photographs.

I took this model skull and drew an outline representing the absolute maximum size skull cavity that could exist while still being consistent with the official HSCA interpretation of the autopsy skull photographs: https://imgur.com/a/9UMt94M Clearly, this is too small to lift or even rotate the official brain through. Removing a brain requires enough space to fit your hands underneath the brain.

It really does seem incontrovertible that 5 inches is too small. The skull cavity in these images must be larger than the HSCA theorized. The only way the HSCA's interpretation of these photographs could be correct is if a portion of the back of the skull had been placed back in prior to photography.

Edited February 5, 2023 by Micah Mileto

[Micah Mileto]

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

 

Pockets of air trapped between tissues can create black spots on x-rays - those black spots do not necessarily mean missing tissue.

https://www.ajronline.org/toc/ajr/154/3

https://www.ajronline.org/doi/pdf/10.2214/ajr.154.3.2106206

[David Josephs]

1 minute ago, Pat Speer said:

Crenshaw did not see an entrance wound. He surmised there was an entrance wound. As stated, we've been over this before ad nauseam.

Got it Pat...  thanks for clarifying... . "He surmised it", right. Because - like - he wasn't inches from the man.  Ya see Pat, this isn't about whether you believe or not...  but hey, Dennis David, O'Connor and everyone else who was there and drew a wound in the right temple... not the left, not the ear, not the face, but all of them place it at the right temple... are all wrong according to you because you think the shots came from behind with Oswald at the trigger...

Thanks for clarifying your POV.      And that bullet lodged behind the ear... just another mistake right?  3 shots 2 hits and the magic bullet...  O'Connor's bullet removed from the intercostals, Ebersol copying and altering xrays to remove evidence of a frontal shot... smoke and mirrors and more lies...  the Nix, Muchmore and Zapruder films, and Moorman's photo... all evidence of an EOP wound...   and not the in your face obviousness of a shot to the right temple...

Attacking Horne sure does make your explanations and work that much more persuasive, and oodles less biased.

5 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

he cites Tom Robinson

You mean this Tom Robinson?  What's that say about a wound in the temple?  He selling a book too or trying to cement his place in history?

 

And of course David Mawell, Jeremy Gunn & Tim Wray were selling snake oil as well

-Visible damage to skull caused by bullet or bullets (as opposed to damage caused by pathologists):
‘Robinson described 3 locations of wounds: 
-he saw 2 or 3 small perforations or holes in the right cheek during embalming, when formaldehyde seeped through these small wounds and slight discoloration began to occur (and executed a drawing of three slits, or holes, in the right cheek of the President on a photocopy of a frontal photograph of the President);
-he described a “blow-out” which consisted of a flap of skin in the right temple of the President’s head, which he believed to be an exit wound based on conversations he heard in the morgue amongst the pathologists (and executed two drawings of this right temporal defect on both a photocopy of a right lateral photograph of the President, and on a right lateral anatomy diagram of the human skull);
-he described a large, open head wound in the back of the President’s head, centrally located right between the ears, where the bone was gone, as well as some scalp. He related his opinion that this wound in the back of the President’s head was an entry wound occuring from a bullet fired from behind, based on conversations he heard in the morgue among the pathologists. (Robinson executed two drawings of the hole in the back of the President’s head, one on an anatomy drawing of the posterior skull, and one on an anatomy drawing of the lateral skull. On the annotated lateral skull drawing, the wound in the rear of the head is much larger than the wound in the right temple.)

Yes indeed Pat, those crack pathologists who performed that immaculate autopsy... were SURE the shots had come from behind, at the NAVAL hospital, with unnamed brass shouting direction of what to do and not to do.

What Fantasy Island episode did you get all this from ?

And his HSCA testimony... wonder why they didn't call him to the WC for testimony, huh? 

[David Josephs]

20 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Pockets of air trapped between tissues can create black spots on x-rays - those black spots do not necessarily mean missing tissue.

Thanks Micah... yes very true.   

At the same time, black on an xray GENERALLY suggests that something is missing, especially if the xray is of a bony structure like the skull, and the amount of black is significantly large.

And since they were all supposed to be fully jacketed bullets.. what's with the fragment trail from temple to rear?