My facts are straight yours are askew. Mclellend described a large hole and nothing more he was not trained to determine anything else about it nor did he examine it in minute details to determine anything else for exampel he did not move the scalp away from the skull to attempt to find an actual bullet entry wound. the autopsy did and they demonstrated with clear evidence how the bullet entered and exited as the drawing shows. It is perfectly consistent with the evidence. Mclelleneds description of a wound is consistent with happenstance opbservation and nothing more. He does not and cannot refute or challeneg the facts
You're right but many other sources do have evidence and I simply provided it proving you wrong. It is you making a claim with no evidence.
All you have to do, is the impossible. Show how a small entrance hole at the bottom rear caused a large exit wound just above that point. I've never heard or read anyone trying to prove that nonsense. They simply pushed the exit wound forward, to the top of the head. By doing so, they invented a small entry and exit point. That is pure and simple fiction.
No one claimed such a hole as you state. It is you lying about them pushing the entrance wound forward to the top of the head they never did. What they proved was that your nonsense about Greer is false.
You continue to cite a drawing the WC never even viewed. You continue to state your non-facts as facts with absolutely no supporting evidence or documentation. No. Dr. M. did not move the scalp away from the skull as there was no scalp to be moved. The back and side of K's head were blasted wide open as Dr. M. and 40 plus other medical witnesses have observed. You have yet to produce a single witness to support your non-facts. And an experienced ER doc viewing the head wound inches away for 15 minutes is hardly a happenstance observation. By the way, do you know how many gunshot wounds the chief pathologist, Commander Humes, worked on prior to the President's???? Actually zero. Natta. None. Some expertise. But you are free to believe in whatever fairy tales you choose to believe in.
The HSCA moved it up about four inches, completely out of the Occipital region. Your stupid drawing shows exactly that area.
The drawing shopws how it went through based on the autopdies detailed examinations. The autopsy report IS the evidence. The edges of that wound did indeed have attached pieces of scalps and skull and brainmatter. Dr Mclellend only looked at it briefly he did not move it or conduct an indepth examination. Dr Mclellend did not Xray it or locate specific marks as the autopsy pathologists did which is how they found the entrance wound. They are facts supported and proven by the autopsy pathologists who did perform such an examination. Mclellend spentr afew minutes looking at it and that is happenstance observation. There was more than one doctor working on the autopsy and they were all in fact highly qualified experts at that field. Mclellend was not. Those are facts a non fact would be claiming that a happenstanceof a large wound while working to save kennedy's life in an emergency room disputes the facts established by the autopsy.
40 plus medical witnesses betray the autopsy report as a fraud as is the bogus drawing you continually refer to and you cannot produce a single witness to corroborate it. Dr. McCelland starred at the wound, just inches away, for 15 minutes. It was not a "happenstance" observation. And Commander Humes was no expert when it comes to gunshot wounds having never done a single autopsy on one. In short, I have witnesses, sources, documentation and you have nothing but a broken record of bogus conclusions and stated and re-stated non-facts.
Those witnsses DO NOT betray the autopsy as a fraud whatsoever you are essentially stating an outright lie. The witnesses corroborating what I said ARE the PATHOLOGISTS who actually performed the autopdy. What part of that fact are you willfully ignoring. Mclelland was assiting in surgery he did not STARE at anything he casually looked at it in a happenstance manner. Commander Humes among the OTHER pathologists were expert trained and experienced in autopsies to include gun shot wounds. In short you have no witness at all they are all very vague and describe an overall wound they do not in any way dispute or refute the established facts of the autopsy. It is you lying about the facts and I am stating them correctly
No, no. What I challenge you to do is to find even one witness that corroborates that phony baloney drawing your keep referring to as what reflects the autopsy report. You have not done so. You cannot produce a single witness. On the other hand, the autopsy report itself contradicts the Ida Dox drawing. For even Humes admitted that the head wound extended to the Occipital and Temporal lobes. Do you know your brain lobes? Moreover, the certification of death was written by Dr.Kemp Clark who stated that cerebral and cerebellar tissue extruded from the wound. Can you find that in the Ida Dox drawing? (Crickets chirping)
Yes yes the pathologists are the witnesses who were experts and all it does is express what they saw and determined. The drawing shows how the bullet passed and is consistent with what the autopsy established whether you like it or not. Sorry no evideence disputes the autopsy it is on you to provide some and you have failed to do so. You have even stated proven falsehoods about such people as Humes who did in fact have experience with gun shot wounds in autopsies. He and others determined the path of the bullet they proved it and detailed it in their report. The drawing merely illustrates it. That is the end of that what other facts do you need to ruin your theries?
The damage was not all visible much of it was found on X rays because fragments which proke off of the main bullet extended deper into the skull. The drawing was still consistent.
Oh, but you failed to answer the question. The autopsy report specifically states that the wound extended to the occipital and temporal lobes but your phony baloney Dox drawing shows no such thing. No, you can't sluff it off by calling for other "facts" of which are numerous. First admit that the Dox drawing is a fraud and not even consistent with the autopsy report. And as to Dr. Humes having performed autopsies of gunshot wounds, where is your proof? Your documentation????? (Crickets still chirping)
Oh I did anser the question and it is you lying and ignoring it. That description you refer to includes the INTERNAL damage and wounds and the accurate drawing shows the external wounds. The drawing is not a fraud you have failed to show it is a fraud and the burden of proof is on you. We both know you never read the WC report and the evidence of Humes background is detailed there. In his career before JFK he had performed over 800 autopsies some of which included gun shot victims. As I have said it is you stating knee jerk reactions to facts because you have only paid attention to one side of the story and never bothered yourself to check the other side. It is the WC which had facts and evidence it is the conspiracy theorists who have none
Nonsense. There is nothing in the report about internal as versus external wounds. You just made that up. But if it does, then kindly provide the citation. And since you claim to have read the Warren Report, kindly provide the citation and page number for your contention that it states Commander Humes performed autopsies of gunshot wounds. (Crickets Chirping)
I made up nothing it is fact and just read the report as you never have. (people shouting answers people ignoring)
Repeating it is a fact does not make it so. Calling an opponent a "liar" does not make it so. I have the Warren Report (which you claim you have read) right on top of my desk waiting for you to give me the page number where it states that Dr. Humes had previously performed autopsies of deaths cased by gunshot wounds. You have not responded. What we seem to have here is a huge credibility gap. (Crickets still Chirping)
It’s essentially this: a Secret Service agent accidentally shot and killed Kennedy. Lee Harvey Oswald did indeed shoot, but only one bullet hit Kennedy. The claim here is that George Hickey, a Secret Service agent riding in the car behind Kennedy, panicked and a gun he was unfamiliar with accidentally discharged, hitting and actually killing Kennedy. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts...agent-accidentally-shoot-jfk/article15198269/ Forensics shows two different types of bullets hit Kennedy. One was a steal jacket type which penetrated Kennedy and the Texas Governor. The second bullet which is believed to have been fired accidentally by a SS agent in the car behind Kennedy's was a type that shattered into many fragments after it hit Kennedy's skull. It's very unlikely Harvey Oswald was using two different types of bullets. Plus, if there was an organization behind Oswald, Oswald would most likely have been provided a much better rifle than the old antiquated one he used, so he was acting alone. But it was most likely covered up by the government and the WC for obvious reasons.
Forensics do not show this. It is only a theory unsupported by any evidence. The frgments from the shattered bullet and the relatively intact bullet were forensically proven to have been fired from OSwalds rifle
Unfortunately no fragments were ever discovered. Ask yourself why the SS were so heavy handed during the autopsy? And why were they telling the doctor how to perform the autopsy? And as the evidence was found such as the fragmented bullet in JFK's skull the SS collected all of it and was never seen again. I believe the only bullet that was found was a steel jacket bullet laying in JFK's gurney. The skull was to badly damaged to have been caused by a steel jacket bullet. The same type of bullet found near Oswald's shooting location in the library.
Yes in fact several were recovered from teh front of the limo on top of the dash and as noted earlier they were shown to have been fired through Oswald's rifle. The SS was not involved in the autopsy and did not interfere with the pathologists work. The SS only collected JFK's brain and turned it over to Robert Kennedy. Far from being never seen again we know he stored it with JFK's Secretary for a while and then took posession of it before it disappeared. Most likely he disposed of it to avoid any embarrasing tests which woulc have revealed JFK's extrensive drug use. Either way if any of this were part of an assassination cover up it would implicate Robert Kennedy in the death of his brother which is fairly ludicrous. The damage to the skull was consistent with a steel jacketed bullet which was fired by Oswald and incidentally was also the ammo used by the Secret Service in their AR-10 rifle. The SS accounted for all ofit's weapons and ammo and again the forensic tests proved the recovered fragments were fired from Oswalds rifle
