Hornberger, FFF on the "Fraudulent" JFKA Autopsy

[Benjamin Cole]

On 7/15/2023 at 12:41 PM, Gerry Down said:

It's debatable what could be meant by "innocent". If RFK was interfering with the autopsy to conceal from the public, which probably would have been in keeping with the wishes of JFK himself, that he had Addisons disease, this could be interpreted by some to be "an innocent explanation for a fraudulent autopsy".

GD-

Sorry for the delayed response. 

I think Hornberger's essay holds water. 

After the assassination of a sitting US President, there can be no excuses for not having an absolutely top-flight autopsy and also a full investigation. 

Oftentimes, people will cite a virtuous sounding reason for skullduggery. Jackie and RFK Jr. could say what they want, but if they did (in a highly emotional state no less), no one should have listened to them. 

As for the investigation into LHO's connections, we know that with hours, the storyline had become that he was a leftie, loner, loser. 

Side note: One thing I wish someone could track down: Could have a skilled, experienced forensic pathologist, who had worked on many, many gunshot deaths, manipulated the probe through JFK's back to the exit? 

Are there times when even an experienced pathologist finds the bullet pathway blocked by shifting body masses or muscles? 

By all accounts Humes and Boswell were rank amateurs, and Finck a peacetime pathologist for two years in Germany. Maybe they just did not know how to handle a probe. Manual dexterity and experience do not come from textbooks. 

I have sent a few e-mails out but since I live offshore, I think they go into spam. 

[Gerry Down]

33 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Side note: One thing I wish someone could track down: Could have a skilled, experienced forensic pathologist, who had worked on many, many gunshot deaths, manipulated the probe through JFK's back to the exit? 

Are there times when even an experienced pathologist finds the bullet pathway blocked by shifting body masses or muscles? 

By all accounts Humes and Boswell were rank amateurs, and Finck a peacetime pathologist for two years in Germany. Maybe they just did not know how to handle a probe. Manual dexterity and experience do not come from textbooks. 

I have sent a few e-mails out but since I live offshore, I think they go into spam. 

JFK apparently had rigor mortis at the beginning of the autopsy. This would have made it difficult to recreate the path of the bullet through his neck as per the SBT, especially as his right hand was in a raised position at the time of the SBT. 

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, Gerry Down said:

JFK apparently had rigor mortis at the beginning of the autopsy. This would have made it difficult to recreate the path of the bullet through his neck as per the SBT, especially as his right hand was in a raised position at the time of the SBT. 

Interesting. 

[David Josephs]

58 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Interesting. 

Uh, yeah, not so much.

Difficulty in recreating the SBT is that it never happened, the bullet would need to rise by 11 degrees as it goes back to front after being shot from what you claim to be a 6th story building on a heavily downward trajectory.  Humes was specific in that it supposedly did not hit anything hard on the way thru.

JC's wound, after the bullet needs to rise by 11 degrees, as well as move right to left by 10 degrees; now switches to a downward angle of 25 degrees.

A 6.5mm bullet would leave a 1/4 inch hole from front to back as well as greatly disturb the tissues and organs it passes...  none of that happened.

Looking at this WCR evidence and frame 222, @Gerry Down - explain how shooting from this angle and hitting JFK where they showed... the bullet rises to exit the throat and does not exit his chest and hit the back of the front seat?

 

Edited July 16, 2023 by David Josephs

[Gerry Down]

13 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Looking at this WCR evidence and frame 222, @Gerry Down - explain how shooting from this angle and hitting JFK where they showed... the bullet rises to exit the throat and does not exit his chest and hit the back of the front seat?

The two investigations into the JFK assassination, the WC and HSCA, both upheld the SBT.

[David Josephs]

2 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

The two investigations into the JFK assassination, the WC and HSCA, both upheld the SBT.

[Charles Blackmon]

19 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Its hopeless why bother

[Paul Cummings]

1 minute ago, Charles Blackmon said:

Its hopeless why bother

Agree

[David Josephs]

@Charles Blackmon @Paul Cummings

I'm reminded of what Joe DiMaggio is quoted as saying when asked why he tried so hard on every play...

The reason I play so hard is that somewhere out there is some kid who has never seen me play before, and I don't want to disappoint him.

I do it for the lurkers who don't engage because of people like him.  Who might think just because he posts here he has something to say.

And to those who never saw me play before...  

Pointless, support-less LNer posts have infected the forums since there were forums... sometimes you need the stick instead of the carrot.

[Gerry Down]

CTers often cite the HSCAs conclusion there was a conspiracy. But they don't realize the same investigation upheld the SBT 😆

[David Josephs]

You've chosen to ignore content by Gerry Down. Options 

For those who may be unaware, ignoring a member relieves you from having to read or deal with any of their posts unless you choose to.

There is no greater happiness available related to certain members...  I'm sure I'm on many of those lists

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

CTers often cite the HSCAs conclusion there was a conspiracy. But they don't realize the same investigation upheld the SBT 😆

OK, Gerry.  Can I share something? I've done a ton of research on the SBT and HSCA, and your statement isn't telling the whole story. The HSCA Pathology Panel "upheld" the SBT under the condition JFK was shot while behind the sign in the Z-film. They did this because they could not conceive of the bullet's passing upwards within JFK's body while he was sitting fairly upright, and mused that he must have bent over real fast while behind the sign. (Cyril Wecht jokes about this, but it's not really funny.) They were not told the HSCA had separately concluded he was hit before this time. As a result, we can assume that at least a few of its members, beyond Wecht, would have rejected the SBT should they have been told JFK was hit while sitting fairly upright. 

And yes, this was deliberate. Blakey was tasked with making the conclusions of his experts align in a pattern acceptable to the politicians on the committee. There was plenty of bad science on the one end, and plenty of political bs on the other. The end result was a poop sandwich...that the American people were told to eat. 

Edited July 16, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Gerry Down]

8 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

OK, Gerry.  Can I share something? I've done a ton of research on the SBT and HSCA, and your statement isn't telling the whole story. The HSCA Pathology Panel "upheld" the SBT under the condition JFK was shot while behind the sign in the Z-film. They did this because they could not conceive of the bullet's passing upwards within JFK's body while he was sitting fairly upright, and mused that he must have bent over real fast while behind the sign. (Cyril Wecht jokes about this, but it's not really funny.) They were not told the HSCA had separately concluded he was hit before this time. As a result, we can assume that at least a few of its members, beyond Wecht, would have rejected the SBT should they have been told JFK was hit while sitting fairly upright. 

And yes, this was deliberate. Blakey was tasked with making the conclusions of his experts align in a pattern acceptable to the politicians on the committee. There was pretty of bad science on the one end, and plenty of political bs on the other. The end result was a poop sandwich...that the American people were told to eat. 

DVP posted a link to his website a month or two ago on here in which he expressed doubt that the data we have supports the idea that the trajectory through JFKs neck was level or very slightly upwards. I wish i could find that link again - @David Von Pein ? To me, judging by the height of the back wound vs the height of the throat wound, on a profile view of JFK on the autopsy table, the trajectory looks very much downwards, in the region of 15 degrees or so.

The HSCA was a bit of a mess. It said there was a probable conspiracy which upset LNers, upheld the SBT which upset CTers, said JFK was shot in the cowlick area which upset the autopsy doctors etc etc. The HSCA was a bit of a mess even if they did do some good work, especially with regard to Mexico City. 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Pointless, support-less LNer posts have infected the forums since there were forums... sometimes you need the stick instead of the carrot.

You, and others here, seem incapable of accepting the fact that someone can disagree with entrenched JFK conspiracy theory lore (ie., that all the evidence is fake, that there were two Oswalds) WITHOUT being a "LNer." Why is that so difficult to understand?

[Gerry Down]

13 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

You, and others here, seem incapable of accepting the fact that someone can disagree with entrenched JFK conspiracy theory lore (ie., that all the evidence is fake, that there were two Oswalds) WITHOUT being a "LNer." Why is that so difficult to understand?

I know. You have to listen to all sides in order to understand the JFK case. Only by listening to what everyone has to say can one move forward in their research. Otherwise you are destined to keep going around and around in circles chasing your own tail.