JFK: What The Doctors Saw validates there was no exit hole in the back of JFK's head.

[Micah Mileto]

12 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Akin claimed he was coerced. Entertaining the possibility of a temple wound probably also entails entertaining the possibility of a massive cover-up of Parkland witnesses.

Edited January 2 by Micah Mileto

[Pat Speer]

20 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

In Shelley's first-day statement, he says that after the shots, he ran across the street to the concrete island, where he bumped into Gloria Calvery. He then went back to the steps, went  inside, and called his wife.

In Lovelady's first-day statement, he says that after the shots he went back inside the TSBD.

So they both went back inside right after the shooting. Through the front door.

It is therefore no surprise if Vickie Adams saw Shelley and Lovelady after she ran down the steps.

 

Wow. He never said anything about going back to the steps. He said he went back in the building. He did not specify which entrance. 

[Sandy Larsen]

15 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Wow. He never said anything about going back to the steps. He said he went back in the building. He did not specify which entrance. 

 

Yes, you're right. My bad.

Shelley didn't state which entrance he re-entered the building through in his first-day statement. But it's obvious that he entered through the main entrance where the steps are. I explain why below. But the bottom line is that he must have entered the main entrance in order for Vickie Adams to have seen him inside as she exited the stairwell only 60 seconds or so after the gun shots.

----------------------------

Both Shelley and Lovelady said in LATER statements that they went TOGETHER to the railroad yard and then into a west entrance, after they had waited on the front steps for three minutes for Gloria Calvery's arrival. That was a lie, as I proved with the Darnell film. Darnell shows that Gloria arrived at the steps less than 30 seconds after the shots, and was talking to Lovelady there. Shelley was gone.

So Shelley wasn't with Lovelady after the shots. If you want to believe that he went ALONE to the railroad yard and then into the west entrance, by all means do. I believe it's far more likely that the whole railroad yard trip was fabricated in order to discredit Vickie Adams. Shelley and Lovelady lied about that trip just like they lied about waiting three minutes for Gloria's arrival at the steps, and just like Shelley lied about where he bumped into Gloria.

Victoria Adams' testimony and statements, corroborated by Dorothy Garner, prove that I am right.

 

[Pat Speer]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Yes, you're right. My bad.

Shelley didn't state which entrance he re-entered the building through in his first-day statement. But it's obvious that he entered through the main entrance where the steps are. I explain why below. But the bottom line is that he must have entered the main entrance in order for Vickie Adams to have seen him inside as she exited the stairwell only 60 seconds or so after the gun shots.

----------------------------

Both Shelley and Lovelady said in LATER statements that they went TOGETHER to the railroad yard and then into a west entrance, after they had waited on the front steps for three minutes for Gloria Calvery's arrival. That was a lie, as I proved with the Darnell film. Darnell shows that Gloria arrived at the steps less than 30 seconds after the shots, and was talking to Lovelady there. Shelley was gone.

So Shelley wasn't with Lovelady after the shots. If you want to believe that he went ALONE to the railroad yard and then into the west entrance, by all means do. I believe it's far more likely that the whole railroad yard trip was fabricated in order to discredit Vickie Adams. Shelley and Lovelady lied about that trip just like they lied about waiting three minutes for Gloria's arrival at the steps, and just like Shelley lied about where he bumped into Gloria.

Victoria Adams' testimony and statements, corroborated by Dorothy Garner, prove that I am right.

 

So let's be clear, you are now stating as fact that the two men walking rapidly westward in the films are NOT Shelley and Lovelady, even though they look just like them, and even though they both said they saw Baker run up behind them, not to them. Is that right? 

Mr. BALL - Then you went out across Elm?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, to the divider.

Mr. BALL - Between the two Elm Streets?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.

Mr. BALL - The one street dead ends and the other street that goes on down under the viaduct?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.

Mr. BALL - Did you run out to the point or walk out?

Mr. SHELLEY - I believe we trotted out there.

 

Mr. BALL - And that's the place you saw Truly and Baker, you say, going into the building?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, uh-huh,

 

 

Mr. BALL - By the time you left the steps had Mr. Truly entered the building?

Mr. LOVELADY - As we left the steps I would say we were at least 15, maybe 25, steps away from the building. I looked back and I saw him and the policeman running into the building.

Mr. BALL - How many steps?

Mr. LOVELADY - Twenty, 25.

Mr. BALL - Steps away and you looked back and saw him enter the building?

Mr. LOVELADY - Yes.

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

So let's be clear, you are now stating as fact that the two men walking rapidly westward in the films are NOT Shelley and Lovelady, even though they look just like them, and even though they both said they saw Baker run up behind them, not to them. Is that right? 

Mr. BALL - Then you went out across Elm?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, to the divider.

Mr. BALL - Between the two Elm Streets?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.

Mr. BALL - The one street dead ends and the other street that goes on down under the viaduct?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes.

Mr. BALL - Did you run out to the point or walk out?

Mr. SHELLEY - I believe we trotted out there.

 

Mr. BALL - And that's the place you saw Truly and Baker, you say, going into the building?

Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, uh-huh,

 

 

Mr. BALL - By the time you left the steps had Mr. Truly entered the building?

Mr. LOVELADY - As we left the steps I would say we were at least 15, maybe 25, steps away from the building. I looked back and I saw him and the policeman running into the building.

Mr. BALL - How many steps?

Mr. LOVELADY - Twenty, 25.

Mr. BALL - Steps away and you looked back and saw him enter the building?

Mr. LOVELADY - Yes.

 

In his first-day affidavit, Shelley said he ran across the little road to the concrete island and bumped into Gloria Calvery there. (After which he went back inside and called his wife.)

That is consistent with what Darnell shows. Darnell shows Calvery standing on the steps. (Talking face-to-face with Lovelady.)

This means that, immediately after the shots, Calvery ran from her position on Elm Street toward the TSBD steps, and Shelley ran from the steps toward where Calvery was. And they bumped into each other on the concrete island.

After that, according to what we see in Darnell, Shelley went somewhere (he's not in the film) and Gloria ran across the little road to the TSBD steps. (And talked face-to-face with Lovelady.)

We know that the two guys walking toward the railroad yard in Darnell aren't Lovelady and Shelley, together. Because Darnell shows Lovelady on the steps talking to Calvery at the very same time as those two guys are walking to the railroad yard! Lovelady can't be in two places at once.

But there are other reasons we know that those two guys aren't Shelley and Lovelady. First, because Darnell shows that the alleged Darnell is taller than the alleged Lovelady, which is the opposite of reality. Shelley was quite short. Second, if they were walking together, then why did they split up? With the alleged Shelley guy turning and going toward Elm Street. Which is what the film shows.

So, as I said, Darnell shows that Lovelady remained on the steps at least for a short time after Calvery arrived. But what happened to Shelley? Well, he may have gone back inside and called his wife. Or, it's conceivable that he is indeed the guy walking toward the railroad yard. Though without Lovelady.

The problem with the latter possibility is that that guy doesn't continue on to the railroad yard. No... he turns to the left and goes toward Elm Street instead, as I said above.

However... having explored all that, we nevertheless know that Shelley had to have gone back to the steps and gone inside before the Darnell film was rolling. And that Lovelady had to have quit talking to Calvery and gone inside shortly after Darnell quit rolling. Because Vickie Adams saw them both inside when she arrive from the forth floor to the first!

The narrative I just described is consistent with everybody's first-day statement and with the Darnell film. Yay!

In contrast, the WC testimonies of Lovelady and Shelley are irreconcilable with the Darnell film, and with Shelley's first-day statement. The Darnell film alone proves they lied in the WC testimonies.

 

[Keven Hofeling]

On 12/29/2023 at 7:56 PM, Pat Speer said:

And then there's McClelland... In his initial report, McClelland described but one wound, a wound of the left temple. When asked in the 80's to show the location of the one wound he'd observed, moreover, he pointed to a location far above his ear, essentially at the top of the head, and inches away from where the wound was placed in the drawing mistakenly attributed to him. So, no, he is not much of an occipital witness, is he?

 

PAT SPEER WROTE: "When asked in the 80's to show the location of the one wound [Dr. Robert McClelland had] observed, moreover, he pointed to a location far above his ear, essentially at the top of the head, and inches away from where the wound was placed in the drawing mistakenly attributed to him. So, no, he is not much of an occipital witness, is he?"

Wait a minute!

The actual footage from the TMWKK episode shows that McClelland is actually just resting his fingers on the top of his head while rubbing his thumb up and down the occipital-parietal region of the right side of the back of his head to indicate the location of the large wound, right where he has ALWAYS maintained that it was located. And you have cherry picked a frame from that segment and have falsely described it as being McClelland indicating that the large wound was instead on the top of JFK's head.

As can be seen in the following clip of McClelland's entire hand gesture, he is running his thumb up and down on the right side of the back of his head as he describes the location of the large head wound to the interviewer. 

Moreover, there is no way you could have merely been confused about what Dr. McClelland was communicating with his hand gesture when you were capturing the screenshot from the segment because at the time, in that video, he was saying the following:

"Almost a fifth or perhaps even a quarter of the right back part of the head in this area here [AT WHICH POINT MCLELLAND RAN HIS THUMB UP AND DOWN THE BACK OF HIS HEAD] had been blasted out along with probably most of the brain tissue in the area."

See SEGMENT ON YOUTUBE, I HAVE CUED IT IN ADVANCE FOR YOU TO 26:08:

A review of your website indicates that you have used this misrepresentation about Dr. McClelland --  and several other misrepresentations -- as the foundation of your crusade against the voluminous evidence of JFK's large avulsive back-of-the-head wound, meaning that it all comes down like a house of cards upon a showing that your bedrock assumptions are demonstrably false.

Take for example your claim that "McClelland described but one wound, a wound of the left temple," which is in its entirety based upon your flawed assumption that the use by McClelland of the phrase "OF  the left temple" in his initial report of the wounds means that he was unaware of what he and several other doctors believed to be the large exit wound in the back of the head. If you had actually read medical journals, as you relentlessly advise others to do, you would have learned that it was abundantly common in the era of the doctors who taught Robert McClelland in medical school to refer to entrance wounds with the prefix predicate "of" without need to specify an exit wound (as a means of shorthand). Not only that, but your effort to demonize Dr. McClelland by questioning his integrity in this manner is simply unconscionable, and in my view, places in question your entire project.

Insinuating that Dr. McClelland was making money off of the assassination by selling his wound drawings and notes without any evidence that this was so strikes me as being profoundly out of bounds. Dr. McClelland's drawings and notes to researchers were so very prolific and common during his lifetime because of his devotion to the truth, and because of his generous disposition toward researchers -- it is a tribute to him that those items are now considered so valuable after his death.

And sure, the sketch in Josiah Thompson's book was an approximation, as all of the witness sketches are, human memory being what it is, but it surely was not sinister of Dr. McClelland to value it so much as an approximation that he ratified it, and perhaps even considered it as his own; but it is sinister to set that sketch up as a straw man, as you have done, by virtue of insisting that the slightest deviation from it by other differing accounts of the wound constitutes conclusive evidence that the account in question must necessarily be impossible for daring to contradict autopsy evidence that is recognized as  fraudulent by the majority of researchers who are recognizable as honest brokers who lack any vested interest in the government's theory of the case.

You have criticized the sketch of the large avulsive back-of-the-head wound that Dr. McClelland made on TMWKK as contradicting estimations of the wound made by others who lacked first-hand experience with that wound, such as Horne and Mantik, but fail to acknowledge the remarkable similarity it has with the approximations of others who do have first-hand experience, such as Jim Jenkins, as follows:

ABOVE: DR. MCLELLAND'S SKETCH OF LARGE BOH HEAD WOUND ON TMWKK (1988):

ABOVE: JAMES JENKINS'S DRAWINGS OF BOTH OF JFK'S HEAD WOUNDS ON SKULL MODEL (2018):

The remarkable similarities between the sketches of the large avulsive back-of-the-head wounds by the actual hands of both Dr. McClelland and James Jenkins is no mere coincidence. It is the mark of mutual corroboration that defies the cheap sleight of hand parlor tricks that you have thrown at them. It is the mark of authenticity; and accordingly, I think that you owe Jim Jenkins and the family of Dr. McClelland  -- as well as all of the others you have misled -- a long overdue apology.

 For the following is the reality that no amount of hair splitting on your part can diminish...

 

Edited January 3 by Keven Hofeling