Proof that Pat Speer is wrong about Dr. McClelland initially saying the gaping wound was near the temple.

[Sandy Larsen]

Pat Speer keeps telling us that Dr. Robert McClelland of Parkland Hospital said at first that JFK's gaping head wound was near the left temple. And he laments on how a lot of researchers ignore this "fact" and instead put a lot of weight on McClelland's testimony because he has never changed it. The source of Pat's belief is Exhibit 1, which he has misinterpreted.

The truth is that McClelland has, from the very beginning, maintained that the wound was on the back of Kennedy's head.

I will prove in this post that Pat is wrong. I am documenting this proof in a dedicated thread so that whenever Pat tells his myth, others can easily find this thread and show he's wrong.

 

Proof:

Following is the complete story of what happened with McClelland and the head wound. Unless otherwise specified, I got all the information for the story from the sources below, Exhibits 1 through 4. The story is fully consistent with all the sources, and the sources are consistent with one another. I have added nothing of my own.

When Dr. McClelland arrived at the operating room, Dr. Marion Jenkins and several other doctors were already attending to President Kennedy. Dr. McClelland asked Dr. Jenkins where Kennedy's wounds were. Jenkins was busy operating a breathing bag with his right hand and checking for a pulse on Kennedy's left temple, with a finger on his other hand. McClelland mistakenly thought that Jenkins was pointing to a small entrance wound on the left temple.

Later, McClelland got a good view of the gaping wound on the back of Kennedy's head. (According to his testimony before the Warren Commission.)

This story is proof that McClelland knew from the time he saw the gaping wound that it was on the back of Kennedy's head, not near his left temple.

 

 

Exhibit 1

PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
DATE AND HOUR   Nov. 22, 1963   4:45 P.M.   DOCTOR: Robert N. McClelland

Statement Regarding Assassination of President Kennedy

At approximately 12:45 PM on the above date I was called from the second floor of  Parkland Hospital and went immediately to the Emergency Operating Room. When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea. An endotracheal tube and assisted respiration was started immediately by Dr. Carrico on Duty in the EOR when the President arrived. Drs. Perry, Baxter, and I then performed a tracheotomy for respiratory distress and tracheal injury and Dr. Jones and Paul Peters inserted bilateral anterior chest tubes for pneumothoracis secondary to the tracheomediastinal injury. Simultaneously Dr. Jones had started 3 cut-downs giving blood and fluids immediately, In spite of this, at 12:55 he was pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark the neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery who arrived immediately after I did. The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. He was pronounced dead after external cardiac message failed and ECG activity was gone.

Robert N. McClelland M.D.
Asst. Prof. of Surgery
Southwestern Med.
School of Univ of Tex.
Dallas, Texas

[Bolding is Sandy Larsen's]

 

Exhibit 2

It was getting late in the evening, Dallas time, but before I ended the interview. I reminded Dr. McClelland of the fact that in his Parkland Hospital admission note at 4:45 p.m. on the day of the assassination, he had written that the president died "from a gunshot wound of the left temple." "Yes," he said, "that was a mistake. I never saw any wound to the president's left temple. Dr. Jenkins had told me there was a wound there, though he later denied telling me this.

(Vincent Bugliosi, "Reclaiming History." p. 406)

 

Exhibit 3

"I'll tell you how that happened," Jenkins explained, "When Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, 'Where are his wounds?' And at that time I was operating a breathing bag with my right hand, and was trying to take the President's temporal pulse, and I had my finger on his left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left temple as the wound.

(Gerald Posner, "Case Closed." p. 313)

 

Exhibit 4

 

[Pat Speer]

31 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Pat Speer keeps telling us that Dr. Robert McClelland of Parkland Hospital said at first that JFK's gaping head wound was near the left temple. And he laments on how a lot of researchers ignore this "fact" and instead put a lot of weight on McClelland's testimony because he has never changed it. The source of Pat's belief is Exhibit 1, which he has misinterpreted.

The truth is that McClelland has, from the very beginning, maintained that the wound was on the back of Kennedy's head.

I will prove in this post that Pat is wrong. I am documenting this proof in a dedicated thread so that whenever Pat tells his myth, others can easily find this thread and show he's wrong.

 

Proof:

Following is the complete story of what happened with McClelland and the head wound. Unless otherwise specified, I got all the information for the story from the sources below, Exhibits 1 through 4. The story is fully consistent with all the sources, and the sources are consistent with one another. I have added nothing of my own.

When Dr. McClelland arrived at the operating room, Dr. Marion Jenkins and several other doctors were already attending to President Kennedy. Dr. McClelland asked Dr. Jenkins where Kennedy's wounds were. Jenkins was busy operating a breathing bag with his right hand and checking for a pulse on Kennedy's left temple, with a finger on his other hand. McClelland mistakenly thought that Jenkins was pointing to a small entrance wound on the left temple.

Later, McClelland got a good view of the gaping wound on the back of Kennedy's head. (According to his testimony before the Warren Commission.)

This story is proof that McClelland knew from the time he saw the gaping wound that it was on the back of Kennedy's head, not near his left temple.

 

 

Exhibit 1

PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
DATE AND HOUR   Nov. 22, 1963   4:45 P.M.   DOCTOR: Robert N. McClelland

Statement Regarding Assassination of President Kennedy

At approximately 12:45 PM on the above date I was called from the second floor of  Parkland Hospital and went immediately to the Emergency Operating Room. When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea. An endotracheal tube and assisted respiration was started immediately by Dr. Carrico on Duty in the EOR when the President arrived. Drs. Perry, Baxter, and I then performed a tracheotomy for respiratory distress and tracheal injury and Dr. Jones and Paul Peters inserted bilateral anterior chest tubes for pneumothoracis secondary to the tracheomediastinal injury. Simultaneously Dr. Jones had started 3 cut-downs giving blood and fluids immediately, In spite of this, at 12:55 he was pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark the neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery who arrived immediately after I did. The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. He was pronounced dead after external cardiac message failed and ECG activity was gone.

Robert N. McClelland M.D.
Asst. Prof. of Surgery
Southwestern Med.
School of Univ of Tex.
Dallas, Texas

[Bolding is Sandy Larsen's]

 

Exhibit 2

It was getting late in the evening, Dallas time, but before I ended the interview. I reminded Dr. McClelland of the fact that in his Parkland Hospital admission note at 4:45 p.m. on the day of the assassination, he had written that the president died "from a gunshot wound of the left temple." "Yes," he said, "that was a mistake. I never saw any wound to the president's left temple. Dr. Jenkins had told me there was a wound there, though he later denied telling me this.

(Vincent Bugliosi, "Reclaiming History." p. 406)

 

Exhibit 3

"I'll tell you how that happened," Jenkins explained, "When Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, 'Where are his wounds?' And at that time I was operating a breathing bag with my right hand, and was trying to take the President's temporal pulse, and I had my finger on his left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left temple as the wound.

(Gerald Posner, "Case Closed." p. 313)

 

Exhibit 4

 

Ridiculous. This is not a proof. It's a repeat of what I've been saying all along!!! McClelland wrote that the wound was of the left temple. Months later, when testifying before the WC, he began testifying in line with his co-workers, that the wound was on the back of the head. When his change was later pointed out to him--decades later--he pointed his finger at Jenkins, and claimed Jenkins had confused him by pointing to the left temple. But there's a problem with this. A big one. His report didn't say there was a small entrance wound AND a massive exit wound. McClelland was by Kennedy's head when Clark inspected the head. Clark found no other wound on Kennedy's head. For what's worse, NONE of the other doctors mentioned a separate entrance wound in their reports or press conferences. They saw but one head wound, a massive wound. And McClelland described but one wound, a massive wound. It follows then like night from day that McClelland thought the massive wound he saw was of the left temple. Who knows? Maybe he saw or heard about Bill Newman's appearance on TV in the interim, between Kennedy's death and the writing of his report. Newman famously pointed to his left temple when describing JFK's head wound, because he was holding his son with his right hand, and just wanted to point out where the temple was. It certainly makes more sense that McClelland was confused about left and right than that he had JUST PLUM FORGOT to mention the location of the massive wound he'd observed in his report, and had instead mentioned a wound he never saw in a location he never even looked at. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Sandy Larsen]

11 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Ridiculous. This is not a proof. It's a repeat of what I've been saying all along!!! McClelland wrote that the wound was of the left temple. Months later, when testifying before the WC, he began testifying in line with his co-workers, that the wound was on the back of the head. When his change was later pointed out to him--decades later--he pointed his finger at Jenkins, and claimed Jenkins had confused him by pointing to the left temple. But there's a problem with this. A big one. His report didn't say there was a small entrance wound AND a massive exit wound. McClelland was by Kennedy's head when Clark inspected the head. Clark found no other wound on Kennedy's head. For what's worse, NONE of the other doctors mentioned a separate entrance wound in their reports or press conferences. They saw but one head wound, a massive wound. And McClelland described but one wound, a massive wound. It follows then like night from day that McClelland thought the massive wound he saw was of the left temple. Who knows? Maybe he saw or heard about Bill Newman's appearance on TV in the interim, between Kennedy's death and the writing of his report. Newman famously pointed to his left temple when describing JFK's head wound, because he was holding his son with his right hand, and just wanted to point out where the temple was. It certainly makes more sense that McClelland was confused about left and right than that he had JUST PLUM FORGOT to mention the location of the massive wound he'd observed in his report, and had instead mentioned a wound he never saw in a location he never even looked at. 

 

Tell me one sentence in my story that is wrong. According to you.

 

[Tony Krome]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Dr. McClelland asked Dr. Jenkins where Kennedy's wounds were.

Where's this from? 

[Mart Hall]

43 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Where's this from? 

Exhibit 3

"I'll tell you how that happened," Jenkins explained, "When Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, 'Where are his wounds?' 

[Paul Rigby]

4 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

...NONE of the other doctors mentioned a separate entrance wound in their reports or press conferences. They saw but one head wound, a massive wound...

Really?

Associated Press report, shortly after 2 pm, quoted by WOR Radio, New York, at 2:43 pm, CST (Fred Newcomb & Perry Adams. Murder from Within, p.154, n.58): ‘Dr. Perry said the entrance wound—which is the medical description—the entrance wound was in the front of the head’”

AP, “Treatment Described,” Albuquerque Tribune, 22 November 1963, p.58: “When asked to specify, Perry said the entrance wound was in the front of the head.”

“When asked to specify the nature of the wound, Dr. Perry said that the entrance wound was in the front of the head,” Post-Dispatch News Services, “Priest Who Gave Last Rites ‘Didn’t See Any Sign of Life,’” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 24 November 1963, p.23A

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/11339-why-transcript-1327c-is-a-fraud/

 

[Michael Griffith]

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Pat Speer keeps telling us that Dr. Robert McClelland of Parkland Hospital said at first that JFK's gaping head wound was near the left temple. And he laments on how a lot of researchers ignore this "fact" and instead put a lot of weight on McClelland's testimony because he has never changed it. The source of Pat's belief is Exhibit 1, which he has misinterpreted.

The truth is that McClelland has, from the very beginning, maintained that the wound was on the back of Kennedy's head.

I will prove in this post that Pat is wrong. I am documenting this proof in a dedicated thread so that whenever Pat tells his myth, others can easily find this thread and show he's wrong.

 

Proof:

Following is the complete story of what happened with McClelland and the head wound. Unless otherwise specified, I got all the information for the story from the sources below, Exhibits 1 through 4. The story is fully consistent with all the sources, and the sources are consistent with one another. I have added nothing of my own.

When Dr. McClelland arrived at the operating room, Dr. Marion Jenkins and several other doctors were already attending to President Kennedy. Dr. McClelland asked Dr. Jenkins where Kennedy's wounds were. Jenkins was busy operating a breathing bag with his right hand and checking for a pulse on Kennedy's left temple, with a finger on his other hand. McClelland mistakenly thought that Jenkins was pointing to a small entrance wound on the left temple.

Later, McClelland got a good view of the gaping wound on the back of Kennedy's head. (According to his testimony before the Warren Commission.)

This story is proof that McClelland knew from the time he saw the gaping wound that it was on the back of Kennedy's head, not near his left temple.

 

 

Exhibit 1

PARKLAND MEMORIAL HOSPITAL
ADMISSION NOTE
DATE AND HOUR   Nov. 22, 1963   4:45 P.M.   DOCTOR: Robert N. McClelland

Statement Regarding Assassination of President Kennedy

At approximately 12:45 PM on the above date I was called from the second floor of  Parkland Hospital and went immediately to the Emergency Operating Room. When I arrived President Kennedy was being attended by Drs Malcolm Perry, Charles Baxter, James Carrico, and Ronald Jones. The President was at the time comatose from a massive gunshot wound of the head with a fragment wound of the trachea. An endotracheal tube and assisted respiration was started immediately by Dr. Carrico on Duty in the EOR when the President arrived. Drs. Perry, Baxter, and I then performed a tracheotomy for respiratory distress and tracheal injury and Dr. Jones and Paul Peters inserted bilateral anterior chest tubes for pneumothoracis secondary to the tracheomediastinal injury. Simultaneously Dr. Jones had started 3 cut-downs giving blood and fluids immediately, In spite of this, at 12:55 he was pronounced dead by Dr. Kemp Clark the neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery who arrived immediately after I did. The cause of death was due to massive head and brain injury from a gunshot wound of the left temple. He was pronounced dead after external cardiac message failed and ECG activity was gone.

Robert N. McClelland M.D.
Asst. Prof. of Surgery
Southwestern Med.
School of Univ of Tex.
Dallas, Texas

[Bolding is Sandy Larsen's]

 

Exhibit 2

It was getting late in the evening, Dallas time, but before I ended the interview. I reminded Dr. McClelland of the fact that in his Parkland Hospital admission note at 4:45 p.m. on the day of the assassination, he had written that the president died "from a gunshot wound of the left temple." "Yes," he said, "that was a mistake. I never saw any wound to the president's left temple. Dr. Jenkins had told me there was a wound there, though he later denied telling me this.

(Vincent Bugliosi, "Reclaiming History." p. 406)

 

Exhibit 3

"I'll tell you how that happened," Jenkins explained, "When Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, 'Where are his wounds?' And at that time I was operating a breathing bag with my right hand, and was trying to take the President's temporal pulse, and I had my finger on his left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left temple as the wound.

(Gerald Posner, "Case Closed." p. 313)

Exhibit 4

 

The very idea that McClellan placed the large wound in the left temple is absurd on its face. Nothing he's ever said supports such a nonsensical claim. 

Why would McClellan have invented a large wound in "the right posterior portion of the skull" (6 H 33) in his WC testimony? 

It seems that Pat spends most of his time in this forum attacking the best evidence for multiple gunmen and conspiracy. If you were a newcomer to the forum and knew nothing about Pat, you might well assume that he favors the single-assassin view. 

The WC apologists who reside in the JFK Assassination Forum frequently quote Pat on the medical evidence. 

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

Really?

Associated Press report, shortly after 2 pm, quoted by WOR Radio, New York, at 2:43 pm, CST (Fred Newcomb & Perry Adams. Murder from Within, p.154, n.58): ‘Dr. Perry said the entrance wound—which is the medical description—the entrance wound was in the front of the head’”

AP, “Treatment Described,” Albuquerque Tribune, 22 November 1963, p.58: “When asked to specify, Perry said the entrance wound was in the front of the head.”

“When asked to specify the nature of the wound, Dr. Perry said that the entrance wound was in the front of the head,” Post-Dispatch News Services, “Priest Who Gave Last Rites ‘Didn’t See Any Sign of Life,’” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 24 November 1963, p.23A

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/11339-why-transcript-1327c-is-a-fraud/

 

This is second hand gibberish in a paper. Many other reporters were at the same press conference. Perry said the wound was in the neck. We also have the transcript. Perry said the wound was in the neck. Apparently, the reporter (or a person taking notes over the phone) got confused. As far as the priest, he only saw JFK's face and claimed he saw a blood clot over his eye that he thought might have been an entrance. He quickly backed away. Neither of these claims are remotely credible, and there is no evidence whatsoever that any medical personnel in Trauma Room One saw or thought they saw an entrance wound outside the large head wound, which Clark believed to be a wound of both entrance and exit. 

From Chapter 18d...

Let's start with Father Oscar Huber, the priest who gave Kennedy his last rites. The November 24th, 1963, Philadelphia Sunday Bulletin ran an article datelined Dallas, Nov. 23rd, 1963. Father Huber was interviewed for this article. It reported: “The President was lying on a rubber-tired table when I came in,” Father Huber said. He was standing at his head. Father Huber said the President was covered by a white sheet which hid his face, but not his feet. “His feet were bare,” said Father Huber... He said he wet his right thumb with holy oil and anointed a Cross over the President’s forehead, noticing as he did, a “terrible wound” over his left eye."

A "terrible" wound over his left eye! No such wound was noticed by the Parkland doctors. It seems possible then that Father Huber had confused Kennedy's left for his right, and that Huber had in fact noticed the wound depicted in the autopsy photos while at Parkland.

Or not. A year later, on November 22, 1964, researcher Shirley Martin spoke to Huber. She then reported on this discussion in an 11-24-64 letter written to fellow researcher Vincent Salandria. This letter was then quoted in Praise From a Future Generation, by John Kelin (2007). She wrote: "Saw Father Huber on Sunday...He says when he entered Emergency Room #1, he pulled the sheet just to the edge of the President's nose and then he saw what he assumed to be a bullet entry hole above the President's left eye...The next day, Father Huber says he learned that the assassin had stood behind the President, therefore negating the possibility that what he saw had been an entry bullet wound. At once, Father Huber realized that what he had seen was only a 'blood clot.'"

A year and a half later, while interviewing Father Huber for his movie Rush to Judgment, Mark Lane followed up on Martin's questions, and received a similar response. (The transcript to this interview was made available by the Wisconsin Historical Society.) Huber told Lane "Well, his face was covered with blood and there was a blotch of blood on the left forehead, which I, at the time, thought possibly could be a bullet wound, but I learned later that it was not, that I was entirely mistaken, because he had been shot in the back of the head. I did not see really any wounds on him, because I only uncovered his face to the tip of his nose. I learned later that the bullet came out, perhaps at the jaw, I don't know."

And that wasn't the last time Father Huber spoke on the matter. In late 1966, Lawrence Schiller followed up with many of those who'd been interviewed by Lane. In his book The Scavengers and Critics of the Warren Report, Schiller quoted Huber as follows: "I saw the President lying on an emergency room table...I noticed that his extremities were extremely white, and the thought came to me: 'There's no blood in this man...' I removed the sheet down to the tip of his nose and anointed him with holy oils...And [then I] put the sheet back over his face. I did not know where he had been shot, where the bullets had struck him and I had no thought of looking for anything like that. His face was covered in blood, but I saw no wounds."

Huber was so worried about his actions being misrepresented, for that matter, that he wrote a response to William Manchester's 1967 book The Death of a President. This response insisted "I removed, to the tip of his nose, the sheet that covered the President's head and immediately began administering the last rites of Catholic Church..." When he sent this response to researcher Stephen Davenport on 8-18-70, moreover, he included a few more details, which Davenport subsequently shared with the HSCA. In this letter, Huber claimed that when he saw Kennedy: "I saw no sign of life in him. His forehead was covered with blood--his eyes were closed as if he were asleep--I did not see any bullet holes in his face or in his forehead--as far as I could see." 

[Jean Ceulemans]

Amen

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

The very idea that McClellan placed the large wound in the left temple is absurd on its face. Nothing he's ever said supports such a nonsensical claim. 

Why would McClellan have invented a large wound in "the right posterior portion of the skull" (6 H 33) in his WC testimony? 

It seems that Pat spends most of his time in this forum attacking the best evidence for multiple gunmen and conspiracy. If you were a newcomer to the forum and knew nothing about Pat, you might well assume that he favors the single-assassin view. 

The WC apologists who reside in the JFK Assassination Forum frequently quote Pat on the medical evidence. 

LOL. Nonsense. Read McClelland's initial report. The only wound described is "of the left temple." Now, people would like to believe he simply FORGOT to give a location for the wound he did see, and instead gave a location for a wound he did not see, and was not seen or reported by anyone else. That's far more damaging to his legacy than screwing up JFK's right with left. Think about it. The "defense" of McClelland holds that he made four major screw-ups, not one. He 1) failed to give a location for the "massive wound" he saw, 2) claimed there was another wound on the skull that no one saw, 3) failed to identify this wound unseen by everyone including himself as an entrance wound for the massive wound he did see  and 4) placed this entrance wound in a location he never even looked at.  The belief he simply mixed up right and left reflects more positively on his competence and makes a heckuva lot more sense. 

Edited November 30, 2023 by Pat Speer

[Micah Mileto]

12 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

Really?

Associated Press report, shortly after 2 pm, quoted by WOR Radio, New York, at 2:43 pm, CST (Fred Newcomb & Perry Adams. Murder from Within, p.154, n.58): ‘Dr. Perry said the entrance wound—which is the medical description—the entrance wound was in the front of the head’”

AP, “Treatment Described,” Albuquerque Tribune, 22 November 1963, p.58: “When asked to specify, Perry said the entrance wound was in the front of the head.”

“When asked to specify the nature of the wound, Dr. Perry said that the entrance wound was in the front of the head,” Post-Dispatch News Services, “Priest Who Gave Last Rites ‘Didn’t See Any Sign of Life,’” St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 24 November 1963, p.23A

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/11339-why-transcript-1327c-is-a-fraud/

 

Ugh. I'm sorry but I don't think that tread is correct. A few searches of specific quotes on newspapers.com refute your hypothesis IMO.

 

Also, who were the Associated Press reports available physically in Dallas before 3 pm? Just Jack Bell or more?

 

Soon ill post more about the transcript and how it is corroborated by the radio reports.

Edited December 1, 2023 by Micah Mileto

[James DiEugenio]

Nice one Sandy.

[Pat Speer]

38 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Nice one Sandy.

Huh? Sandy presented no proof of anything, except that I was telling the truth. I've said all along that McClelland claimed he'd been confused and had said the wound was "of the left temple" because Jenkins had pointed to the left temple, or some such thing. Sandy disputed even that. Upon realizing I was correct, Sandy started this ridiculous thread, in which he cites McCelland's subsequent statements as proof he was telling the truth. Talk of your circular reasoning!

The whole point is that McClelland made no mention of an entrance wound or exit wound in his original report. He said there was a wound of the left temple. As everyone else described one head wound, and as McClelland himself only saw one head wound, it is as close to a fact as anything in this case that he was saying the one wound he saw was of the left temple, after mistaking JFK's right for his left. He then moved the wound to fit what the others had said. But those wanting him to be a consistent truth-teller who suspected a conspiracy from day one need to understand his history, and that he told Dudman there was nothing about the wounds to suggest a shot from the front, told Weisberg Garrison was a psychopath, and admitted later in life he'd only changed his opinions about the direction of the shots after viewing the Zapruder film on TV. There is no way one can square this with some of what he said afterwards, when he, as Crenshaw, became a darling of the CT community, who applauded everything they wanted to hear and ignored everything they didn't want to hear. For example, McClelland said over and over that the throat wound depicted in the autopsy photos looked just as it did at Parkland. And yet that didn't stop Lifton and others from claiming this wound had been altered along with the head wound. 

 

[Cory Santos]

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Huh? Sandy presented no proof of anything, except that I was telling the truth. I've said all along that McClelland claimed he'd been confused and had said the wound was "of the left temple" because Jenkins had pointed to the left temple, or some such thing. Sandy disputed even that. Upon realizing I was correct, Sandy started this ridiculous thread, in which he cites McCelland's subsequent statements as proof he was telling the truth. Talk of your circular reasoning!

The whole point is that McClelland made no mention of an entrance wound or exit wound in his original report. He said there was a wound of the left temple. As everyone else described one head wound, and as McClelland himself only saw one head wound, it is as close to a fact as anything in this case that he was saying the one wound he saw was of the left temple, after mistaking JFK's right for his left. He then moved the wound to fit what the others had said. But those wanting him to be a consistent truth-teller who suspected a conspiracy from day one need to understand his history, and that he told Dudman there was nothing about the wounds to suggest a shot from the front, told Weisberg Garrison was a psychopath, and admitted later in life he'd only changed his opinions about the direction of the shots after viewing the Zapruder film on TV. There is no way one can square this with some of what he said afterwards, when he, as Crenshaw, became a darling of the CT community, who applauded everything they wanted to hear and ignored everything they didn't want to hear. For example, McClelland said over and over that the throat wound depicted in the autopsy photos looked just as it did at Parkland. And yet that didn't stop Lifton and others from claiming this wound had been altered along with the head wound. 

 

Well, to be fair, Dr. Crenshaw had impressive credentials and was correct about the LBJ call and about being there with JFK -even when other doctors tried to indicate he was not there.  So if telling the truth made him a “darling”, I can’t say, but it was refreshing to hear some truth for once.  

[Sandy Larsen]

14 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

Sandy started this ridiculous thread, in which he cites McCelland's subsequent statements as proof he was telling the truth. Talk of your circular reasoning!

 

Dr. Jenkins himself corroborated what Dr. McClelland said, that he got the small-hole-at-the-temple information from him! There's no circular reasoning in my proof. There is just your stubbornness and biases that are keeping you from seeing the truth.