In Memory of FBI Agent Henry Heiberger
Brokedad
Whereas it quite obviously causes much "pain" for Mr. Von Pein to have to
hear the facts as relates to the FBI Laboratory examination of the
clothing of JFK, in memory of the quite obviously honorable Henry
Heiberger, I will again, for it's historical content and context, post a
summary of some of my discussions with Agent Heiberger in regards to the
FBI examination of the clothing worn by JFK at the time of the
assassination.
http://openlettersmonthly.com/issue/he-died/#comment-1938
Thomas H. Purvis says:
1. The lower hole was X-rayed and found to contain metallic residue
embedded in the fabric around the perimeter of the puncture/hole.
2. Portions of the fabric containing the metallic residue were cut and
removed from the fabric, and this/these samples were destroyed during
"flame" analysis .
3. Results of the flame analysis demonstrated the metallic residue to be
copper.
4. A separate Lab Test Report is/and was completed for each step in the
process. Therefore, a Lab Test Report for the X-ray as well as a Lab Test
Report for the flame analysis testing was completed.
5. There was NO COMPARISON TESTING whatsoever.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Since copper is not a normal element of clothing manufacture, and the
copper was only found around the perimeter of the hole in the coat, there
was no need to run any comparison testing"
"Had comparison testing been done, the sample would have been taken
directly adjacent to the existing hole, and the sample location would have
been marked/circled in chalk, as well as having photographs taken after
removal and marking of the sample location"
"No comparison sample would have been taken up near the coat collar as
anything such as hair cream or makeup could have contaminated the sample
and affected the results"
"I conducted no comparison sampling and no sample was taken from anywhere
on the coat, let alone up near the coat collar. In fact, I was not even
aware that another hole existed there."
"Laboratory Test Reports are completed for each and every test conducted.
You can get those and they will verify exactly what tests were conducted"
-----------------------------------------------------------
FBI Agent Henry Heiberger to Tom Purvis, many years ago during our
conversations relative to the FBI Laboratory examination of the clothing
of JFK.
Agent Heiberger is the ONLY FBI Agent to have conducted any physical/
laboratory testing on the clothing worn by JFK at the time of the
assassination.
As I will continue to give "pain" to Mr. Von Pein on the subject matter, I
would therefore urge him to contradict the above stated information by
presentation of all of the factual research which he has personally
conducted in location of and speaking with "first source" references.
And Mr. Von Pein, just for the record, reading and believing "CASED
CLOSED"; the WC's version of "THE SHOT THAT MISSED"; and/or whatever VB
has to say on the subject matter of the clothing, does not count as
"factual research".
Many, many, others have erroneously reported what the WC states regarding
examination of the clothing of JFK, as if it is "God's Truth".
"Truth" is what you believe it to be, however it is not necessarily
"FACT"!
"FACT" is, the WC did not inform you of the "Truth" in this matter.
Certainly glad that I was not "dumb" enough to fall for this little
slight/sleight-of-hand maneuver on the part of Specter & Company.
But then again, as anyone who knows anything about me knows, I also did
not fall for the admission of the altered survey data into evidence
either.
Thus, I am also apparantly the only person to have found this little
maneuver, as well as discuss the issues with Mr. Robert West, and present
it as well.
Gerry Simone (O)
Good post but I'm confused.
Agent Heiberger says this, right?
<<Quote on>>
"I conducted no comparison sampling and no sample was taken from anywhere
on the coat, let alone up near the coat collar. In fact, I was not even
aware that another hole existed there."
<<Quote off>>
I understand from a separate post that there was a spot cut out for a
comparison sample below the collar according to Humes' testimony while
examining JFK's jacket that had an FBI memo attached to it.
Judging from the context of this post, are you implying that there was
another BULLET hole near the collar or that the other hole is suspicious?
Heilberger says that he wasn't even aware of another hole, and he was the
one who conducted the test, so what's the issue?
Maybe someone else from the FBI did a comparison later just to be sure.
"Brokedad" <tempty...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1190740261....@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Brokedad
wrote:
> Tom,
>
> Good post but I'm confused.
>
> Agent Heiberger says this, right?
>
> <<Quote on>>
>
> "I conducted no comparison sampling and no sample was taken from anywhere
> on the coat, let alone up near the coat collar. In fact, I was not even
> aware that another hole existed there."
>
> <<Quote off>>
>
> I understand from a separate post that there was a spot cut out for a
> comparison sample below the collar according to Humes' testimony while
> examining JFK's jacket that had an FBI memo attached to it.
>
> Judging from the context of this post, are you implying that there was
> another BULLET hole near the collar or that the other hole is suspicious?
>
> Heilberger says that he wasn't even aware of another hole, and he was the
> one who conducted the test, so what's the issue?
>
> Maybe someone else from the FBI did a comparison later just to be sure.
>
>
> news:1190740261....@r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/browse_thread/threa...
>
> - Show quoted text -
Eventually, I would have been getting around to this issue of the
"other" members of the Spectrographic Unit of the FBI Lab, as it
involves examination of the coat as well as what Henry Heiberger
relayed to me in regards to his limited examination of the tie worn by
JFK.
Those items which are in "marks" represent virtually the exact
statements of Henry Heiberger to me during our multiple conversations
regarding the examination of JFK' s clothing.
Through a variety of contacts, including FBI Agent Robert Frazier, I
located and spoke with each and every one of the FBI Agents who worked
in the Spectrographic Unit Section of the Lab.
ALL, with the exception of Henry Heiberger, stated absolutely that
they had nothing to do with examination of any of the clothing of JFK,
and each also stated that in event the other FBI Agents respectively
told me that they had no part in this examination, that, then Henry
Heiberger was quite obviously the only member of their group to have
conducted the physical/laboratory examination of the clothing.
Each member of the Unit, which included Gallagher; Heilman; Heiberger;
and one or two more whom I would have to dig to find their names,
relayed to me exactly what part that they played in examination of the
evidence, etc;
And, absolutely none, other than Henry Heiberger, claimed to have had
any association with examination of the clothing.
After this posting has time to "sink in" and any questions are
answered, I will thereafter go into what Henry Heiberger personally
relayed to me in regards to the Laboratory examination of the tie worn
by JFK, as Heiberger's statements to me regarding this piece of
evidence is also in direct contradiction to what the WC has informed
us of in regards to the "nick" on the tie.
Lastly, I will explain the "how/why" Henry Heiberger was not made
available to testify befory the WC.
The importance of this being that Henry Heiberger, and ONLY Henry
Heiberger was capable of stating as FACT exactly what Laboratory
Testing was actually done on JFK's clothing, as well as providing
copies of those Laboratory Test Reports which he also stated that he
completed for each and every test conducted, and which Test Reports I
might add were never admitted into evidence to support the "Hearsay"
testimony under which the coat and the tie were admitted into evidence
with the reported "Comparison" hole at the top collar of the coat, and
the "nick" on the tie.
Last time that I checked, a "memorandum"/aka "note from Mom" did not
fully qualify as factual evidence and/or testimony in regards to
laboratory testing of anything.
And, since this "note from Mom" is now one of those items which
appears to have also disappeared from the National Archives, I
personally would like to know if it was Arlen Specter's "mom" that
wrote this little note for him in order that he could pull this little
slight/sleight-of-hand episode as well.
Gerry Simone (O)
But that second hole, albeit of strange origin or dubious purpose, if not
a mistake, really doesn't change the case one way or another.
I would love to hear what else he conveyed to you and the nick on the tie
(was it caused by a scalpel or a bullet)?
"Brokedad" <tempty...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1190821418.4...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
Brokedad
wrote:
> OK, thank you.
>
> But that second hole, albeit of strange origin or dubious purpose, if not
> a mistake, really doesn't change the case one way or another.
>
> I would love to hear what else he conveyed to you and the nick on the tie
> (was it caused by a scalpel or a bullet)?
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
To the contrary!
A bullet which penetrates through the coat, at the edge of the coat
collar, on an oblique angle, thereafter exiting to strike JFK in the
rear of the head at the edge of the hairline, and thus "tunnel"
upwards (when the head is held vertically erect), to strike in the EOP
region of the skull is quite significant.
Try making that scenario fit with the position of JFK at Z313.
It fits ONLY when JFK is fully bent over/doubled at the waist with the
back side of his head in an almost horizontal plane, which also
happens to occur down directly in front of James Altgens, who also
happens to have observed this shot strike JFK, as well as Nellie
Connally fully describing that JBC was down with his head in her lap
when the third/last shot blew brain matter all over them, which also
happens to agree with all of those witnesses who stated that the Z313
headshot was the second shot, as well as Mr. Hudson and others who
descirbed the approximate location of the Presidential Limo at the
time of the third/last/final shot.
Z313 is the "Cowlick" entry into the skull, which absolutely exists!
Down in front of James Altgens position is the second impact to the
head of JFK which ultimately resulted in the EOP entry which the
autopsy surgeons readily located.
The elongated nature of the EOP entry wound through the skull easily
reveals this, to include the angle of impact/angle of attack.
As to the examination of the tie:
1. The tie had no "nick" in which fabric was actually absent.
2. The tie had an "abraised" area where the fabric was damaged.
3. The abraised area was X-rayed and revealed metallic residue
embedded in the fabric in the area of the abrasion.
No additional work was done on examination of the tie.
4. I (Tom) must be confusing the "nick" removed area of fabric with
where one of the other FBI Lab agents cut and removed the frabric in
order to conduct flame analysis of the metallic residue in order to
determine it's composition.
5. I (Henry Heiberger) was sent out of town to Georgia. An anonymous
telephone call reported having found "Oswald was Here" written in
chalk on the inside of an abandoned railroad box car.
I (Henry Heiberger) was sent down to Georgia to evaluate it and to
obtain samples of the chalk.
Upon returning I was directed to determine who manufactured the chalk.
6. I (Henry Heiberger) don't know what the hell that was all about.
That was the biggest waste of my time. I (Henry Heiberger) eventually
determined who manufactured the chalk, but it proved nothing, and we
all knew that Oswald was dead and buried.
Lastly:
I, (Tom Purvis) located and spoke with each and every FBI Agent who
worked in the Spectrographic Analysis Section of the FBI Lab.
Absolutely none, other than Henry Heiberger, stated that they had any
part in the examination of the clothing of JFK.
Thus, Henry Heiberger stated:
a. There was no "nick", but there was an abrasion.
b. The abrasion was X-rayed and found to have metallic residue at
area of the damaged fabric.
c. No additional testing of the clothing of JFK was conducted by him
as he was tasked to determine who made the chalk in an "Oswald was
Here" scenario.
d. If there was a "nick" with fabric missing from the tie, then it
must be where one of the other Lab Technicians completed removal and
testing of the metallic residue which he had found by X-ray.
e. The Laboratory Test Reports which he filled out on the testing
were turned in, and all that I had to do was obtain them and they
would show what testing was conducted as well as the results of the
testing, and who the examiner was.
YET!
Absolutely no other agent admits to having even touched the clothing
worn by JFK.
Gerry Simone (O)
hole (under the collar) was NOT through and through.
How can you say that it penetrated the coat?
That cowlick spot in the colour photo version of the back of head autopsy
photo seems too superficial, like a stain as opposed to a hole as it might
appear in the B & W version. If you think that's a thru and thru hole, then
each of the dark spots in the back autopsy B & W photo could be a bullet
hole too (are you saying that the second spot in that back autopsy photo
relates to the 'hole' under the top of the collar?). I've seen the photo of
the jacket but didn't notice a second hole.
Humes was persuaded by the HSCA that there was only ONE back of head wound -
at the cowlick as opposed to his 2.5 cm above and to the right of the EOP.
He later recanted in an interview years later and stuck to his original
story. The other autopsists Boswell and Finck vehemently denied the cowlick
entry.
So the nick was an abrasion that revealed the underlying white lining of the
tie?
So they didn't determine that the metallic traces were copper or from a
bullet?
Could a scalpel or scissors leave a metallic trace?
"Brokedad" <tempty...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1190905812....@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...