The Clean Cut Throat Wound

[Gerry Down]

Humes probably saw something like it on the recent James Bond movie and his imagination ran wild. 

[Michael Griffith]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

I don't see what all the fuss is about.

At the autopsy the autopsy doctors couldn't find an exit point for the back wound. LNers posit this is because the back muscles of JFK had swelled and were not positioned at the autopsy in such a way as they were at Z224 when JFKs right arm was in a raised position. Thereofore the autopsy doctors failed to mimick and trace the bullet path at the autopsy.

Humes completed the autopsy and handed the body over to the morticians. Everyone present, including Greer and the FBI agents thought no exit point had been found for the bullet.

Then Humes phones Dr. Perry and Perry reveals the throat wound was a gunshot wound and only then Humes realizes the back wound had exited out the throat. But by then the body had been handed over to the morticians. 

Humes never wrote in the autopsy report that it was only after handing the body over to the morticians that he realized he had made a mistake at the autopsy. And naturally did not want to include that mistake in the autopsy report and so doesn't include it. 

You know this stuff is bogus and that it's already been answered, but you just keep repeating it. Again, for the fourth or fifth time, Boswell admitted to the ARRB that they were able to probe the back wound after they removed the chest organs. Boswell said that the probing was difficult before then because of the muscles, but that they were able to "get at it" once they removed the chest organs.

And you know, because I have personally documented this in replies to you, that Dr. Karnei noted that the pathologists positioned the body "every which way" while doing the probing. He also noted that the men around the table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity. That's where the wound ended. But you will never admit this but will float farcical theories rather than accept this powerful evidence. 

You also know that after taking over the probing from Humes and spending a long time probing the wound himself, Dr. Finck, who was a board-certified forensic pathologist, proclaimed "this wound has no exit." That's when Sibert called Dallas to see if they had found a bullet.

You just cast aside the numerous eyewitness accounts that document that the pathologists absolutely, positively established that the back wound had no exit point at the autopsy. You cite the third draft of the autopsy report and dismiss all these independent, mutually corroborating accounts. 

You're still repeating the myth that Humes, Boswell, and Finck didn't know about the throat wound until after the autopsy report??? Seriously? Who are you people? Why do you get on public boards and repeat myths that have been debunked for years?

When are you folks going to deal with Doug Horne's documentation that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a bullet exiting the throat? When? You'll find it in chapter 11 of Inside the ARRB, Volume 3. Horne spends 26 pages documenting this.

[Gerry Down]

17 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

You're still repeating the myth that Humes, Boswell, and Finck didn't know about the throat wound until after the autopsy report??? Seriously? Who are you people? Why do you get on public boards and repeat myths that have been debunked for years?

That's probably part of the reason why Humes had to burn the autopsy notes. The notes showed they missed the throat wound and so he would not want a record of it.

The autopsy doctors made a mistake during the autopsy itself. They missed the throat wound and consequently misinterpreted the back wound. And so alot of the cover up that is going on here is simply the doctors trying to hide their own mistakes. It has nothing to do with a conspiracy in Dealey Plaza. 

[Bill Brown]

2 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

I think that you will find that alot of researchers will believe that JFK might have been whisked away under darkness in a helicopter parked next to Air Force One.

 

Yes and the same "researchers" believe there were as many as ten shots fired in Dealey Plaza and that Kennedy was hit in the back by a bullet which penetrated only two inches into soft tissue.

 

[Bill Brown]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

Just admit you had no clue about this until my prior house guest Cliff schooled you.  It’s ok.  

 

I read the Sibert & O'Neill Report for the first time almost twenty years ago, early 2000s.  Nowhere in that report does it state that Humes and the others thought Kennedy was struck by a high tech weapon firing ice bullets.

So yes, I had no clue about the stark raving mad ideas in the head of another forum member here who spouts nonsense and then backpedals when called out on it.

 

[Greg Doudna]

On 6/3/2023 at 8:09 AM, Michael Griffith said:

When are you folks going to deal credibly with the fact that we now know that on the night of the autopsy, the autopsy doctors absolutely, positively knew that the back wound had no exit point?

-- Dr. Robert Karnei was a resident surgeon at Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1963 and witnessed the autopsy. In a 1991 recorded interview, Karnei said the autopsy doctors positioned the body in multiple ways to facilitate the probing of the back wound, and that “the men” who saw the probing commented that they could see the end of the finger and then the end of the probe “from inside the empty chest”! He added that the pathologists worked “all night long with the probes” to find the bullet’s path through the body:

          They did have the body--trying to sit it up and trying to get that probe to go. . . .

          Q: Why didn't they turn the body over?

          A: Well, they did. They tried every which way to go ahead, and try to move it around. . . .

          Q: But this was after the Y incision?

          A: Yes. The men described being able to see the end of the finger and the probe from inside the empty chest.

          They were working all night long with probes trying to make out where that bullet was going on the back there. (p. 10)

In his 3/10/97 ARRB interview, Karnei said that by around midnight the autopsy doctors "had not found a bullet track through the body, nor had they found an exit wound for the entry in the shoulder" (p. 001476).

In his 8/27/77 HSCA interview, Karnei said that he recalled the autopsy doctors "putting the probe in and taking pictures" (p. 5). Karnei was not the only witness who saw pictures taken of the probing, but those pictures were never included in the official collection of the autopsy materials. I think we all know why.

Karnei also told the HSCA that he saw "the chest cavity opened and watched the removal of the organs," and that after this he saw Finck "working with a probe and arranging for photographs" (p. 6). This is another reference that indicates photos were taken of the probing.

-- James Jenkins, a medical technician who assisted Dr. Boswell during the autopsy, stated in his 8/29/1977 HSCA interview that Dr. James Humes, the chief autopsy pathologist, found that the bullet tract had not "penetrated into the chest" and that Humes had been able to "reach the end of the wound." Jenkins specified that the back wound "was very shallow" and that "it didn't enter the peritoneal cavity [the chest cavity]. He noted that there was quite a “controversy” because the doctors “couldn’t prove the bullet came into the chest cavity” even though they probed the back wound “extensively” (pp. 5, 7, 10-11, 13).

Jenkins added that at around the time of the probing "they repeatedly took x-rays of the area” (p. 8 ). For obvious reasons, those x-rays were not included in the official collection of the autopsy materials.

In a 1979 filmed interview, Jenkins said the following:

          Commander Humes put his finger in it, and, you know, said that ... he could probe the bottom of it with his finger. . . . I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura. You could actually see where it was making an indentation. . . . It was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity.

-- In his 7/16/96 ARRB interview, autopsy photographer John Stringer said that the back wound was probed and that the probe did not come out of the neck:

          Q: Was the probe put into the neck, or did it come of the neck?

          A: It was put into the back part.

          Q: The back of the body. And then did the probe come out the neck?

          A: No. (p. 73)

-- FBI Special Agent Francis O'Neill, who was in the autopsy room during the entire autopsy, revealed in his 9/12/97 ARRB interview that at the end of the autopsy, there was no doubt in anyone's mind that the bullet that was found in Dallas had fallen out of the back wound:

          There was not the slightest doubt when we left there that the bullet found on the stretcher in Dallas was the bullet which worked its way out through external cardiac massage. And the doctor said, since the body had not been turned over in Dallas, “External cardiac massage was conducted on the president, and the bullet worked its way out."

          There was not the slightest doubt, not a scintilla of doubt whatsoever, that this is what occurred. In fact, during the latter part of it and when the examination was completed, the doctor says, "Well, that explains it.” Because Jim [Sibert] had gone out, called the laboratory, learned about the bullet, came back in.

          Because I was closer to the President’s body than I am to you, and you’re only about a foot and a half away or two feet away. And viewing them with the surgical probe and with their fingers, there was absolutely no point of exit and they couldn’t go any further. And that presented a problem, one heck of a problem. And that’s why Jim went out and called. . . .

          Q: You previously made reference to attempts to probe that wound. Did you ever see any kind of metal object used to probe that wound?

          A: Yes. They used a metal probe, in addition to their fingers. . . . In the back, they probed it to a point where they could not probe any further. In other words, it did not go any further. (pp. 30-31)

O'Neill stated in his 11/8/78 HSCA affidavit that "Humes and Boswell couldn't locate an outlet for the bullet that entered the back." That's when Sibert left to call the FBI lab to see if "any extra bullets existed." He added, "I know for a fact that when the autopsy was complete, there was no doubt in anyone's mind in attendance at the autopsy that the bullet found on the stretcher in Dallas came out of JFK's body," i.e., out of the back wound (p. 000573).

O’Neill also offered this gem of an observation: "I do not see how the bullet that entered below the shoulder could have come out the front of the throat" (p. 000575).

-- FBI Special Agent James Sibert, who was at the autopsy with O’Neill, echoed O’Neill in his 9/11/97 ARRB interview. Sibert said he called Killion to see if any bullets had been found because the autopsy doctors said the back wound had no exit point:

          Q: Can you tell me, was the phone call made to Mr. Killion before or after the body was unloaded from the casket?

          A: Oh, that was after the body was removed; it was on the autopsy table, and the autopsy was in progress. Because the reason I made that call was that the pathologists said, "There’s no exit to this back wound,” and probed it with rubber glove and a chrome probe. (p. 59)

Sibert explained more about the probing and the fact that the autopsy doctors--"Finck, in particular"--said they could feel the end of the back wound:

          But when they raised him up, then they found this back wound. And that’s when they started probing with the rubber glove and the finger, and also with the chrome probe.

          And that’s just before, of course, I made this call, because they were at a loss to explain what had happened to this bullet. They couldn’t find any bullet.

          And they said, "There's no exit.” Finck, in particular, said, "There's no exit.” And they said that you could feel it with the end of the finger. I mean, the depth of this wound. (p. 111)

-- Dr. John Ebersole, the radiologist at the autopsy, stated in his 3/11/78 testimony to the HSCA’s medical panel that the autopsy doctors determined that the back wound had no exit point:

          Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger, inasmuch as a complete bullet of any size could be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other areas. An inspection revealed there was no point of exit. The individuals performing the autopsy were at a loss to explain why they could find no bullets. (p. 57) 

-- In discussing the probing of the back wound, autopsy doctor J. Thornton Boswell admitted in his 2/26/96 ARRB interview that after they "opened the chest" they could see that "the bullet had not pierced through into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura”:

          We probed this hole which was in his neck with all sorts of probes and everything, and it was such a small hole, basically, and the muscles were so big and strong and had closed the hole and you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it.

          But when we opened the chest and we got at—the lung extends up under the clavicle and high just beneath the neck here, and the bullet had not pierced through into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura. (pp. 75-76)

In a somewhat confusing mix of describing and theorizing, Dr. Boswell then switched from describing the probing to speculating about a hypothetical path from the back wound that would have resulted in a probe coming out of the throat wound, saying that “if you put a probe in this and got it back through like this, that would come out right at the base of the neck” (p. 76). He had to resort to a hypothetical because he knew that at the autopsy they found the end of the tract and that it ended at the lining of the chest cavity.

Michael, this is pretty convincing, but could you say what is your suggestion as to mechanism?

The unintended "short shot" idea won't cut it, because if it lost enough velocity to account for the shallow penetration it is going to fall short and not hit JFK at all.

Could a frangible bullet, intended lethally for the head/brain but missed lower into the upper back, account for the shallow penetration, combined with the idea of secret bullet fragments removal preceding the autopsy including from the shallow upper back wound, be a conceivable way of accounting for the autopsy probes etc. you name? If not what's your explanation? 

 

[Charles Blackmon]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

It has nothing to do with a conspiracy in Dealey Plaza. 

You have nothing to back up a statement like that.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

 

I read the Sibert & O'Neill Report for the first time almost twenty years ago, early 2000s.  Nowhere in that report does it state that Humes and the others thought Kennedy was struck by a high tech weapon firing ice bullets.

 

You don’t know the definition of the word “thought.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/thought

 

2

a

: the action or process of thinking : COGITATION

b

: serious consideration : REGARD

 

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

So yes, I had no clue about the stark raving mad ideas in the head of another forum member here who spouts nonsense and then backpedals when called out on it.

 

Said the guy who has severe problems with English comprehension.

Edited June 4, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Charles Blackmon]

45 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 

I read the Sibert & O'Neill Report for the first time almost twenty years ago, early 2000s.  Nowhere in that report does it state that Humes and the others thought Kennedy was struck by a high tech weapon firing ice bullets.

So yes, I had no clue about the stark raving mad ideas in the head of another forum member here who spouts nonsense and then backpedals when called out on it.

 

If you are talking about Cliff V, I have no idea if his theory is correct or not but I have followed his posts and he has not backpedaled on anything. Throwing out accusations does not earn you credibility points. 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Sure thing.

 

From the Pathological Examination Report:

 

"The other missile entered the right superior posterior thorax above the scapula and traversed the soft tissues of the supra-scapular and the supra clavicular portions of the base of the right side of the neck.  This missile produced contusions of the right apical parietal pleura and of the apical portion of the right upper lobe of the lung.  The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck.  As far as can be ascertained, this missile struck no bony structures in its path through the body."

 

I am open to the idea that bullet coursed from back to front through JFK (although I have concluded JBC was struck by a separate bullet). 

But what you have cited here appears to be reasonable conjecture, rather than an observation based upon a successful probe, or conclusive x-ray.

I have contacted a pathology group to find out if probes of gunshot wounds are ever blocked, due to internal shifting or bruising etc of organs. 

For my money, the JFK autopsy was bungled, and the pathologists were not experienced. This makes conclusions based on the autopsy, CT or LN, iffy. 

Just IMHO. 

[Michael Crane]

3 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Yes and the same "researchers" believe there were as many as ten shots fired in Dealey Plaza and that Kennedy was hit in the back by a bullet which penetrated only two inches into soft tissue.

 

I believe that the number is actually as high as 11 shots IMO.

I mean with you,it's like were are playing poker with the cards face up & you keep raising with seven,deuce off suit.

Edited June 5, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Michael Crane]

18 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I am open to the idea that bullet coursed from back to front through JFK (although I have concluded JBC was struck by a separate bullet). 

But what you have cited here appears to be reasonable conjecture, rather than an observation based upon a successful probe, or conclusive x-ray.

I have contacted a pathology group to find out if probes of gunshot wounds are ever blocked, due to internal shifting or bruising etc of organs. 

For my money, the JFK autopsy was bungled, and the pathologists were not experienced. This makes conclusions based on the autopsy, CT or LN, iffy. 

Just IMHO. 

Ben,Ben,Ben,Ben,Ben.

Come on man.

The shot in JFK's back was too low to come out of his throat/neck.

The bullet did not travel upwards.

In fact,the bullet trajectory was tracked as going in at a downward angle.

 

Edited June 5, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Benjamin Cole]

21 minutes ago, Michael Crane said:

Ben,Ben,Ben,Ben,Ben.

Come on man.

The shot in JFK's back was too low to come out of his throat/neck.

The bullet did not travel upwards.

In fact,the bullet trajectory was tracked as going in at a downward angle.

 

MC-

I am a layman. 

Pathologists and surgeons who worked wartime, and some hunters, will tell you bullets do strange things.

Hume (whose observations were not that of an expert) did say the bullet hole in JFK's back pointed downwards, 45 degrees or so. 

But, of course, that means a bullet already had deviated from the straight line, unless JFK was shot from above--I mean even above the roof of the TSBD. 

So, even in this specific case, a bullet immediately followed a non-straight line upon entering JFK, if we believe Hume. In other words, the bullet was deflected on a downward course upon impact on JFK. 

So bullets do not always go in a straight line through a human body, and can curve.

I am loath to make conclusions based upon the JFK autopsy. It may be the body was altered even before the autopsy by inexperienced pathologists. 

Interestingly enough, many witnesses in the TSBD, second through fifth floors, thought the shots had come from beneath them. 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

MC-

I am a layman. 

Pathologists and surgeons who worked wartime, and some hunters, will tell you bullets do strange things.

Hume (whose observations were not that of an expert) did say the bullet hole in JFK's back pointed downwards, 45 degrees or so. 

But, of course, that means a bullet already had deviated from the straight line, unless JFK was shot from above--I mean even above the roof of the TSBD. 

So, even in this specific case, a bullet immediately followed a non-straight line upon entering JFK, if we believe Hume. In other words, the bullet was deflected on a downward course upon impact on JFK. 

So bullets do not always go in a straight line through a human body, and can curve.

The round entered on a downward angle at T3 and left a hairline fracture at T1.

That’s not a “curve,” Ben.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The round entered on a downward angle at T3 and left a hairline fracture at T1.

That’s not a “curve,” Ben.

CV--

I am a layman.

You are in the States.

Why not send a couple e-mails to pathology organizations in the US, asking for experts.

1. Then ask if a probe into a bullet hole is ever blocked, by shifting internal organs, muscles, etc.

2. Do bullets always follow a straight line through a human body? 

I sent an e-mail to a pathology organization, but as I am offshore, I think my e-mails go into a spam folder.