Jump to content
The Education Forum

President Kennedy's eyes


Myra Bronstein
 Share

Recommended Posts

I haven't seen this addressed anywhere (searched forum, don't recall it in Best Evidence, etc). Coulda missed it of course.

In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nurse Diane Bowron told researcher Livingstone, "When we prepared the body for the coffin, we washed the face and closed the eyes" (Killing the Truth, p. 183). If the two nurses did (Bowron and Hinchcliffe), then Crenshaw didn't.

When asked, Bowron also said that eyes do not normally open after death once they have been closed (p. 190).

Humes was asked about the eyes in his ARRB deposition:

Q. Do the eyes of President Kennedy appear to be open in these photographs?

A. Yes.

Q. Were the eyes, in fact, open during the autopsy, do you recall?

A. The picture shows me that they were.

IOW, if they were open, he didn't open them, or he would have said so. There then follows what must be a trick question, since I know of no autopsy photos showing the eyes closed. But Humes' answer further indicates that the autopsy doctors did not open the eyes. (Even though examing the eyes, I would think, would be normal autopsy procedure.)

Q. If other photographs did not have the eyes open, would you be able to explain the difference in that appearance?

A. I don't know. I might, I guess. I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra Bronstein Posted Nov 27 2006, 10:08 PM

I haven't seen this addressed anywhere (searched forum, don't recall it in Best Evidence, etc). Coulda missed it of course.

In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Good catch. I do find the Parkland Dr.'s to be reliable witnesses in general. The main problem with reliability is that Parkland Dr.'s recall (just about unanimously) an entry wound to the base of the throat and a large grape fruit size exit wound in the occipital-parietal region of the head. The Bethesda Dr.'s performing the autopsy didn't even notice the entry wound in the throat (due to a tracheotomy performed in Dallas, directly on to of the entry wound), and claim the head wound to have been towards the side of the head above the ear, and being much more irregular in size.

But that's another thread.

Who to believe....? I tend to believe the first hand witnesses, in this case Parkland.

Edited by Antti Hynonen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra Bronstein Posted Nov 27 2006, 10:08 PM

I haven't seen this addressed anywhere (searched forum, don't recall it in Best Evidence, etc). Coulda missed it of course.

In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Good catch. I do find the Parkland Dr.'s to be reliable witnesses in general. The main problem with reliability is that Parkland Dr.'s recall (just about unanimously) an entry wound to the base of the throat and a large grape fruit size exit wound in the occipital-parietal region of the head. The Bethesda Dr.'s performing the autopsy didn't even notice the entry wound in the throat (due to a tracheotomy performed in Dallas, directly on to of the entry wound), and claim the head wound to have been towards the side of the head above the ear, and being much more irregular in size.

But that's another thread.

Who to believe....? I tend to believe the first hand witnesses, in this case Parkland.

I agree with Antti, and think Myra raises a valid point about the closed eyes 're-opening', the witnesses at Parkland should IMO be given the benefit of the doubt, so.....all I can add is a question? What does the timeline regarding any scenario [involving shennanigans? alteration, on the scale of surgery of the head area Sibert/O'Neill doesent seem to fit] as in pre-Air Force 1, return to Washington D.C., the timeline doesent allow for it, does it?

The John Liggett allegation/story has always been 'interesting' to me, but I tend to avoid the whole 'coming out of the woodwork' years later for obvious reasons, also there are no "John Liggett documents at NARA," [at least under his name]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra Bronstein Posted Nov 27 2006, 10:08 PM

I haven't seen this addressed anywhere (searched forum, don't recall it in Best Evidence, etc). Coulda missed it of course.

In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Good catch. I do find the Parkland Dr.'s to be reliable witnesses in general. The main problem with reliability is that Parkland Dr.'s recall (just about unanimously) an entry wound to the base of the throat and a large grape fruit size exit wound in the occipital-parietal region of the head. The Bethesda Dr.'s performing the autopsy didn't even notice the entry wound in the throat (due to a tracheotomy performed in Dallas, directly on to of the entry wound), and claim the head wound to have been towards the side of the head above the ear, and being much more irregular in size.

But that's another thread.

Who to believe....? I tend to believe the first hand witnesses, in this case Parkland.

I agree with Antti, and think Myra raises a valid point about the closed eyes 're-opening', the witnesses at Parkland should IMO be given the benefit of the doubt, so.....all I can add is a question? What does the timeline regarding any scenario [involving shennanigans? alteration, on the scale of surgery of the head area Sibert/O'Neill doesent seem to fit] as in pre-Air Force 1, return to Washington D.C., the timeline doesent allow for it, does it?

The John Liggett allegation/story has always been 'interesting' to me, but I tend to avoid the whole 'coming out of the woodwork' years later for obvious reasons, also there are no "John Liggett documents at NARA," [at least under his name]

Coincidence?

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Myra Bronstein Posted Nov 27 2006, 10:08 PM

I haven't seen this addressed anywhere (searched forum, don't recall it in Best Evidence, etc). Coulda missed it of course.

In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Good catch. I do find the Parkland Dr.'s to be reliable witnesses in general. The main problem with reliability is that Parkland Dr.'s recall (just about unanimously) an entry wound to the base of the throat and a large grape fruit size exit wound in the occipital-parietal region of the head. The Bethesda Dr.'s performing the autopsy didn't even notice the entry wound in the throat (due to a tracheotomy performed in Dallas, directly on to of the entry wound), and claim the head wound to have been towards the side of the head above the ear, and being much more irregular in size.

But that's another thread.

Who to believe....? I tend to believe the first hand witnesses, in this case Parkland.

I agree with Antti, and think Myra raises a valid point about the closed eyes 're-opening', the witnesses at Parkland should IMO be given the benefit of the doubt, so.....all I can add is a question? What does the timeline regarding any scenario [involving shennanigans? alteration, on the scale of surgery of the head area Sibert/O'Neill doesent seem to fit] as in pre-Air Force 1, return to Washington D.C., the timeline doesent allow for it, does it?

The John Liggett allegation/story has always been 'interesting' to me, but I tend to avoid the whole 'coming out of the woodwork' years later for obvious reasons, also there are no "John Liggett documents at NARA," [at least under his name]

Coincidence?

Jack

As I would think everyone realizes regatding this topic, [JFK Assassination - Controversial Issues of,] Anything is possible.

And......in this particular photo comparison ProbableWhy?

Because gentle reader, it would......directly answer the inconsistencies as elaborated earlier in this thread.

But, that's just my opinion?

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Having been shot (and had to do a hospital stay for that) and also been in the miltary and have roomed with docs - I would unequivically say that the doctors know one thing -they look at the sight of injury. I was shot in the pelvis area (right side)...but they weren't very understanding about what i was telling them. As it turned out they were right - they found the entrance wound and the exit wound. I thought a bulet had gone off in my pocket - instead of my buddy accidentally shooting me :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speculation: Someone working on the body between Parkland and Bethesda opened the eyes to check for any bullet fragment damage that would have to be explained. Didn't close them again in the rush.

Hi Ron

Your scenario is possible and might be more realistic than that there was some conspiracy or manipulation in regard to the apparent reopening of the eyes. I agree that this is an interesting topic though.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speculation: Someone working on the body between Parkland and Bethesda opened the eyes to check for any bullet fragment damage that would have to be explained. Didn't close them again in the rush.

Hi Ron

Your scenario is possible and might be more realistic than that there was some conspiracy or manipulation in regard to the apparent reopening of the eyes. I agree that this is an interesting topic though.

Chris

When my father passed the doctor closed his eyes but warned us that they sometimes open again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have always been interested in the black triangle superimposed over Kennedy's Right Eye. (photo F1)

Looks like a fairly crude cover up of a frontal entry wound from the direction of the old Grassy Knoll.......

Edited by Shanet Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
Myra Bronstein Posted Nov 27 2006, 10:08 PM

I haven't seen this addressed anywhere (searched forum, don't recall it in Best Evidence, etc). Coulda missed it of course.

In "Trauma Room 1," Dr Crenshaw said that one of the last things he did at Parkland was close the President's eyes. But in the stare-of-death photo his eyes are open. (Don't want to attach it...'cause.)

I don't know how significant this is, or how reliable Crenshaw is, but I thought I'd mention it.

Good catch. I do find the Parkland Dr.'s to be reliable witnesses in general. The main problem with reliability is that Parkland Dr.'s recall (just about unanimously) an entry wound to the base of the throat and a large grape fruit size exit wound in the occipital-parietal region of the head. The Bethesda Dr.'s performing the autopsy didn't even notice the entry wound in the throat (due to a tracheotomy performed in Dallas, directly on to of the entry wound), and claim the head wound to have been towards the side of the head above the ear, and being much more irregular in size.

But that's another thread.

Who to believe....? I tend to believe the first hand witnesses, in this case Parkland.

I agree with Antti, and think Myra raises a valid point about the closed eyes 're-opening', the witnesses at Parkland should IMO be given the benefit of the doubt, so.....all I can add is a question? What does the timeline regarding any scenario [involving shennanigans? alteration, on the scale of surgery of the head area Sibert/O'Neill doesent seem to fit] as in pre-Air Force 1, return to Washington D.C., the timeline doesent allow for it, does it?

The John Liggett allegation/story has always been 'interesting' to me, but I tend to avoid the whole 'coming out of the woodwork' years later for obvious reasons, also there are no "John Liggett documents at NARA," [at least under his name]

Coincidence?

Jack

I just read McAdams "spin" on Dr. Crenshaw's "Conspiracy of Silence' entitled " The Long Surpressed Truth" , or a Bunch of Fibs? My question is : who is the fibber?

Here you have a physician who says Kennedy was hit in the front of the head and everyone was too afraid to speak out about it. What more needs to be said? Cat's out of the bag, right? No problem. Here come the spin doctors and everything is handled and we are "back to normal" We can sleep at night again. This case has been exposed over and over again, only to hear some non-sensical rebuttal that flies in the face of reality and common sense.

Edited by Peter McGuire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have personally never seen this done, but "in the old days", I have read of coins being placed on the deceased's eyelids for a period of time to insure that they would not re-open.

Charlie Black

The coins were payment for The Boatman -- a Roman (I believe) custom that survived to our time.

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...