Jump to content
The Education Forum

BE7


John Dolva
 Share

Recommended Posts

The suggestion here is that for autopsy photo BE7 Kennedy's head is not in the stainless steel cradle. The cradleit has been removed. The collared hole it fitted into matches the image on the photo.

This gives the suggested location of the photographer and orientation in relation to the xrays:

EDIT:: perspective correction and 'neg' reversal.The Dark area on the photo is NOT the dark area on the xrays (in part anyway), the visible bone formations and the external to wound indicators like ear and metal collar is used.Larger sample displayed.

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

With the apxray and photo, orientated in this way and wrapped on to a 3d model of Kennedys head, a number of features match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the apxray and photo, orientated in this way and wrapped on to a 3d model of Kennedys head, a number of features match.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the apxray and photo, orientated in this way and wrapped on to a 3d model of Kennedys head, a number of features match.

John:

Very interesting. I'd been thinking about the notion of wrapping the 2D xrays around a 3D model, but was never able to get satisfactory results. Kudos to you -- I think you're on to something here!

When I look at these images, though, I find myself a bit perplexed... (not anything new when considering this case, eh?) I think there may be frontal shot indications, but I find the angles troublesome. I need to do some reading and post again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frank: ...angles troublesome.

Frank. Yeah, it gets hard to visualise. I've got the luxury of seeing it in realtime and can turn the model as I wish. To snapshot and then placing it so it can be understood in 2D then is not that easy. Many of the images have to be shifted off from where they should be in order to reveal the match. Howevewer, it's the idea that is ultimayely important. I can see indications of shots but need to study it more to say anything about it.

It helps to get a wider sense of where things were and not be limited by the bounds of the individual photographs. In this is a suggestion of combining 4 photos from the rear of the body/head. The stirrup is obviously swivelable and most likely removable. I suggest the wound BW photo BE7 was taken towards the end of the autopsy. The head is no longer in the stirrup which has been removed and the collar is visible in the photo. Opposite it, is what looks like a portion of the ear. When the collar is resized to match the size in the other photo where it appears clearly, then the BE7 photo scaling makes sense. Lining up the collar and ear gives the suggested photographer position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting work, John. Quite revealing.

Pat Speer, are you catching this? How does this possible match with YOUR evaluation of the medical evidence?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting work, John. Quite revealing.

Pat Speer, are you catching this? How does this possible match with YOUR evaluation of the medical evidence?

I'm hoping someone who has spent a lot of time looking at the photo's can comment on this suggestion. There are other matters to go on to , but this is perhaps a fundamental benchmark. As the suggestion is that the head is no longer in the stirrup for BE7 it is somewhere that is only approximated by the standard 'back on table' view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree 100% with Mark. This is great work, and we anxiously await Pat's comments.

Well, not overly anxious Tim, I hope. :P Anticipation perhaps. It's here hopefully for discussion.

This seems to be a head position on the table that makes this suggestion possible. (the stirrup swiveled and left in place as locator.)

Perhaps after the rear photos the body was laid back on the table without the stirrup and placed roughly in this location and the wound exposed and photo taken.

(this is for illustration only, not a PRECISE orientation)

* Those who are particularly observant may see that in this illustration the visible skin has been stretched BACK over the wound. (Various features are found to match up.)

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, your work here reflects favorably on what I've read in Fetzer's "Murder In Dealy Plaza," in regard to Mantik's assertions that the autopsy photos weren't altered, but that the problem with them was in the orientation of the photos. Your work here seems to confirm that, to some degree. Please continue, as I think much can be learned from this sort of work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, your work here reflects favorably on what I've read in Fetzer's "Murder In Dealy Plaza," in regard to Mantik's assertions that the autopsy photos weren't altered, but that the problem with them was in the orientation of the photos. Your work here seems to confirm that, to some degree. Please continue, as I think much can be learned from this sort of work.

Mark, that's interesting. I go about these things trying as much as possible not to refer to other peoples conclusions. In this way I try to avoid pre judice.

In this instance I took the WC and HSCA pictures and thought I'd see if I could make sense of them as presented.

The idea here came out of a post by Lee (yet again proof of value of a speculative mind relatively free of bonds) where he was suggesting a feature on the table as being in the photo. I disagreed but was inspired to look for other ways. So this and the original material brings me in line with Fetzer, no problems there (I beg to differ on zfilm alterations :P and other things I've read about on this forum, but thats another story).

_________________________

A separate thing about the autopsy material is the bone fragments. The side flap seems to me to be easy to locate.

When placing the flap, as in the rear head photo, in an inverted bowl (3D) and turning it around one gets a fragment of size and ortientation that very well matches suture and other features clearly visible in the pre-mortem xray.

It looks to me like this fragment has a bullet sized and shaped hole on the margin with a crack radiating from it. The thing of interest is that the bevelling around this half hole appears to be ON THE INSIDE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice job John.

I also noticed when looking at the "Death Stare" autopsy photo, that it doesn't appear to show a head support attached to the table.

Thank's Robin.

I noticed this. I suspect it's there but hidden and the perspective makes it hard to see depth. I'll look again more carefully though.

_________________________

The fragment in question is located according to where it happened to fold back when the xrays were taken. This means that it is not in the place wher it was premortem. However it seems easy to orient according to sutures and outlines. At the location of the half hole mentioned, on the xray there is a bevelled half hole as well. For this bevelling to appear on the photo as being on the inside, as far as I understand, indicates an entry. xray on left photo right. The shape of the half hole is very similar with the suture immediately posterior of it. (The bright spot on the photo within the bevelling should not automatically be assumed to be something xray opaque. It may be a droplet reflecting light or some other light coloured feature.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE:

Paul O'Connor and Jim Jenkins have stated that Kennedy's head was supported by a block, not by a stainless steel head-holder. Jerrol Custer, however, stated that the steel head-holder was removed for the X-rays. If Custer can be believed, I guess it is possible that early photographs were taken with the head-holder in place, it was removed for X-rays, then replaced by a block.

One of the autopsy photographs of William Pitzer's body* -- in the Bethesda morgue -- was taken from a similar point of view as below. The autopsy table looks the same as in the Kennedy photographs, and an insertion socket for a head-holder is visible (see arrow, right).

Alan Eaglesham

3799.jpg

Edited by Robin Unger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE:

Paul O'Connor and Jim Jenkins have stated that Kennedy's head was supported by a block, not by a stainless steel head-holder. Jerrol Custer, however, stated that the steel head-holder was removed for the X-rays. If Custer can be believed, I guess it is possible that early photographs were taken with the head-holder in place, it was removed for X-rays, then replaced by a block.

One of the autopsy photographs of William Pitzer's body* -- in the Bethesda morgue -- was taken from a similar point of view as below. The autopsy table looks the same as in the Kennedy photographs, and an insertion socket for a head-holder is visible (see arrow, right).

Alan Eaglesham

It does make sense that the metal head support was removed prior to taking x-rays and replaced with a block. Obviously, the metal cradle would show on the x-rays while something with less density would not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...