Where is the massive back head wound?

[Ashton Gray]

The Dallas doctors threw in the information about the large hole and Specter most always hurried away from it by asking about a small hole that no one saw.

Of course Specter "hurried away from it"—and left it sitting in the record, you bleating, semi-literate ignoramus.

I do not recall a single time where Specter actually probed into this large wound the doctors spoke of.

Of course Specter didn't "probe" the phony no-see-um hole, you snurfling, gurgling defiler of evidence, you purveyor of frauds and deceit. He wasn't supposed to do anything but get it into the record and leave it sitting there. Twit.

Guinn (with the AARB) made mention that when the doctors mentioned the large hole in the back of the head - Specter stated that it was in the top of the head.

Of course Specter moved it wherever he wanted, you pantywaist, sniveling, febrile, slavering ghoul. So did every person who claimed to have seen it. And changed the size, too. The nonexistent hole moves all over the back of the head, shrinking and growing like Alice in Wonderland. Only she has more substance and reality than the alleged "hole," and every character she meets makes infinitely more sense than you ever have or ever will, you bubbling, infinitely erupting cess pool.

And you don't mention that the Parkland doctors changed their stories, too, do you?

Don't bother. I will.

Ashton Gray

Edited December 31, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Bill Miller]

And you don't mention that the Parkland doctors changed their stories, too, do you?

Don't bother. I will.

Ashton Gray

OK ... please do and be precise if you can.

Thanks,

Bill

[Robin Unger]

In this autopsy photo it shows that the skull at the top/back part of Kennedys head is MISSING.

You can see straight through the hair where there should be skull.

If you look at the "curved metal stirrup" you can see the other END of the curve through the hair, you can see the towell under his head.

FWIW i just present the facts as i see them, without any Bias.

I don't sit in the LN or Conspiracy camp.

I will do my own research, and not rely on other peoples opinions.

[Robin Unger]

In this image i see a "ragged curved area" towards the TOP/BACK of kennedys head

Edited December 31, 2006 by Robin Unger

[Frank Agbat]

...

I will do my own research, and not rely on other peoples opinions.

An extremely sane position. Perhaps the only one that will preserve said sanity...

While we're on the subject of the autopsy photographs...

From what I've read and/or interpolated, I think it is possible that some of the "autopsy" photographs may actually be post-autopsy in timing. Perhaps they were taken during reconstruction work by the morticians after the doctors had completed their work. There was, I believe, some discussion about having the body lie in state (open casket), but this idea was eventually vetoed.

This makes "Fox #5" neither a fake, nor a genuine autopsy photo.

(I *think* this opinion is based on "In the Eye of History", but it has been a while since I read it -- so weigh accordingly).

[Ashton Gray]

QUOTE:

• ASHTON GRAY: The purported large hole in the back of Kennedy's head is and at all relevant times was the official government line; it was the primary constant in the testimony collected by Specter for the Warren Commission. This is one element of this discussion that anybody will have to concede is amusing: the idea that this "giant hole in the back of the head" story originated somewhere else. No: it was little Darlin' Arlen trotting around (alone) collecting it up. (I guess the rest of the commission investigating the assassination of the President of the United States just couldn't be bothered to be present at the time.)
  And guess who, of the Warren Commission, is on record as having viewed the autopsy photos.
  

Ashton.

I have spent days reading the online reports WC, HSCA, and ARRB

I don't ever recall specter reffering to a large hole in the back of JFK'S head.?

It is also my understanding that Specter did not see the autopsy photo's.

Specter HSCA testimony.

Mr. KLEIN. You also testified that you did not have an opportunity to review the photographs and the X-rays pertaining to the President's wounds?

Mr. SPECTER. I certainly have.

Mr. KLEIN. Could you explain the reasons given to you as to why you could not view those X-rays and photographs?

Mr. SPECTER. I do not know here again that anybody ever said what the reasons were. I do know that I wanted to see them and there is a memorandum, which I just looked at this morning, which I am very delighted to see in the files, about my pressing to see it.

Reconstructing the reasons as best I can at this point, I believe it was, and I have said this publicly before, an attitude on the part of the Kennedy family that it might be possible that the photographs and X-rays would get into the public domain and the photographs would defile the memory and image of President Kennedy as a vibrant young leader and it would be ghoulish to show him in the picture with half his head blown off. That was the reason why I was not permitted to see them, as a speculation or a feel for the situation.

Mr. KLEIN. Mr. Chairman, I would ask that these documents be marked as committee exhibits.

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/hscspec.htm

Right. Well, Arlen Specter is a debased amoral lying Congressperson (but I repeat myself) without anything as troublesome as morals or a conscience. He is and always has been a sycophantic lap dog for the intelligence cult. How else could anyone stand unflinchingly and defraud the entire world with something as pathetically perverse as his infamous "single bullet theory"? Sorry: rhetorical question.

It's interesting that you went to Specter (who I'll get to in a moment) when I posed: "And guess who, of the Warren Commission, is on record as having viewed the autopsy photos." I sort of thought you would, since Specter has been being discussed.

In fact, I was referring to Earl Warren.

Here is a footnote from the article "How Five Investigations into JFK's Medical/Autopsy Evidence Got it Wrong" at History Matters:

• Actually, Earl Warren himself apparently glanced at the autopsy pictures, and the Commission had them in its possession at one point, as noted by Rankin in an executive session on January 27, 1964 (see p. 193 of the transcript of that executive session).
  

You know: he "glanced" at them. Sure. Just a real quick peek. Chief Justice of the United States. In charge of the investigation of the assassination of the President of the United States. He "glanced" at the autopsy photos. Dontcha' know. (And of course John J. McCloy and Allen Dulles didn't even peek. Nah.)

But let's get to Specter. <SPIT!>

That same footnote goes on to say:

• And Arlen Specter admitted in a U. S. News and World Report interview on 10/10/66 that he was shown one photograph that, though not authenticated, was said to have been of Kennedy’s back.
  

That's substantiated by other sources saying that Secret Service Inspector Thomas J. Kelley "privately displayed a photo to Arlen Specter." (A photo. Dontcha' know.)

And what did Specter say in the testimony above?

Well, he lied even more directly than that in a 26 August 1965 interview with Ed Epstein:

• Q. Did you see autopsy photos?
  ARLEN SPECTER. No, I never saw them.
  Q. ...Why were autopsy photos not available to you?
  ARLEN SPECTER. Ask Rankin.
  

So, Specter is amoral lying scum. So? What's new?

As for Specter himself never "referring to a large hole in the back of JFK's head," I've just gently explained this very point to the village idiot.

Ashton

[Bill Miller]

From what I've read and/or interpolated, I think it is possible that some of the "autopsy" photographs may actually be post-autopsy in timing. Perhaps they were taken during reconstruction work by the morticians after the doctors had completed their work.

Frank, I do not recall ever hearing where the mortician said that cameras were taking photos while he covered the large hole in the back of the President's head.

Below is a clip of the head damage. Note the jagged shade line in the right rear portion of the skull. I suspect that the elevated avulsed bones took on more light which illuminated those parts of the head unevenly compared to the rest of the posterior portion of the head.

Bill Miller

[Bernice Moore]

Jacqueline B.Kennedy....

" I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been.

But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on.:

Warren Commission Suppressed Jackie's

Testimony On JFK's Head Wound

Court Reporter's Tape Shows

Additional Description Withheld

Dallas, TX -- August 5, 2001 -- JFK Lancer, an historical research firm reports that the Court Reporter's tape shows Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony before the Warren Commission had additional descriptions which were withheld.

Mrs. Kennedy testified in a short private session held at her home in Washington, D.C., with Chief Justice Earl Warren, Commission General Council J. Lee Rankin, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and a court reporter in attendance. Testimony of witnesses before the Warren Commission was made public in the fall of 1964. Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony was also released containing her description of her husbands wounds which read :

"And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything."

But a second section in which she described the wounds she saw carried only the notation: (Reference to Wounds Deleted).

Although very few Americans actually read those transcripts, historians and researchers who did read them were outraged, and waged a legal battle to have the omitted testimony released. In the early 1970s, a court decision required the United States Government to disclose to the public the contents of the still classified section of Mrs. Kennedy's 1964 Warren Commission testimony. Her previously withheld statement read:

" I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on."

Releasing this previously withheld section gave researchers what was assumed to be Mrs. Kennedy's complete description of the President's head wounds. Researchers took for granted that the hand-typed transcript page released by the National Archives from the official records of the Warren Commission ended the matter.

However, new analysis reveals that the original court tape actually reads:

"... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."

Filmmaker Mark Sobel found the discrepancy while doing research for a forthcoming documentary on JFK. Sobel explained, "I was quite surprised to find that Mrs. Kennedy was not asked for more detail --- she had an opportunity to view the wounds longer and closer than any other person as they originally existed. Given the seemingly contradictory testimony by the doctors who treated the President at Parkland Hospital in Dallas just after the shooting and the Doctors who performed the autopsy at Bethesda many hours later, Mrs. Kennedy's testimony would appear critical."

Sobel filed under the Freedom of Information Act to have the court reporter's original tape of Mrs. Kennedy's testimony unsealed, citing that the content had already been fully declassified by the courts and that it was in the best interest of the public for the accuracy of the existing transcript to be verified. Sobel explained, "As I compared the 1964 transcript to the original court reporter's paper tape, I reached a sentence officially transcribed by the Warren Commission as: "I could see a piece of his skull, and I remember that it was flesh colored" words on the original paper taped no longer matched up."

Court Reporter Kathy Bradford of Bradford Court Reporting of Dallas, Texas, agreed. Bradford reviewed the transcript from the archives and certified Mrs. Kennedy's complete statement was not found in the Warren Commission's version..

This extra description was almost certainly witheld from the Commissioners and Legal Staff as well, since these descriptions are missing in the typed transcript that is contained in the actual Warren Commission Records --- before it was finally released publicly in its entirety.

Apprised of these new details, David Mantik, M.D., Ph.D. stated, "Given the lack of follow-up in Mrs. Kennedy's description to exactly what she saw, these details could have been valuable to the House Select Committee on Assassinations that reviewed the medical evidence." Mantik is one of the few doctors allowed to view President Kennedy's original autopsy materials in the National Archives.

Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, seen in films and photos in Dealey Plaza climbing onto the rear of the limousine, stated in his Warren Commission testimony,

"Between the time I originally grabbed the handhold and until I was up on the car, Mrs. Kennedy--the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head, and he had slumped noticeably to his left. Mrs. Kennedy had jumped up from the seat and was, it appeared to me, reaching for something coming off the right rear bumper of the car, the right rear tail, when she noticed that I was trying to climb on the car."

Debra Conway of JFK Lancer, says that the court reporter's tape is now on their web site. Conway stated, "Mrs. Kennedy also describes this piece of skull to historian Theodore White in her famous 'Camelot' interview where she told him, 'I could see a piece of his skull coming off; it was flesh colored not white--' This is very similar to what she said to the Warren Commission."

Conway went on to explain, "There were pieces of skull found in the street and in the limousine. The piece of skull described by Mrs. Kennedy could have been one of those later found in the street, the limousine, or an avulsed piece still attached to his head."

Researcher Barb Junkkarinen, who specializes in the medical evidence of the Kennedy assassination and is the Director of the JFK Alliance for Open Archives organization, told JFK Lancer, "The real 'find' here is that two specific descriptions of the head wound by Mrs. Kennedy (that the skull piece was wedge shaped, and that it had little ridges at the top) are not included in what is supposed to be the full and complete transcript of her testimony."

In his memoirs, Senator Arlen Specter, a Junior Council for the Warren Commission in 1964, suggests that the minimal testimony taken from Mrs. Kennedy was due to Earl Warren wishing to be protective of her, and that the handling of her testimony created some distress among other Commissioners and Legal Staff. However, in formerly Top Secret transcripts of the meetings of the seven Commissioners, Commissioner John J. McCloy repeatedly emphasized the importance of obtaining such testimony as quickly as possible "She's the best witness," he said "as to how those bullets struck her husband."

Junkkarinen adds, "Why they would withhold an accurate description is open to debate, but the fact that they put out an altered transcript is telling. How many other transcripts may have fallen victim to the same shenanigans? This is a find that proves alteration of original evidence, and that is important.

-2-

JFK Lancer Productions & Publications

http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/jbkwc.html

B..

[Richard J. Smith]

QUOTE:

The purported large hole in the back of Kennedy's head is and at all relevant times was the official government line; it was the primary constant in the testimony collected by Specter for the Warren Commission. This is one element of this discussion that anybody will have to concede is amusing: the idea that this "giant hole in the back of the head" story originated somewhere else. No: it was little Darlin' Arlen trotting around (alone) collecting it up. (I guess the rest of the commission investigating the assassination of the President of the United States just couldn't be bothered to be present at the time.)

And guess who, of the Warren Commission, is on record as having viewed the autopsy photos.

Ashton.

I don't ever recall specter reffering to a large hole in the back of JFK'S head. ?

Proof of Specter questioning witnesses about whether they saw a small bullet hole in the back of the head beneath the large gaping wound they all had described:

Dr McClelland

Dr. McCLELLAND - I saw the large opening which I have described.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any other wound on the back of the head?

Dr. McCLELLAND - No.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe a small gunshot wound below the large opening on the back of the head?

Dr. McCLELLAND - No.

Dr Peters

Dr. PETERS - Well, as I mentioned, the neck wound had already been interfered with by the tracheotomy at the time I got there, but I noticed the head wound, and as I remember--I noticed that there was a large defect in the occiput.

Mr. SPECTER - What did you notice in the occiput?

Dr. PETERS - It seemed to me that in the right occipitalparietal area that there was a large defect. There appeared to be bone loss and brain loss in the area.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you notice any holes below the occiput, say, in this area below here?

Dr. PETERS - No, I did not and at the time and the moments immediately following the injury, we speculated as to whether he had been shot once or twice because we saw the wound of entry in the throat and noted the large occipital wound, and it is a known fact that high velocity missiles often have a small wound of entrance and a large wound of exit, and I'm just giving you my honest impressions at the time.

Dr Jenkins

Dr. JENKINS - Now, Dr. Clark had begun closed chest cardiac massage at this time and I was aware of the magnitude of the wound, because with each compression of the chest, there was a great rush of blood from the skull wound. Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any wounds immediately below the massive loss of skull which you have described?

Dr. JENKINS – No

Dr Clark

Mr. SPECTER - Now, you described the massive wound at the top of the President's head, with the brain protruding; did you observe any other hole or wound on the President's head?

Dr. CLARK - No, sir; I did not.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe, to make my question very specific, a bullet hole or what appeared to be a bullet hole in the posterior scalp, approximately 2.5 cm. laterally to the right, slightly above the external occipital protuberant, measuring 15 by 6 mm.

Dr. CLARK - No, sir; I did not. This could easily have been hidden in the blood and hair.

Dr. Clark - I then examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed.

Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Clark, in the line of your specialty, could you comment as to the status of the President with respect to competency, had he been able to survive the head injuries which you have described and the total wound which he had?

Dr. CLARK - This, of course, is a question of tremendous importance. Just let me state that the loss of cerebellar tissue would probably have been of minimal consequence in the performance of his duties. The loss of the right occipital and probably part of the right parietal lobes would have been of specific importance.

Dr Giesecke

Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any other wound or bullet hole below the large area of missing skull ?

Dr. GIESECKE – No

Dr Perry

Mr. SPECTER - Will you now describe as specifically as you can, the injury which you noted in the President's head?

Dr. PERRY - As I mentioned previously in the record, I made only a cursory examination of the President's head. I noted a large avulsive wound of the right parietal occipital area, in which both scalp and portions of skull were absent, and there was severe laceration of underlying brain tissue. My examination did not go any further than that.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you, to be specific, observe a smaller wound below the large avulsed area which you have described?

Dr. PERRY - I did not.

Dr Baxter

Mr. Specter - Did you notice any bullet hole below that large opening at the top of the head?

Dr. Baxter - No; I personally did not.

Nurse Bowron

Mr. SPECTER - And what, in a general way, did you observe with respect to President Kennedy's condition?

Miss BOWRON - He was very pale, he was lying across Mrs. Kennedy's knee and there seemed to be blood everywhere. When I went around to the other side of the car I saw the condition of his head.

Mr. SPECTER - You saw the condition of his what?

Miss BOWRON - The back of his head.

Mr. SPECTER - And what was that condition?

Miss BOWRON - Well, it was very bad---you know.

Mr. SPECTER - How many holes did you see?

Miss BOWRON - I just saw one large hole.

Mr. SPECTER - Did you see a small bullet hole beneath that one large hole?

Miss BOWRON - No, sir.

[John Simkin]

The Dallas doctors threw in the information about the large hole and Specter most always hurried away from it by asking about a small hole that no one saw.

Of course Specter "hurried away from it"—and left it sitting in the record, you bleating, semi-literate ignoramus.

You are coming very close to being put under moderation. Final warning.

[Ashton Gray]

Jacqueline B.Kennedy....

"And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. ... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."

Hi Bernice.

What Jacqueline Kennedy describes is exactly what I see depicted in the Zapruder film. I don't know how it could be any more exact. Now, I'm talking about what I see. I'm not telling anyone else what to see. But I have no compunctions whatsoever about stating what I see, here, in this clip from Z:321 to Z:330:

Now, please, lord'a'mercy, to all concerned: verify what I am about to say, but from the head shot at Z:313 to where this clip starts, the dear woman is looking down. It is at Z:321 that her head starts to turn up toward her husband's face, which is why I started the clip here.

To me, she looks almost uncertainly bemused as she starts to look up toward his face, as though maybe he has thrown up or something after having been hunched over. And then she looks at his face. And the front right side of his head is gone, a prominent piece of wedge-shaped skull hanging and flopping by a flap of skin. At that instant, at Z:324, her hand flies in alarm off of JFK's left shoulder as he slumps toward her. Then, even in her horror and shock, her hand returns to him, nurturingly, this time across the back of his neck and lower head, but in this very act he slips further forward until she is staring straight down at the hole where this wedge-shaped piece of skull had been, and her mouth begins to open in the fullness of the horror of what has been done.

She isn't looking at the back of his head. She is looking directly at the wedge-shaped piece of skull hanging from the front right of his head.

And I swear I cannot understand why so much effort has been expended out scouring the universe for rumored little no-see-um pieces of bone that might have got away somewhere, or attempting to dream up airy, hypothetical "explanations" and "theories" over what actually is right smack dab in the record. Just plain as the noonday sun.

I would not wish to tell any person on this earth what they should see. But I swear to Aunt Gertie's garters I think I might swoon if somebody stopped, just for a moment, regurgitating yards and yards and yards and more yards of what somebody else has told them they ought to see, just shut out for a moment the cacophonic roar, and simply sat quietly and looked at what was at the end of their nose.

Debra Conway of JFK Lancer, says that the court reporter's tape is now on their web site. Conway stated, "Mrs. Kennedy also describes this piece of skull to historian Theodore White in her famous 'Camelot' interview where she told him, 'I could see a piece of his skull coming off; it was flesh colored not white--' This is very similar to what she said to the Warren Commission."

Conway went on to explain, "There were pieces of skull found in the street and in the limousine. The piece of skull described by Mrs. Kennedy could have been one of those later found in the street, the limousine, or an avulsed piece still attached to his head."

Ahhhhhhhhhhh....

Ashton

Edited December 31, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Bill Miller]

She isn't looking at the back of his head. She is looking directly at the wedge-shaped piece of skull hanging from the front right of his head.

Jackie wasn't talking about what she saw as she pulled her husband over towards her as seen on the Zapruder film .... she was talking about 'holding the "BACK" of his head on', which means she is describing what she had saw as they raced for Parkland hospital.

" I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on." The Dallas doctors used another word as well - POSTERIOR. The word (posterior) means the rear or the back of the head. 'Anterior' means front.

Bill Miller

Edited December 31, 2006 by Bill Miller

[Richard J. Smith]

Jacqueline B.Kennedy....

She isn't looking at the back of his head. She is looking directly at the wedge-shaped piece of skull hanging from the front right of his head.

Does it look like she's looking at the right front of his head? Looks to me like she's looking directly at the avulsion on the back of the head. The gif doesn't go far enough. Here's Z337.

BTW, several of the doctors mentioned "cerebellum". Any clue where the cerebellum is located?

Edited December 31, 2006 by Richard J. Smith

[Brian Smith]

"Another new witness discovered by the ARRB is John Van Hoesen. Van Hoesen was a mortician who was present when Robinson reconstructed the skull. He told the ARRB he saw an "orange-sized" hole in the back of the head. Incidentally, Robinson himself told the HSCA he very clearly recalled seeing a large wound in the back of the skull, and he even diagrammed the wound for the HSCA interviewer. Robinson, of course, not only saw this wound for a prolonged period of time, but he also HANDLED it. Is anyone going to seriously suggest that Robinson "confused" this wound for a wound that was "really" above the right ear?! (The current lone-gunman theory posits, and the extant autopsy photos show, a large wound above the right ear..."

"Historic New Information on the Kennedy Assassination" by Michael T. Griffith

[Ed O'Hagan]

What Jacqueline Kennedy describes is exactly what I see depicted in the Zapruder film. I don't know how it could be any more exact. Now, I'm talking about what I see. I'm not telling anyone else what to see. But I have no compunctions whatsoever about stating what I see, here, in this clip from Z:321 to Z:330:

The fatal head shot had just occurred only .45 seconds earlier , and yet Jackie was able to accomplish what we see her doing from Z.321-330 ( in .55 seconds).Physiologically and neurologically impossible !

Edited December 31, 2006 by Ed O'Hagan