Revised and Expanded Response to John McAdams' Claims

[Michael Griffith]

For those who might be interested, I have revised and expanded my article "Some Comments on John McAdams' Kennedy Assassination Home Page." 

LINK

My article deals with McAdams' claims regarding Jack Ruby's Mafia contacts, Ruby's shooting of Oswald, Ruby's meetings with criminal figures, Ruby's polygraph, Ruby's calls to Mafia contacts in the weeks before the assassination, how Ruby entered the DPD basement, David Ferrie, the single-bullet theory, JFK's back wound, JFK's throat wound, JFK's head wounds, and Lee Harvey Oswald.

Here's an excerpt:

          But researchers have known for years that this description is sheer speculation. We know from released documents about the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did not have an exit point. We also know that they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that people standing near the autopsy table could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity.

          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. (Transcript of interview with Robert Karnei, 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). 

          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).

          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. (Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime: The Definitive Book on the JFK Assassination, New York: Open Road Media, 2013, p. 52)

Edited May 5, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Michael Griffith]

I just added an excerpt from my article to the OP.

[Gerry Down]

4 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

For those who might be interested, I have revised and expanded my article "Some Comments on John McAdams' Kennedy Assassination Home Page." 

LINK

My article deals with McAdams' claims regarding Jack Ruby's Mafia contacts, Ruby's shooting of Oswald, Ruby's meetings with criminal figures, Ruby's polygraph, Ruby's calls to Mafia contacts in the weeks before the assassination, how Ruby entered the DPD basement, David Ferrie, the single-bullet theory, JFK's back wound, JFK's throat wound, JFK's head wounds, and Lee Harvey Oswald.

Here's an excerpt:

          But researchers have known for years that this description is sheer speculation. We know from released documents about the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did not have an exit point. We also know that they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that people standing near the autopsy table could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity.

          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. (Transcript of interview with Harrison Livingstone, 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). 

          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).

          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.

They should have raised JFKs right arm up and outwards on the autopsy table rather than having it hanging down by his body. That way the back and shoulder muscles would line up correctly allowing the probe to go through.

JFKs right arm was up and outwards at z224 when he was shot.

[Michael Griffith]

5 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

They should have raised JFKs right arm up and outwards on the autopsy table rather than having it hanging down by his body. That way the back and shoulder muscles would line up correctly allowing the probe to go through.

JFKs right arm was up and outwards at z224 when he was shot.

You seem to be forgetting that Karnei said the doctors positioned JFK's body "every which way" during the probing. They also removed the chest organs to facilitate the probing.

The key point is that the probe went as far as it could go. The doctors found the end of the wound tract. Jenkins and others near the table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity.

 

Edited May 5, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Gerry Down]

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

You seem to be forgetting that Karnei said the doctors positioned JFK's body "every which way" during the probing. They also removed the chest organs to facilitate the probing.

The key point is that the probe went as far as it could go. The doctors found the end of the wound tract. Jenkins and others near the table could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity.

 

When they started off the autopsy they had this idea in their head that the assassin had fired downwards from 6 floors up and this caused them to think that the bullet entry wound on the back should descend downwards into the body at something resembling a 45 degree angle. Therefore they were looking for the wrong track trajectory to begin with. The real trajectory, as per the SBT, is a more level track through the neck. You should not have to remove the chest organs in order to demonstrate the trajectory as per the SBT because that trajectory goes nowhere near the chest organs. So if they were looking for an exit wound at the back of the chest cavity its no wonder they didn't find it because there would be no exit wound down that low. 

[Michael Griffith]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

When they started off the autopsy they had this idea in their head that the assassin had fired downwards from 6 floors up and this caused them to think that the bullet entry wound on the back should descend downwards into the body at something resembling a 45 degree angle. Therefore they were looking for the wrong track trajectory to begin with. The real trajectory, as per the SBT, is a more level track through the neck. You should not have to remove the chest organs in order to demonstrate the trajectory as per the SBT because that trajectory goes nowhere near the chest organs. So if they were looking for an exit wound at the back of the chest cavity its no wonder they didn't find it because there would be no exit wound down that low. 

They weren't looking for an exit wound at the back of the chest cavity. That just happened to be where the wound tract led. FBI Special Agent Francis O'Neill said the following about this in his HSCA interview, which was sealed until the ARRB released it:

          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 [Sibert] went out and called. . . .

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).

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.

Another important witness on the back wound is Dr. Robert Canada. Dr. Canada was the commanding officer of the treatment hospital at Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1963, and he witnessed the autopsy. In a 1968 interview with Dr. Michael Kurtz, Canada said that the back wound was at around T3, that the bullet “did not exit,” and that its wound tract ended in the chest near the stomach ((Kurtz, The JFK Assassination Debates: Lone Gunman versus Conspiracy, University Press of Kansas, 2006, p. 91; see also https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/altered-history-exposing-deciet-and-deception-in-the-jfk-assassination-medical-evidence-part-1/, segment on Dr. Canada begins at 1:08:20). Dr. Canada asked Dr. Kurtz not to reveal his account until 25 years after he died, so Kurtz did not write about it until 2006. 

We have to keep in mind that the back wound was not at C6 or C7 but at T3, as established by the holes in JFK's shirt and coat, by the death certificate, and by the back-wound dot on the autopsy face sheet, among other sources.

Again, the doctors found the end of the wound tract, and people standing near the table could see the end of the probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. The wound was shallow and had no exit point. 

That's why the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being the exit point for the back wound, as Doug Horne has established. 

Edited May 5, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Gerry Down]

20 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

They weren't looking for an exit wound at the back of the chest cavity. That just happened to be where the wound tract led. FBI Special Agent Francis O'Neill said the following about this in his HSCA interview, which was sealed until the ARRB released it:

          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 [Sibert] went out and called. . . .

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).

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.

Another important witness on the back wound is Dr. Robert Canada. Dr. Canada was the commanding officer of the treatment hospital at Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1963, and he witnessed the autopsy. In a 1968 interview with Dr. Michael Kurtz, Canada said that the back wound was at around T3, that the bullet “did not exit,” and that its wound tract ended in the chest near the stomach ((Kurtz, The JFK Assassination Debates: Lone Gunman versus Conspiracy, University Press of Kansas, 2006, p. 91; see also https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/article/altered-history-exposing-deciet-and-deception-in-the-jfk-assassination-medical-evidence-part-1/, segment on Dr. Canada begins at 1:08:20). Dr. Canada asked Dr. Kurtz not to reveal his account until 25 years after he died, so Kurtz did not write about it until 2006. 

We have to keep in mind that the back wound was not at C6 or C7 but at T3, as established by the holes in JFK's shirt and coat, by the death certificate, and by the back-wound dot on the autopsy face sheet, among other sources.

Again, the doctors found the end of the wound tract, and people standing near the table could see the end of the probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. The wound was shallow and had no exit point. 

That's why the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being the exit point for the back wound, as Doug Horne has established. 

I dont doubt any of this except maybe the Michael Kurtz interview as there is some doubt as to his credibility as a JFK assassination researcher. See discussion at this thread: 

As per the SBT, the bullet passed in between the strap muscles of the back. So once Humes probed the back wound and got to the strap muscles, the narrow bullet track would have widened with the gap of the strap muscles causing Humes to lose the track at this point. What appears to have happened is that at this point having lost the track of the wound at the point of the strap muscles where the space widened (I think the space widened vertically up and down though i'm not well versed on the exact positioning of the strap muscles) Humes began to go downwards to where he thought a bullet being fired from a sixth floor window would descend which would be into the chest cavity. This problem was acerbated by the fact that because during the autopsy JFKs arm was most likely down by the side of his body (thus the muscle layout in his back was significantly different than when he had been shot at Z224 with his arm raised) thus cutting off the original track which would have continued on forward and out the throat. 

The natural direction Humes took when he came to the vertical gap in the strap muscles (and with the original track wound cut off because of the different positioning of JFKs arm during the autopsy than when he had been shot at Z224) would be to go downwards as it would not make sense to go laterally forward as such a trajectory would not seem to make sense for an assassin firing from six floors up. 

I think this is a very reasonable explanation for what quite possibly happened during the autopsy. 

[Michael Griffith]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

I dont doubt any of this except maybe the Michael Kurtz interview as there is some doubt as to his credibility as a JFK assassination researcher. See discussion at this thread: 

As per the SBT, the bullet passed in between the strap muscles of the back. So once Humes probed the back wound and got to the strap muscles, the narrow bullet track would have widened with the gap of the strap muscles causing Humes to lose the track at this point. What appears to have happened is that at this point having lost the track of the wound at the point of the strap muscles where the space widened (I think the space widened vertically up and down though i'm not well versed on the exact positioning of the strap muscles) Humes began to go downwards to where he thought a bullet being fired from a sixth floor window would descend which would be into the chest cavity. This problem was acerbated by the fact that because during the autopsy JFKs arm was most likely down by the side of his body (thus the muscle layout in his back was significantly different than when he had been shot at Z224 with his arm raised) thus cutting off the original track which would have continued on forward and out the throat. 

The natural direction Humes took when he came to the vertical gap in the strap muscles (and with the original track wound cut off because of the different positioning of JFKs arm during the autopsy than when he had been shot at Z224) would be to go downwards as it would not make sense to go laterally forward as such a trajectory would not seem to make sense for an assassin firing from six floors up. 

I think this is a very reasonable explanation for what quite possibly happened during the autopsy. 

Humm, okay. I wasn't aware that you believe in the SBT.

I think your explanation ignores numerous items of evidence and makes several doubtful assumptions. Do you just not believe all the independent accounts about what people standing near the table saw during the probing? It sounds like you're saying that Humes jammed the probe so hard in the "wrong" direction that he created a false tract, an extremely unlikely mistake even for a first-year medical student, especially since Humes first probed the wound with his finger.

Furthermore, Humes was not the only one doing the probing. Finck, a board-certified forensic pathologist, also probed the wound, first with a finger and then with a probe. Finck had performed actual autopsies and surely understood the role that muscles play when probing wound tracts. 

I find it hard to believe that it never occurred to any of the doctors to raise JFK's right arm upward and outward. That would have been a logical position to try, and, again, Karnei said the doctors positioned the body "every which way" to facilitate the probing. 

Moreover, with the chest organs removed, the probing would have been easier anyway because there would have nothing pressing against the interior side of the tissue where the wound was located, and it would have given the doctors a much better view of the interior side of the wounded area. By the way, removing the chest organs is standard procedure in an autopsy. 

Your explanation also requires us to discard the physical evidence of the holes in the back of JFK's coat and shirt. The only way to make those holes fit the SBT is to assume that JFK's coat and shirt bunched in nearly perfect millimeter-for-millimeter correspondence, and without overlapping folds (otherwise, double holes would have been made), an idea that I find utterly implausible, not to mention that it is refuted by the photographic evidence of JFK's coat during the motorcade.

There's also the problem of the tie knot: There's no hole through the knot and no nick on either edge of the tie. Any bullet exiting the throat could not have missed the knot. 

What is your answer for Doug Horne's evidence that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound? 

I will have to look into the deal with Kurtz. But, even we if assume he fabricated his interview with Dr. Canada, that still leaves several other witnesses who independently described seeing the probing and who saw that the back wound had no exit point.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Tom Gram]

40 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

I dont doubt any of this except maybe the Michael Kurtz interview as there is some doubt as to his credibility as a JFK assassination researcher. See discussion at this thread: 

As per the SBT, the bullet passed in between the strap muscles of the back. So once Humes probed the back wound and got to the strap muscles, the narrow bullet track would have widened with the gap of the strap muscles causing Humes to lose the track at this point. What appears to have happened is that at this point having lost the track of the wound at the point of the strap muscles where the space widened (I think the space widened vertically up and down though i'm not well versed on the exact positioning of the strap muscles) Humes began to go downwards to where he thought a bullet being fired from a sixth floor window would descend which would be into the chest cavity. This problem was acerbated by the fact that because during the autopsy JFKs arm was most likely down by the side of his body (thus the muscle layout in his back was significantly different than when he had been shot at Z224 with his arm raised) thus cutting off the original track which would have continued on forward and out the throat. 

The natural direction Humes took when he came to the vertical gap in the strap muscles (and with the original track wound cut off because of the different positioning of JFKs arm during the autopsy than when he had been shot at Z224) would be to go downwards as it would not make sense to go laterally forward as such a trajectory would not seem to make sense for an assassin firing from six floors up. 

I think this is a very reasonable explanation for what quite possibly happened during the autopsy. 

I’m sure @Pat Speer will chime in at some point, but you may not be familiar with the positioning of the strap muscles on the back because there are no strap muscles on the back. The bullet impacted the trapezius, which is a continuous, single mass of muscle with no vertical gaps. Humes was talking about the strap muscles on the front of the neck - and I’ll let Pat elaborate but I’m pretty it was Specter who distorted Humes’ statements about neck muscles into a statement about the back. 

[Gerry Down]

22 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

Humm, okay. I wasn't aware that you believe in the SBT.

I think your explanation ignores numerous items of evidence and makes several doubtful assumptions. Do you just not believe all the independent accounts about what people standing near the table saw during the probing? It sounds like you're saying that Humes jammed the probe so hard in the "wrong" direction that he created a false tract, an extremely unlikely mistake even for a first-year medical student, especially since Humes first probed the wound with his finger.

Furthermore, Humes was not the only one doing the probing. Finck, a board-certified forensic pathologist, also probed the wound, first with a finger and then with a probe. Finck had performed actual autopsies and surely understood the role that muscles play when probing wound tracts. 

I find it hard to believe that it never occurred to any of the doctors to raise JFK's right arm upward and outward. That would have been a logical position to try, and, again, Karnei said the doctors positioned the body "every which way" to facilitate the probing. 

Moreover, with the chest organs removed, the probing would have been easier anyway because there would have nothing pressing against the interior side of the tissue where the wound was located, and it would have given the doctors a much better view of the interior side of the wounded area. By the way, removing the chest organs is standard procedure in an autopsy. 

Your explanation also requires us to discard the physical evidence of the holes in the back of JFK's coat and shirt. The only way to make those holes fit the SBT is to assume that JFK's coat and shirt bunched in nearly perfect millimeter-for-millimeter correspondence, and without overlapping (otherwise, double holes would have been made), an idea that I find utterly implausible, not to mention that it is refuted by the photographic evidence of JFK's coat during the motorcade.

What is your answer for Doug Horne's evidence that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound? 

I will have to look into the deal with Kurtz. But, even we if assume he fabricated his interview with Dr. Canada, that still leaves several other witnesses who independently described seeing the probing and who saw that the back wound had no exit point.

I'm not saying Humes made a false tract. He was just trying to probe a track that was incorrect down into the chest cavity. No LNer has ever said the track went down into the chest cavity.

The probe came to a stop in the back muscles cos JFKs arm was down during the autopsy. So the track that was open on Elm street at z224 was now closed on the autopsy table. Humes didn't know where to go at this point and so began pushing downwards with the probe about an inch into JFKs back towards the chest cavity which of course was not the correct track. The witnesses who saw the probe trying to punch through the chest cavity were of course all correct, but that was simply not the correct place to be probing.

The Robert Croft photo proves conclusively that JFKs coat was bunched just 3 seconds before he was shot at z224.

[Michael Griffith]

Rather than use up numerous pages to cite more evidence on the back wound and the throat wound, I recommend viewing Doug Horne's well-documented presentation on the three drafts of the autopsy report in his video The JFK Medical Cover-Up. Using numerous sources, Horne shows that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound. His discussion on the three drafts of the autopsy report starts at 1:18:45 and ends at 2:15:03.

LINK

Plus, I have additional material on the back wound and the throat wound in my article.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Michael Griffith]

10 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

 

I'm not saying Humes made a false tract. He was just trying to probe a track that was incorrect down into the chest cavity. No LNer has ever said the track went down into the chest cavity.

The probe came to a stop in the back muscles cos JFKs arm was down during the autopsy. So the track that was open on Elm street at z224 was now closed on the autopsy table. Humes didn't know where to go at this point and so began pushing downwards with the probe about an inch into JFKs back towards the chest cavity which of course was not the correct track. The witnesses who saw the probe trying to punch through the chest cavity were of course all correct, but that was simply not the correct place to be probing.

I think this scenario is ludicrous. I find it hard to even bother typing to respond to it. The doctors positioned the body "every which way" during the probing and had a clear view of the interior side of the wounded area after the chest organs were removed. A first-year medical student would have known to move the right arm into various positions to facilitate the probing of a wound in the rear of the right shoulder. I find it impossible to take seriously the idea that while positioning the body "every which way," the doctors just left the right arm lying down beside the body, even though they were trying to identify a wound tract in the upper righthand side of the back. 

I can't comprehend the argument that the wound-probing witnesses were correct but that the probe was not probing in "the correct place." "The correct place"? If the back wound was at C7, as the SBT requires, there's no way the back muscles could have steered the wound tract that far downward into the chest cavity, regardless of how the right arm was positioned. Look at an anatomy textbook and see the difference between C7 and T3 and try to explain how even the worst-positioned right arm could have caused the back muscles to steer the wound tract that far downward. That just makes no sense. 

The Robert Croft photo proves conclusively that JFKs coat was bunched just 3 seconds before he was shot at z224.

No, it does not. The Croft photo does not show a bunch that was large enough or in the right location to have caused such a huge shift in where the bullet holes would be made, even making the wild assumption that the shirt was bunched in nearly exact correspondence with the coat. Look at the photos of the coat and the shirt and see how far down those holes are. The modest bunch in the Croft photo does not even come close to being big enough or in the right location to account for the holes.

Furthermore, Willis Slide 5, taken after the Croft photo, and taken a split-second before JFK was first hit, shows the coat virtually flat. 

How could JFK's tailor-made shirt have bunched up in nearly perfect correspondence with the coat, in every horizontal and virtual aspect and without forming an overlapping flap, when most of the shirt was pressed against the seat because his back was resting against the seat? Look how far down the hole is on the back of his shirt. There's no way his tailor-made shirt could have bunched so far upward while his back was pinning most of it against the seat. 

For a bunch to have caused the bullet to make holes so low on the shirt and coat, over 5 inches below the top of the collar, it would have had to take fabric from the areas of the holes and move that fabric upward by a least 3 inches, and without forming an overlapping flap (to avoid creating double holes). No photo or footage shows JFK's coat with any such bunch. 

I repeat the point that if a bullet had exited the throat, it could not have missed the tie knot, yet there was no bullet hole through the tie and no nick on either edge of the tie knot. 

Rather than use up numerous pages to cite more evidence on the back wound and the throat wound, I recommend viewing Doug Horne's well-documented presentation on the three drafts of the autopsy report in his video The JFK Medical Cover-Up. Using numerous sources, Horne shows that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound. His discussion on the three drafts of the autopsy report starts at 1:18:45 and ends at 2:15:03.

LINK

Plus, I have additional material on the back wound and the throat wound in my article.

Edited May 6, 2023 by Michael Griffith