Charles Black Posted August 16, 2005 Share Posted August 16, 2005 (edited) I realize my near total lack of knowledge in this field so I don't mind asking a couple of simple questions. Was there no trust in forensic pathology in 1963? I know that there were many forensic pathologists practicing. Was it considered an inept or inadequate science? If not, why was one, or better yet several, not called upon to determine the specifics of the death of the man, who was generally recognized to be, the most powerful person in the world of politics-----not to mention that he was a very rich and powerful person in his own right. A person whose shooting murder was to be investigated by no one less than the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. As a Catholic myself, I do not know of a forbidding religous reason that the burial could not have been delayed for a day if neccessary. Why not have persons who were best in their field conducting this autopsy? Why did Jackie, Robert or Ted not demand it? I of course know a few obvious reasons, but has there ever been a legitimate reason given? Why was it neccessary that an autopsy be conducted within eight hours of his death, with whatever poorly qualified pathologists that might, at that time, be available? I would think that Mrs. Kennedy's meticulous attention to detail and protocol regarding nearly everything else in her life, would have demanded nothing but the best, as was her custom. I would think also that J. Edgar, with his own attention to detail, should have been demanding the same and not want any doors left open to potential criticism of his investigation. Unless of course he did not want "correct" forensic detail. In my personal experience,things that do not seem correct and logical, usually are not. This autopsy scenario becomes more and more ridiculous as I merely scratch the surface of potential problems. Conspiracy clues become more and more prevalent as each aspect of this case comes under more and more scrutiny from people who are no more qualified than even myself. "A mystery wrapped in an enigma"? Not really! There seems to be much motive for many people, tho not Lee Harvey Oswald, to want the President out of the way and that guilt be placed only upon an unguilty, tho misguided, patsy. Charlie Black Edited August 16, 2005 by Charles Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now