On May 10, 1:36 pm, john.mcad...
@marquette.edu (John McAdams) wrote:
> On 10 May 2012 13:32:52 -0400, Bud <sirsl...
> >On May 6, 7:46=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> On May 5, 10:16=A0pm, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:
> >> > =A0 Ben Holmes offered this assertion at the nuthouse...
> >> > =A0 "That alone should tell you something. It was the *MILITARY* that i=
> >> > the order not to dissect the throat wound, and the supposed bullet trac=
> >> > But you don't have a credible and non-conspiratorial explanation for th=
> >> > fact."
> >> > =A0 Setting aside that Ben can`t establish this fact as fact,
> >> =A0 Over at the nuthouse Ben interjected the following here...
> >> =A0 "You're lying again, kook! I have sworn testimony under oath from one of
> >> the prosectors, as well as common sense knowledge about the military and
> >> who controlled the autopsy. What do you have? Anything at all? "
> >> =A0 Notice the complete lack of support Ben produced to support his idea?
> >> Nothing cited, nothing quoted, nobody named, just more empty claims.
> > Well, over at the nuthouse Ben has offered the following testimony in
> >support of his claim that the testimony of one of the prosectors
> >establishes as fact that a military officer ordered the neck not to be
> > MR. OSER: Your Honor, I would ask Your Honor to direct the witness to
> >answer my question.
> >BY MR. OSER:
> >Q: I will ask you the question one more time: Why did you not dissect
> >the track of the bullet wound that you have described today and you
> >saw at the time of the autopsy at the time you examined the body?
> >I ask you to answer that question.
> >A: As I recall I was told not to, but I don't remember by whom.
> >Q: You were told not to but you don't remember by whom?
> >A: Right.
> >Q: Could it have been one of the Admirals or one of the Generals in
> >the room?
> >A: I don't recall.
> >Q: Do you have any particular reason why you cannot recall at this
> >A: Because we were told to examine the head and the chest cavity, and
> >that doesn't include the removal of the organs of the neck.
> > Anyone notice anything missing? Like Finck saying a military officer
> >ordered him not to dissect the neck? Finck`s position is that he doesn`t
> >recall who told him not to. He mentions that someone conveyed the wishes
> >of the Kennedy family...
> > "Finck :I was told that the family wanted an examination of the head, as
> >I recall, the head and chest, but the prosectors in this autopsy didn't
> >remove the organs of the neck, to my recollection."
> Notice he says "the family" wanted such and such.
And it wasn`t only in the 1967 Clay Shaw trial that he said this. In a
memo dated Jan. 25th, 1965 he wrote...
"In my discussions with Cdr Humes, I stated we should not check the
block "complete autopsy" in the Autopsy Report Form. In compliance with
the wishes of the Kennedy family, the prosectors had confined their
examination to the head and chest."
" "I was told that the Kennedy family first authorized the autopsy of
the head only and then extended the permission to the chest. Organs of the
neck were not removed because of these same restrictions."
Ben knows this is Finck`s true position, and he never said it was an
order from a military officer. But since this is moderated forum I can`t
label Ben`s claims what they really are.
> The people in the autopsy room were under pressure from the people on
> the 17th Floor to get the autopsy done quickly.
Numerous people in the autopsy room attest to Kennedy family
influence. If only CTer ideas had such corroborative support.
> That's confirmed by William Manchester's account, and *he* got
> testimony from the people on the 17th Floor.
> The Kennedy Assassination Home Pagehttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm