The Autopsy Doctors' Rear Head Entry Site vs. the Autopsy Photos of the Brain

[Michael Griffith]

5 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

You keep saying that the photos show virtually no brain missing. First we don't have photos but only drawings, and secondly the drawing we have showing the top of the brain looks to me at least as though the the upper half of the right side is missing. That's the way i'd describe it. If I saw a brain like that i'd say a good fist size of brain matter was gone. Thirdly in the drawing the cerebellum looks like it is being pushed out the back of the brain. Normally photos looking down on a brain show next to no cerebellum but in the drawing we can see lots of the cerebellum. This might be an indication that the brain underwent severe swelling which pushed the cerebellum out of it's normal position. And such severe swelling would account towards why the brain weighed 1500g.

And, furthermore, earlier you said the missing brain was not visible because it was on the outside of the right cerebrum, which is not visible in the brain photo in question. Now you're saying the top half of the right side is missing. Which is it? 

I don't know what in the world you're looking at. I can't fathom how anyone with decent eyesight could claim to see the top half of the right cerebrum missing. I see a laceration and I see disruption on the right side, but I don't see any substantive amount of brain tissue missing. 

And how did Baden and the FPP fail to see this missing brain tissue? Why isn't any such missing tissue described in the supplemental brain exam report? 

Edited June 7, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Gerry Down]

25 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

And, furthermore, earlier you said the missing brain was not visible because it was on the outside of the right cerebrum, which is not visible in the brain photo in question. Now you're saying the top half of the right side is missing. Which is it? 

I don't know what in the world you're looking at. I can't fathom how anyone with decent eyesight could claim to see the top half of the right cerebrum missing. I see a laceration and I see disruption on the right side, but I don't see any substantive amount of brain tissue missing. 

And how did Baden and the FPP fail to see this missing brain tissue? Why isn't any such missing tissue described in the supplemental brain exam report? 

You can't tell anything from that line drawing of the brain. You can't tell where brain is missing or where brain is simply disrupted.

The photo itself would not be much better. For example you can't tell what a house looks like from just the overhead view alone. You also need the side elevations. We don't have any side elevations of the brain so we can't contradict the witnesses who said a fist sized amount of brain was missing.

You're simply trying to interpret too much from a single overhead view of the brain.

[Michael Crane]

The public has not seen a picture of JFK's brain have they? Just an illustration right?

Edited June 7, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Michael Crane]

Oh man,

An Ida Dox drawing again?

Edited June 9, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Michael Griffith]

On 6/7/2023 at 5:42 PM, Gerry Down said:

You can't tell anything from that line drawing of the brain. You can't tell where brain is missing or where brain is simply disrupted.

The photo itself would not be much better. For example you can't tell what a house looks like from just the overhead view alone. You also need the side elevations. We don't have any side elevations of the brain so we can't contradict the witnesses who said a fist sized amount of brain was missing.

You're simply trying to interpret too much from a single overhead view of the brain.

Oh, wow. So now you've gone from saying (1) that the missing brain matter was on the side of the right cerebrum that we can't see in the brain drawing, to saying (2) that you saw one half of the top part of the right side of the brain missing in the brain drawing, to saying (3) that "you can't tell where brain is missing" in the brain drawing! This is what happens when you can't bring yourself to face self-evident fact.

Every doctor, including Baden and Artwohl and Mantik, who has seen the autopsy brain photos has said that the drawing in question is a true rendering of how the brain looked from the top view.

Baden saw all the brain photos and said they showed virtually no brain missing.

The supplementary brain exam report says nothing about any missing brain tissue, although it describes in detail the damage seen in the Dox drawing of the brain. 

The HSCA FPP saw nothing like the amount of missing brain that yesterday you claimed to see in the brain drawing.

By any reasonable, rational reading of the accounts of the brain matter that was blown out and splattered onto 15 surfaces, that brain matter was obviously far more than the amount of missing brain that any doctor who has seen the brain photos has described.

Even Dr. Joe Riley has said that " the fixed brain weight is inconsistent with major loss of tissue" (LINK).

Dr. Mantik discusses the stark contradiction between the autopsy skull x-rays and the brain photos:

          But here is the real problem: according to chief pathologist James Humes, “Two thirds of the right cerebrum had been blown away.” Such a major loss of brain tissue was confirmed by many other witnesses—at Parkland and at Bethesda. Furthermore, my own optical density measurements (made directly from the extant skull X-rays at the Archives) confirmed that only about 30% of the right brain remained. . . .

          The huge clash between the lateral X-rays and the brain photographs persists. Although I should not expect Bugliosi to deal with optical densities, this matter can be addressed at a layman’s level, via the obvious blackness at the front of the lateral X-rays. A fist-sized area shows virtually no brain at all. Although the OD measurements confirm this, simple visual inspection clearly supports the same conclusion. Besides the empty bilateral frontal area, though, a great deal of brain tissue is obviously missing on the superior right side as well. The brain photographs, on the other hand, show a nearly intact brain on both sides. Therefore: either the X-rays are wrong or the photographs are of some other brain. (JFK Assassination Paradoxes, 2022, pp. 5, 53)

Edited June 8, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Pat Speer]

On 6/7/2023 at 4:40 PM, Michael Crane said:

Oh man,

An Ido Dox drawing again?

Uhhh, yeah. She was a medical illustrator hired by the HSCA FPP to help them with their exhibits. As it had been decided that the FPP could not put autopsy photos on the record, she was tasked with "tracing" a number of the photos. The problem, of course, is that these exhibits were not created in a vacuum, and were twisted a bit here and there to help Dr. Baden "sell" the FPPs conclusions. The most notorious example of this is the tracing of the back of the head photo, which Baden had Dox re-do to make the red spot look more like a bullet hole. 

This is pretty awful, when you think of it. The FPP concluded there had been a bullet hole where no witnesses saw a bullet hole, and their illustrator traced a photo in such a manner that it did not look like a bullet hole. So Baden had her "correct" her work to help him sell this non-existent hole. 

[Michael Griffith]

14 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Uhhh, yeah. She was a medical illustrator hired by the HSCA FPP to help them with their exhibits. As it had been decided that the FPP could not put autopsy photos on the record, she was tasked with "tracing" a number of the photos. The problem, of course, is that these exhibits were not created in a vacuum, and were twisted a bit here and there to help Dr. Baden "sell" the FPPs conclusions. The most notorious example of this is the tracing of the back of the head photo, which Baden had Dox re-do to make the red spot look more like a bullet hole. 

This is pretty awful, when you think of it. The FPP concluded there had been a bullet hole where no witnesses saw a bullet hole, and their illustrator traced a photo in such a manner that it did not look like a bullet hole. So Baden had her "correct" her work to help him sell this non-existent hole. 

Another problem with the Clark Panel-HSCA high entry wound is that the autopsy photos show intact cerebral cortex at the point of the alleged wound, an obvious impossibility. There would be obvious damage to the cerebral cortex if a bullet had entered at the high entry site. Dr. Joseph Riley:

          There is no entrance wound where the HSCA locates it. The autopsy photographs show intact cerebral cortex at the point that the HSCA claims is an entrance wound. . . .

           In the "top of head" autopsy photographs, intact cerebral cortex is visible. (This has been confirmed in personal communications from Dr. Robert Artwohl and Dr. David Mantik, both of whom visited the archives). What is unappreciated is that this cortex (superior parietal lobule) corresponds to the HSCA's entrance site. (LINK)

We have an obvious fragment trail near the top of the skull, and that trail is far too high to have come from a bullet that went from the EOP to the right eye. Moreover, there is no connection between the cavitation wound, which is deep and parallel to the cortical surface, and the high fragment trail. Only two bullets could have caused these injuries.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Michael Griffith]

And let's not forget that Jackie told the WC that she was trying to hold JFK's hair and skull on "from the back" of his head, that "from the back" she could see where she needed to hold hair and skull on:

          I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing -- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on.... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top. And then he sort of did this [indicating], put his hand to his forehead and fell in my lap. (5 H 180, deleted testimony released later)

She is clearly describing a defect in the back of the head, a defect at which she was trying to hold hair and skull in place. No wonder the WC deleted this segment from the published transcript. Jackie described the same back-of-head wound that Clint Hill observed up close for several minutes on the way to Parkland Hospital. 

 

         

 

[Michael Griffith]

I rediscovered this gem from the HSCA FPP report regarding the conflict between the EOP entry site and the autopsy photos of the brain. After saying that the photos of the brain support the FPP's higher placement of the rear head entry wound, the FPP report says panel member Dr. Earl Rose wants to emphasize, on behalf of the majority of the panel, that the lack of injury on the inferior (lower) part of the brain is "incontrovertible" evidence that the autopsy report's EOP entry site is wrong:

          One panel member, Dr. Rose, wishes to emphasize the view of the majority of the panel (all except Dr. Wecht) that the absence of injury on the inferior surface the brain offers incontrovertible evidence that the wound in the President's head is not in the location described in the autopsy report. (7 H 115)

If the brain photos are genuine, then there can be no EOP entry site, even though there is good evidence for the site. And, since there is no cowlick entry site either, we are left with no rear head entry wound, which is obviously impossible. 

Clearly, the autopsy photos of the brain are not of JFK's brain.

 

Edited June 24, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Michael Crane]

The shot callers imported a brain from the Bethesda compound.The brain shown in actual pictures are probably not even the substitute brain that Jenkins handled.

Edited June 25, 2023 by Michael Crane

[Michael Griffith]

9 hours ago, Michael Crane said:

The shot callers imported a brain from the Bethesda compound. The brain shown in actual pictures are probably not even the substitute brain that Jenkins handled.

Yes, this is obviously what happened. Not only do the brain photos show no damage to the lower part of the brain, but they show virtually no brain tissue missing, whereas there is overwhelming evidence, including the x-rays, that nearly one half of the brain was blown away, if not more.

The point cannot be stressed enough that if the brain photos are genuine, the EOP entry site is impossible. Yet, there is strong evidence that a bullet entered at the EOP site, so much so that even Larry Sturdivan rejected the CP-HSCA higher entry point and argued for the EOP site. 

This is also a good example of the mistakes that the plotters made in the cover-up. At the time, they believed the autopsy materials and the other unpublished WC records would remain sealed for 75 years. This was the law at the time for all unpublished records of federal executive branch investigations. Thus, the plotters were not careful in their choosing and handling of the substitute brain. They believed they would be long dead by the time these materials were finally released. 

Also, until the JFK assassination, the general public largely trusted the federal government. The plotters most likely believed that once the government issued its lone-gunman finding, that would settle the matter in the minds of nearly all Americans. I think they were surprised by the amount of scrutiny and doubt that emerged regarding the single-assassin story. 

Edited June 25, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Michael Crane]

Mike,

I'm happy that someone see's things the same way that I do.

Now,I'm going to possibly go off course & say that yes,records were sealed for 75 years,and I personally believe that the gag order/Order of Silence of 15 years to Naval personnel & others at autopsy WAS going to be extended after the 15 year period.

Somewhere in my brain remembers hearing or reading that the extension was going to be another 10 or 15 years.

Edited June 26, 2023 by Michael Crane