The Mystery of Kennedy's Brain Deepens

[Benjamin Cole]

14 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

To my recollection Burkley didn't advise Sprague of anything. It was his lawyer, Illig, who told him Burkley told him he suspected there was more than one shooter. Unfortunately, there was no immediate follow-up, and Sprague stepped aside. Blakey then took over with a whole new approach: have "experts" re-interpret the evidence. As these experts were all over the place, this, sadly, resulted in a muddled mess. 

Michael Baden has written that the large scar on Connally's back was the result of a tumbling bullet. This guy is a forensic pathologist?

JBC's shirt clearly shows a small round entry hole in the rear of his assassination day shirt, and Dr. Shaw, Connally's surgeon, testified he debrided or enlarged the back wound to remove dead tissue. 

How can Baden be so wrong? Perhaps Baden also said the first president of the United States was King George. 

I agree with your assessment of the careful lawyer Blakey deferring to "experts" on medical issues, as most lawyers would do in court. 

But man oh man....how wrong can you get? 

 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[David Von Pein]

Re: Brain Weights.....

Edited August 25, 2023 by David Von Pein

[Joe Bauer]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

But remember in addition to not sectioning the brain, Humes did not weigh the brain the night of the autopsy.

Which is really kind of stunning.

So , I am not sure but  I think the supplementary is the first time that this 1500 gram weight appears in the official record.  I am sure Pat Speer can correct me if I am wrong.

But as I noted, only Humes signed off on that.  On the last separate page, its Stover and Galloway certifying it.

And the date of 12/6 is handwritten.  

Whew.  >>>>  If there had been a real trial. <<<<

You can say that again.

If the headshot bullet virtually exploded the inside of JFK's cranium with enough energy to blast hard outer skull bone completely off and into the street...imagine what that explosive energy did to the soft tissue inner brain?

That bullet blows through and obliterates the back of the thick head skull bone upon entering, traverses through most of the length of the soft tissue brain and then exits with still enough velocity force and mass to then blast out a huge flap of skull bone on JFK's right side above his right ear?

A significant amount of JFK's brain had to have been ripped and torn into mush after that through and through skull bone obliterating torpedoing.

 

Edited August 25, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[James DiEugenio]

I agree Joe.

 

And BTW, i think it was on a TV special in San Francisco back in the eighties that Baden was confronted with the fact that Humes did not weigh the brain the night of the autopsy.

He looked like he had just learned that fact.

Which tells you a lot about the HSCA pathology panel.

[Pat Speer]

4 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Michael Baden has written that the large scar on Connally's back was the result of a tumbling bullet. This guy is a forensic pathologist?

JBC's shirt clearly shows a small round entry hole in the rear of his assassination day shirt, and Dr. Shaw, Connally's surgeon, testified he debrided or enlarged the back wound to remove dead tissue. 

How can Baden be so wrong? Perhaps Baden also said the first president of the United States was King George. 

I agree with your assessment of the careful lawyer Blakey deferring to "experts" on medical issues, as most lawyers would do in court. 

But man oh man....how wrong can you get? 

 

From chapter 11:

Although Dr. Shaw indicated that the wound was really 1.5 x .8 cm to the HSCA's investigators, and was even quoted on this in the report of Baden's Panel, Dr. Baden oversold the significance of this ovoid shape in his testimony before the committee and produced a stench all his own in his 1989 book Unnatural Death. While an HSCA report written by Baden records the length of Connally's back scar as 1 1/8 inches (or 2.9 cm), Baden told Unnatural Death's readers the back wound scar was 2 inches long (or 5 cm).

Now, let's be clear. This was almost certainly a lie, and not a simple mistake. Dr. Shaw's operative report in which he first claimed Connally's wound was 3 cm made clear that he extended the wound beyond its original size when he excised damaged skin. He subsequently testified that he doubled the size of the wound when doing so, and that the wound was originally 1.5 cm before he extended it to 3 cm. Lattimer and Baden, of course, insist Shaw was mistaken, and that the wound was 3 cm before it was extended. If this is true, however, Shaw's sworn testimony suggests he extended the wound to about 6 cm. As a 6 cm bullet wound would be unlikely to shrink back to a 2.9 cm scar in less than 15 years, Baden's measurement of Connally's scar supports Shaw's statements, and not Lattimer's and Baden's contention the wound was 3 cm before Shaw excised the damaged skin. By increasing the size of Connally's scar from 2.9 cm to 5 cm, however, Baden lent support to Lattimer's nonsense.

The impact of Lattimer's and Baden's lies has been palpable. In 1992, in the mock trial of Oswald put on by the American Bar Association and televised on Court TV, Dr. Martin Fackler, testifying for the prosecution, repeated the 3 cm lie, and made matters worse by incorrectly testifying--when it was pointed out to him that Dr. Shaw had told the HSCA that the wound was really 1.5 cm--that Dr. Shaw had only changed his recollection "later on." This was not true. Shaw had testified before the Warren Commission--in his very first testimony on the subject--that the wound was 1.5 cm. Even so, Fackler's testimony was quite revealing. When one reads the 9-19-75 letter from Lattimer to researcher Emory Brown preserved in the Harold Weisberg Archives, one finds that Lattimer told Brown that Shaw originally claimed the wound was 3 cm long but then "changed his story gradually to make it 1-1/2 cm in latter versions." Well, heck, did Fackler confer with Lattimer before testifying?

You can bet on it. In 1992, Fackler published a three-page article on the one small test he performed for the trial. He published this in his own publication, Wound Ballistics Review. Well, the bulk of this issue was gobbled up by a 25 page article in which Lattimer recounted the numerous tests he'd performed while trying to prove the single-bullet theory. Fackler, it seems clear, was a willing convert to Lattimer's cause, and a more-than-willing repeater of Lattimer's lies.

[James DiEugenio]

Milicent Cranor chimes in on Facebook:

Hey Jimmy! Interesting article. But I was surprised to read you had not known of the Mastrovito interview, since I'd written about it for you in PROBE. It was in, "On the Rim of the Black Hole" under the subhed "A Bit of Brain Down the Drain." And, since you're intereted in this issue, here's more on what Vrtacmik saw (from my story, "Traces of Witness Tampering"):

Kenneth Vrtacnik, a medical photographer at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, told Douglas Home... Highlights of the 11/12/96 interview:

Number of Bullet Paths? Unsure

He described it as “one long section, tan in color” with “wooden pegs (or arrows) showing bullet trajectories running through it. Asked if there was one peg, or more than one peg, he said he was unsure, but later in the interview again used the word “pegs.”

Size? Unsure

Asked what percentage of the brain it was, he said he could not be sure and declined to give an estimation. He would not even say whether it was less than one-half, or more than one-half, said he “could not be sure.”

r it was perforated by one peg or two would have been obvious to a child. How could he have been unsure about this? I doubt if a failing memory explains it. He had a keen interest in the assassination. He went to the trouble to get a look at this forbidden item. How could he forget what he saw, especially if it so dramatically contradicted the government?

In this case, what seems superimposed is not an image, but amnesia, a blank with a distinct outline that has become very familiar to those of us who research this crime. But it may be that Kenneth Vrtacnik was so meticulous he would rather say nothing than be wrong in the slightest way.

[Nick Bartetzko]

13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Oh please with Paul Hoch. Mr. Warren Report.

Burkley signed the death certificate.

He said in a JFK library interview he did not want to be quoted about the official story. Why?

We don't know.

He and his lawyer wrote that tantalizing letter to Sprague. Sprague leaves, Blakey does no formal deposition.

Then Gunn  got his daughter to sign off on a review of his files.

Cool.

She then reversed herself. 

Why?

George Burkley knew and the Secret Service knew he knew.

The additional question is this: did LBJ also know he knew?

Is that why he more or less bribed him to stay on at the White House after the assassination?

 

 

Jim,

This came up years ago. I believe Dr Burkley's daughter was married to Farmers Insurance Group CEO Leo Dunlea in Los Angeles. I worked for Farmers in Los Angeles for 25 years and was right across the street from the Home Office. I met him a couple of times over the years. He was a quiet, distinguished man and it's my opinion that he convinced his wife to change her mind as he did not want his name in public and associated in any way to the JFKA. Again, I have nothing to base this on other than his quiet leadership style and my impressions after very brief interactions with him.

Nick 

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks so much for that Nick.  

I know its an assumption but it makes a lot of sense.  Those kinds of people do not want tis kind of publicity.

[Pat Speer]

FWIW, the injuries to the brain as described in the autopsy protocol and supplemental report are inconsistent with the shooting scenario (low entrance/high exit) described in the report, which was deemed necessary for the single-assassin solution. And the brain shown in the Dox drawing is consistent with these descriptions. 

Well, this makes it clear to me no switcheroo occurred, of the photos or of the brain. They are, in fact, strong evidence for more than one shooter. 

So why the discrepancies about the timing of the supplemental exam? Age. If you go back and ask the coaches of a high school basketball team a series questions--some 30 years later--about what was said at half-time of a championship game--you are bound to get some discrepancies, to the extent even that you might question if they were in the same locker room. 

And what about the brain weight? Well, it seems clear no one was gonna write down the weight of the brain at autopsy--that would be like writing down the height of a man whose legs had been amputated in an accident as 3'8." And it seems clear the brain had been soaked and infused with formalin at the time of the supplemental exam. So it's totally possible the brain weighed close to 1500 gm and they rounded up, or even that they just put down a number. In any event, it's unlikely they put down the 1500 gm to try to cover up the damage to the brain when the report and photos showed a severely damaged brain, with damage incompatible with the single-assassin solution. 

 

 

[Joe Bauer]

12 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I know it's an assumption but it makes a lot of sense.  Those kinds of people do not want this kind of publicity.

Think of the tens or even hundreds of thousands of persons in high private business, military or political career positions and how many truth secrets they surely knew but would never reveal, acknowledge or discuss to protect their standings or maybe even culpability in?

One of the top three reasons major secrets are kept.

Dallas FBI SA James Hosty kept the truth of his destroying his office's Lee Harvey Oswald file from the Warren Commission just days after the JFKA.

Only revealing this years later upon writing his own book about his involvement with the JFK event and Lee Oswald and Marina titled "Assignment Oswald."

Can anyone imagine what that Lee Oswald FBI file destroying "truth" would have done to the entire Warren Commission investigation direction and context if Hosty had revealed it just months after did it in his Warren Commission testimony giving appearance?

Edited August 25, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Joe Bauer]

14 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

So it's totally possible the brain weighed close to 1500 gm and they rounded up, or even that they just put down a number. In any event, it's unlikely they put down the 1500 gm to try to cover up the damage to the brain when the report and photos showed a severely damaged brain, with damage incompatible with the single-assassin solution. 

There were photos of JFK's removed brain?

Ones that showed it being "severely damaged?"

I have never seen photos of the removed brain.

Even saturating formalin could not bring a half or even 1/3rd missing brain up to a full normal brain weight of 1500 grams...could it?

[James DiEugenio]

It is not at all possible that the brain weighed 1500 grams.

Do you really think they went outside to the car and back to Dealey Plaza to get, for example, the Harper fragment.

This cover up lasted even past the HSCA.

And the photos show pretty much a complete brain, with disruption only on the right side.  

[Pat Speer]

4 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

There were photos of JFK's removed brain?

Ones that showed it being "severely damaged?"

I have never seen photos of the removed brain.

Even saturating formalin could not bring a half or even 1/3rd missing brain up to a full normal brain weight of 1500 grams...could it?

Yes, there are photos of the brain. The Dox drawing published by the HSCA is one of them. I have looked at the photos of dozens if not hundreds of brains of gunshot victims. And JFK's brain is severely damaged, not at all what one would expect for a brain in which a largely intact bullet traversed from low to high, while leaving a small round hole at exit. 

And yes, I know, that last bit sounds curious. The "official" solution pushed by Baden et al was that the bullet exited largely intact and broke up after hitting the windshield strut. They needed to say this in order to avoid what I believe is an over-looked issue regarding the medical evidence. This issue is the large fracture emanating from the large defect. IF the bullet exited in pieces, this fracture would not have been so large. So the HSCA FPP mused that the exiting projectile must have been at least as large as the two recovered fragments. Well, this was SMOKE, seeing as they'd suggested that the large fragment on the x-rays was a slice from the middle of the bullet. (I mean, how else can one explain that this slice was 6.5 mm?) When subsequently confronted on this, moreover, Baden blew more smoke. He said it was incorrect to assume the supposedly 6.5 mm fragment came from the middle, and that it actually rubbed off the back of the bullet. What the? 

 

 

[Micah Mileto]

Is there any strong evidence that the Kennedy family was interfering with the autopsy BEFORE the time RFK was killed? We have an autopsy authorization with RFK's signature and nothing written under the "Restrictions" field. 

[Joe Bauer]

32 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Yes, there are photos of the brain. The Dox drawing published by the HSCA is one of them. I have looked at the photos of dozens if not hundreds of brains of gunshot victims. And JFK's brain is severely damaged, not at all what one would expect for a brain in which a largely intact bullet traversed from low to high, while leaving a small round hole at exit. 

And yes, I know, that last bit sounds curious. The "official" solution pushed by Baden et al was that the bullet exited largely intact and broke up after hitting the windshield strut. They needed to say this in order to avoid what I believe is an over-looked issue regarding the medical evidence. This issue is the large fracture emanating from the large defect. IF the bullet exited in pieces, this fracture would not have been so large. So the HSCA FPP mused that the exiting projectile must have been at least as large as the two recovered fragments. Well, this was SMOKE, seeing as they'd suggested that the large fragment on the x-rays was a slice from the middle of the bullet. (I mean, how else can one explain that this slice was 6.5 mm?) When subsequently confronted on this, moreover, Baden blew more smoke. He said it was incorrect to assume the supposedly 6.5 mm fragment came from the middle, and that it actually rubbed off the back of the bullet. What the? 

 

 

PS...from the photos you viewed of JFK's removed brain, surely you must have seen a noticeable chunk missing from the back of it?

Inches away Clint Hill testified to the WARREN COMMISSION:

Mr. SPECTER. What did you observe as to President Kennedy's condition on arrival at the hospital?
Mr. HILL. The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one "large gaping wound" in the right rear portion of the head.

Edited August 25, 2023 by Joe Bauer