Hoover memo 11/29/63.

[Cliff Varnell]

The FBI marked the back wound according to the bullet hole in the jacket.

Correction:

It was inded the autopsy face sheet that was used to mark the low back wound.

Why would Specter himself mark a wound location 5+ inches below his SBT

trajectory?

Cliff, if you re-read the testimony of Frazier, Shaneyfelt, and Kelley, you'll see that the re-enactment was run by the Commission, basically Specter. It was he who decided what angles were to be measured, etc. He pushed for the use of the autopsy photos in peforming the re-enactment. He saw an autopsy photo on the day of the re-enactment. This autopsy photo was of the back wound, the very photo necessary for him to accurately mark the back wound on the FBI stand-in. This back wound was marked acurately. It follows then that he used the autopsy photo he saw in the re-enactment.

Pat, this is where we disagree.

If Arlen Specter claims the re-enactment back wound was based on the autopsy photo he's lying.

Flat out mendacity.

The mark on the jacket in the re-enactment is NOT in the accepted wound location on the

Fox 5 autopsy photo.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/back.jpg

The "official" back wound in this photo -- which is, after all, an improperly produced autopsy

photo of poor quality and suspect authenticity -- is at C7/T1.

The location of the back wound in the reenactment is T3 or lower.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Ford-Rankin/FBIreenact.GIF

http://www.jfklancer.com/docs.maps/autopdescript1.gif

Check out the photo in TKOAP pg 125. Specter looks like a total clown, like an idiot, holding

this pointer 5+ inches above the wound location.

Do you think anyone VOLUNTEERS for such duty?

[Pat Speer]

Pat, this is where we disagree.

If Arlen Specter claims the re-enactment back wound was based on the autopsy photo he's lying.

Flat out mendacity.

The mark on the jacket in the re-enactment is NOT in the accepted wound location on the

Fox 5 autopsy photo.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/back.jpg

The "official" back wound in this photo -- which is, after all, an improperly produced autopsy

photo of poor quality and suspect authenticity -- is at C7/T1.

The location of the back wound in the reenactment is T3 or lower.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Ford-Rankin/FBIreenact.GIF

http://www.jfklancer.com/docs.maps/autopdescript1.gif

Check out the photo in TKOAP pg 125. Specter looks like a total clown, like an idiot, holding

this pointer 5+ inches above the wound location.

Do you think anyone VOLUNTEERS for such duty?

Cliff, the C7/T1 entrance is a LN invention. The FPP put it at T1...period. All their drawings and descriptions place it at T1. As far as whether it was T3 or T1 in the re-enactment has no bearing. Specter BEGGED the WC to give him access to the autopsy photos so he could test the proper location, precisely so he wouldn't be made to look like an idiot later. When Warren agreed to let Humes look at the photos, but then changed his mind, it fell on Specter to back-door the WC and arrange for Kelley to show him the photo. He saw the photo. He admits this. Why in heck would he not then use this info when conducting the re-enactment? Perhaps they marked the jacket based on the face sheet and that Specter then looked at the photo and said "close-enough." This is beside the point. The point is he suspected the Rydberg drawing was inaccurate before the re-enactment, he then looked at the photo and CONFIRMED that it was inaccurate, and yet he ended up using the entrance on the Rydberg drawing to measure the angle. This is preposterous and possibly criminal. The FBI made many mistakes, but the May 24 re-enactment was all WC.

[Cliff Varnell]

Pat, this is where we disagree.

If Arlen Specter claims the re-enactment back wound was based on the autopsy photo he's lying.

Flat out mendacity.

The mark on the jacket in the re-enactment is NOT in the accepted wound location on the

Fox 5 autopsy photo.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/back.jpg

The "official" back wound in this photo -- which is, after all, an improperly produced autopsy

photo of poor quality and suspect authenticity -- is at C7/T1.

The location of the back wound in the reenactment is T3 or lower.

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Ford-Rankin/FBIreenact.GIF

http://www.jfklancer.com/docs.maps/autopdescript1.gif

Check out the photo in TKOAP pg 125. Specter looks like a total clown, like an idiot, holding

this pointer 5+ inches above the wound location.

Do you think anyone VOLUNTEERS for such duty?

Reverting to newsgroup style point-by-point.

Pat Speer wrote:

> Cliff, the C7/T1 entrance is a LN invention. The FPP put it at T1...period.

T1 is an LN invention as well. Are we supposed to believe that Arlen Specter studied

the angles and trajectories of the Single Bullet Theory and then referenced 3 DIFFERENT

locations for the back wound for the re-enactment?

He had the autopsy face sheet location, the autopsy photo location (presumably),

and finally pointed at the top of JFK's jacket collar.

3 locations in the span of 5 & 3/8".

Call me conspiratorial, but I don't think Specter was on that long a leash with Hoover.

> All their drawings and descriptions place it at T1.

And they concluded the Fox 5 autopsy photo was "more confusing than informative,"

"difficult or impossible to obtain accurate measurements of wound locations," and

"obviously deficient as scientific evidence."

That's the argument for T1, which I find intellectually indefensible.

> As far as whether it was T3 or T1 in the re-enactment has no bearing.

It has bearing on my point. I'm skeptical of any version of events that posits

Hoover had no operational input on what his men were doing in the re-enactment.

> Specter BEGGED the WC to give him access to the autopsy photos so he could test

> the proper location, precisely so he wouldn't be made to look like an idiot later.

And they went ahead and made an idiot out of him anyway.

> When Warren agreed to let Humes look at the photos, but then changed his mind,

> it fell on Specter to back-door the WC and arrange for Kelley to show him the photo.

This is Specter's story, right? You know you have to be careful swallowing a xxxx's

spin, don't you?

> He saw the photo. He admits this. Why in heck would he not then use this info

> when conducting the re-enactment?

Why in the hell would he mark a wound location 5+" below his SBT inshoot?

> Perhaps they marked the jacket based on the face sheet and that Specter then

> looked at the photo and said "close-enough."

And then compared the autopsy photo to the Ryberg drawing and said, "Close enough,"

again?

Good enough for gummit work not once, but twice?

> This is beside the point.

It's not beside MY point.

> The point is he suspected the Rydberg drawing was inaccurate before the re-enactment,

> he then looked at the photo and CONFIRMED that it was inaccurate, and yet he ended up

> using the entrance on the Rydberg drawing to measure the angle.

He knew it was inaccurate the moment he compared it to the holes in the clothes,

probably one of the first things he checked after he got the job!

Arlen Specter's job was to promote a lie, and his understanding of his role began

before Rydberg entered the picture. It was Rydberg's job to promote a lie, but he

did so at Humes' direction. Specter understood the job set out for him long before

the re-enactment.

I'd sift his auto-biography with fine mesh, and a face mask.

> This is preposterous and possibly criminal. The FBI made many mistakes,

> but the May 24 re-enactment was all WC.

Using the autopsy face sheet, the autopsy photo, and the Rydberg drawing

all as a reference for the wound location?

Hoover had to okay this nonsense.

Edited June 23, 2006 by Cliff Varnell

[Pat Speer]

Cliff, Specter never tells us why or how he got Kelley to show him the photo, only that he saw it. Specter's WC memos show he was greatly concerned by the inaccuracy of the Rydberg drawings. Humes testified repeatedly that the wounds could best be understood by analyzing the photos. Specter walks him through these questions. These were clearly answers Specter wanted on the record. It is obvious from this that Specter wanted the WC to test the SBT with the actual entrance wound. I believe whole-heartedly he was hoping the trajectory would work, and that, after finding that it didn't, turned completely chicken. As far as Hoover's role in the re-enactment...is this just a hunch, or have you seen memos detailing his role? The testimony of all the FBI men was that they were working on the re-enactment at the WC's request, and that they only measured angles they were asked to measure, etc. This explains why the left-right angle was not measured. It's clear Specter was under orders not to dig too deeply, as proven by the Redlich memo, and he followed orders.

Edited June 23, 2006 by Pat Speer

[Cliff Varnell]

Pat Speer wrote:

> Cliff, Specter never tells us why or how he got Kelley to show him the photo,

> only that he saw it. Specter's WC memos show he was greatly concerned by

> the inaccuracy of the Rydberg drawings. Humes testified repeatedly that the

> wounds could best be understood by analyzing the photos. Specter walks him

> through these questions. These were clearly answers Specter wanted on the

> record. It is obvious from this that Specter wanted the WC to test the SBT with

> the actual entrance wound. I believe whole-heartedly he was hoping the trajectory

> would work, and that, after finding that it didn't, turned completely chicken.

Pat, this Specter/Humes dog and pony show -- I don't buy it.

Arlen Specter has a real Passion for Mendacity.

Here's a bit from Edward Jay Epstein's 1965 interview with Specter:

http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diary/specter.htm

(quote on)

Q. Did you see autopsy photos?

A. No, I never saw them.

Q. Did [WC Senior Counsel Francis] Adams?

A. Not to my knowledge.

Q. Why were autopsy photos not available to you?

A. Ask Rankin.

(quote off)

Okay, let's ask Rankin.

WC chief counsel J. Lee Rankin and Rep. Wade Boggs in the WC Executive Session of

January 27th, 1964:

(quote on)

Rankin: Then there is a great range of material in regard to the wounds...ince we

have the picture of where the bullet entered in the back, that the bullet entered below

the shoulder blade to the right of the backbone, which is below the place where the

picture shows the bullet came out in the neckband of the shirt in front, and the bullet,

according to the autopsy, didn't strike any bone at all, that particular bullet, and go

through. So...how could it turn...

Boggs: I thought I read that bullet just went in a finger's length.

(quote off)

The WC had the evidence of the low back wound, and thus conspiracy, well in hand

by January, 1964.

Obviously, they'd seen the clothes, mistaking the Parkland nurses' slits in the front

shirt collar band for bullet defects; they had the autopsy face sheet; they had the FBI

autopsy report putting the back wound "below the shoulder"; they had Burkley's death

certificate listing the wound about the level of T3; and, apparently, Rankin had an autopsy

photo showing a wound that matched the holes in the clothes, the three contemporaneous

official documents, and the witness statements of 2 FBI men and 4 SS SAs.

The WC Executive Session of 1/27/64 laid out the problem the Warren Commission and

the FBI were hired to solve: how to package an obvious conspiracy and sell it to the

public as a lone assassin.

In March of '64 Specter huddled with Humes and they came up with the Single Bullet

Theory, and its corollary, Clothes Bunch Theory, another fraud that continues to have

its adherents today.

It was a job that Specter clearly didn't relish, and he wanted the record to show that he

was an intrepid hunter of the truth, instead of the hack xxxx-for-hire that he was.

> As far as Hoover's role in the re-enactment...is this just a hunch, or have you

> seen memos detailing his role? The testimony of all the FBI men was that they

> were working on the re-enactment at the WC's request, and that they only measured

> angles they were asked to measure, etc.

Curtis Gentry, J. EDGAR HOOVER -- THE MAN AND THE SECRETS, pg. 552:

(quote on)

From its inception, Hoover treated the Warren Commission as an adversary. He publicly

offered it his full cooperation -- after all, it was a creation of the President -- but instructed

his agents to volunteer nothing beyond what was requested, and then only after prior

approval of FBIHQ.

(quote off)

> This explains why the left-right angle was not measured. It's clear Specter was

> under orders not to dig too deeply, as proven by the Redlich memo, and he followed

> orders.

It wasn't Specter's job "to dig."

He wasn't there to investigate, he was there to create a scenario they could sell to the

public.

Hoover was so pissed off at the WC's cursory look into Oswald's FBI connections

that he set Specter up in that ludicrous photo op and turned the hot shot from Philly

into a total buffoon.

With one stroke -- making sure during the reenactment that JFK's actual back wound

location was marked on the jacket -- Hoover reinforced perceptions in the West Wing

and at Langley that whatever the outcome of the Warren Commission, it had to be

favorable to J. Edgar Hoover.

Or so I speculate.

Edited June 24, 2006 by Cliff Varnell

[Michael Hogan]

In his indispensable book Breach of Trust, Gerald McKnight writes:

That same day (April 30, 1964 Executive Session-Autopsy Pictures of President Kennedy) before the Commission had convened, Rankin had received a memo from Specter laying out in the strongest terms the argument that it was imperative that the autopsy pictures and X-rays be made available to selected members of the staff before the reenactment. Specter noted that it was "essential for the Commission to know precisely the location of the bullet wound on the President's back so the angle may be calculated." Otherwise, Specter wrote, he could not finish his part of the report with any confidence.(1) Comments made well after the Warren Report was published revealed that Specter, Belin, and probably others on the staff were incredulous and resentful over the Commission's treatment of the autopsy material.(2)

1) A copy of Specter's memo can be found in HSCA, Vol. 11, 92-93

2) Specter to Humes, 12/11/1967, 4 series, box 50, NARA

Gerald McKnight devotes much more to this aspect of the investigation. His analysis of the "Single Bullet" fabrication is complete, documented, and devastating.

In my opinion, Breach of Trust is an instant classic and an invaluable resource. Based upon what I have read I would have to say Pat Speer's analysis of the record is accurate and well reasoned.

[Cliff Varnell]

In his indispensable book Breach of Trust, Gerald McKnight writes:

That same day (April 30, 1964 Executive Session-Autopsy Pictures of President Kennedy) before the Commission had convened, Rankin had received a memo from Specter laying out in the strongest terms the argument that it was imperative that the autopsy pictures and X-rays be made available to selected members of the staff before the reenactment. Specter noted that it was "essential for the Commission to know precisely the location of the bullet wound on the President's back so the angle may be calculated."

The Commission DID know the precise location of the back wound. This was established

at the Executive Session on 1/27/64. Specter came on board mid-March and they kept

him in the dark on Rankin's autopsy photo, it seems, although I can't believe he didn't get

a look at the clothing.

Otherwise, Specter wrote, he could not finish his part of the report with any confidence.(1)

Specter DID NOT finish his report with *any* confidence. On May 24, 1964, Arlen Specter's

"baby" arrived stillborn in the re-enactment because the FBI had marked the actual wound

location on the jacket, and Specter was demonstrating a trajectory 5+" higher -- and act of

public humiliation that has to rank up with the all time greats.

How can you be "confident" when you're pointing a trajectory 5+ inches above the

wound?

Comments made well after the Warren Report was published revealed that Specter, Belin, and probably others on the staff were incredulous and resentful over the Commission's treatment of the autopsy material.(2)

1) A copy of Specter's memo can be found in HSCA, Vol. 11, 92-93

2) Specter to Humes, 12/11/1967, 4 series, box 50, NARA

Gerald McKnight devotes much more to this aspect of the investigation. His analysis of the "Single Bullet" fabrication is complete, documented, and devastating.

In my opinion, Breach of Trust is an instant classic and an invaluable resource.

I absolutely agree! I've yet to see anything in BOT that contradicts my arguments.

On the contrary, McKnight shares my view that the assassination was designed

to provide a pre-text to invade Cuba.

Based upon what I have read I would have to say Pat Speer's analysis of the record is accurate and well reasoned.

The problem is not so much with Pat Speer's analysis of the record, the problem is with the

record itself, as presented by Specter.

Specter claims he saw an autopsy photo that showed a wound in the back of the neck and

on that basis he marked a wound on the jacket 5+" lower, and then ignored it?

The man is lying.

[Michael Hogan]

Cliff,

By no means did I intend to slight anything you have written. I hope it didn't appear that way.

Without a doubt, Specter performed an incredible disservice to America. His duplicity during the investigation, and stubbornly clinging to his falsehoods for more than four decades is inexcusable.

Mike Hogan

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff,

By no means did I intend to slight anything you have written. I hope it didn't appear that way.

Without a doubt, Specter performed an incredible disservice to America. His duplicity during the investigation, and stubbornly clinging to his falsehoods for more than four decades is inexcusable.

Mike Hogan

No slight taken whatsover, Michael! I enjoy the point-by-point back and forth

and it's a great way to research. I'm sure Pat feels the same way...

Your citation of the excellent BREACH OF TRUST sent me back for a closer

read...

My only disagreements with Gerald McKnight are over Hoover's grasp of the basic

facts of the case, which McNight characterizes as "tenuous," and the veracity

of Specter's claim to have used the autopsy photo to fix the chalk mark on the

back of the jacket.

The first point goes back to the Tolson memo of 11/29/63 where Hoover mangled

THE most obvious facts.

I think Hoover knew damn well that Oswald didn't fire from the fifth floor.

Hoover knew that the FBI hadn't proven that Oswald could fire 3 shots in 3 seconds

with a bolt action rifle.

Hoover knew that if Connally dodged the second shot and it hit JFK then the shot came

from the front.

And I think Hoover knew that if the chalk mark were placed according to the

autopsy face sheet that snot nosed Specter kid and the rest of those WC runts

would look like idiots.

I think Hoover frequently mangled the facts of the case in the manner of a petulant

schoolboy venting contempt for his lessons.

Edited June 24, 2006 by Cliff Varnell