Zapruder film vs. autopsy photo

[mainframetech]

In the autopsy photos here:
http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html

On photo BE4, there is a flap of skull that is clearly hinged to flap
forward. On the Z-film frame 337 and frames before and after, we see the
flap of skull hinged and flapping out to the right side and down.

Other than an altered Z-film, what might cause this anomaly?

Chris

[miker...@gmail.com]

The wound on the right side of the Presidents head was a very large exit wound. Look at bulge inside the red ellipse.

The bullet struck the top of the Presidents head at an oblique angle at a steep downward and left to right trajectory.

Here is an autopsy photo
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-iY-YMVoH9xc/UhDT-A6R4AI/AAAAAAAACKc/54di0yWcqSc/w819-h632-no/topofhead06resizedellipse2.gif


And here are two interpretations of the fragment ejection pattern seen on Zapruder frame 313

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/--e1fTbRB0mQ/Ub-nk3XuyYI/AAAAAAAABfA/sjjlOp7C2FA/w826-h816-no/poimistvectors3.gif

And the bullet trajectory
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-oHRVTA64HrU/Uc2DPcBIh9I/AAAAAAAABp4/JATQBRab1Ag/w826-h816-no/inv_poi_bullettrajectory.gif

[Anthony Marsh]

The explosion of the head.

[Sandy McCroskey]

Why is that an anomaly?

[mainframetech]

On Sunday, August 18, 2013 11:47:54 AM UTC-4, miker...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, August 18, 2013 8:46:15 AM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > In the autopsy photos here:
>
> >
>
> > http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On photo BE4, there is a flap of skull that is clearly hinged to flap
>
> >
>
> > forward. On the Z-film frame 337 and frames before and after, we see the
>
> >
>
> > flap of skull hinged and flapping out to the right side and down.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Other than an altered Z-film, what might cause this anomaly?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Chris
>
>
>
> The wound on the right side of the Presidents head was a very large exit wound. Look at bulge inside the red ellipse.
>

Easier to look at Tom Robinson's drawing of the small wound on the
right temple that includes the 'flap' of skull that hinges the wrong way
when matched to the Z-film. Here's the drawing:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3
Notice how small he drew it. And he also commented that the damage to
the top of the head was done by the prosectors as they hunted for bullet
fragments. They had ordered all the assistants out of the room, but not
Robinson.

>
>
> The bullet struck the top of the Presidents head at an oblique angle at a steep downward and left to right trajectory.
>

That would make a small hole in the BOH of JFK. Over 40 people saw the
'large hole' in the BOH. If a bullet stayed going at that angle, it would
go down his throat.

>
>
> Here is an autopsy photo
>
> https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-iY-YMVoH9xc/UhDT-A6R4AI/AAAAAAAACKc/54di0yWcqSc/w819-h632-no/topofhead06resizedellipse2.gif
>

An interesting choice to show us. Tell me, what did they do with all
the brains hanging out of the head? Trim them off and throw them in a
bucket? They're gone in some of the other pictures. And again, Robinson
saw the prosectors damaging the skull on top while searching. The damage
to the top of head was not seen by the medically trained staff at
Parkland, and many of the folks at Bethesda.

>
>
>
>
> And here are two interpretations of the fragment ejection pattern seen on Zapruder frame 313
>
>
>
> https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/--e1fTbRB0mQ/Ub-nk3XuyYI/AAAAAAAABfA/sjjlOp7C2FA/w826-h816-no/poimistvectors3.gif
>
>
>
> And the bullet trajectory
>
> https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-oHRVTA64HrU/Uc2DPcBIh9I/AAAAAAAABp4/JATQBRab1Ag/w826-h816-no/inv_poi_bullettrajectory.gif

Those are nice photos with lines drawn on them. What do they have to do
with reality? They are someone's idea of where a bullet might have gone
if it had been fired from the 6th floor of the TSBD.

You haven't answered the question of why the photo from the autopsy had
the skull flap hinging one way, and the Z-film has it hinging another way.
Was something faked in one of the 2?

Chris

[mainframetech]

Based on the question that was asked, your answer isn't an answer. An
'explosion of the head' will not decide how the skull flap will hinge,
down or sideways. Please read the question more carefully.

Chris

[BT George]

On Sunday, August 18, 2013 8:46:15 AM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:

I would think lots of things should be taken into account:

1) As I have said to R. Harris, the Zfilm, even enhanced is still far from
HD quality. Furthermore 1/18 of a second is a minute sliver of time.
Any analysis of the aftermath of an explosive event like the head shot
that relies o n a semi-good quality of film and microanalyzing various
minute moments in time is IMO, fraught with potential interpretation
risks.

I certainly would be very cautious making any sweeping conclusions based
on a handlful of frames, representing fractions of second or at most a
second or two in total elapsed time.

2) As I also indicated in my analysis of his "protrusion" theory, the
condition of JFK's entire head should be taken into consideration. In one
of those posts I said:

"The bullet that struck from behind created massive fractures in the skull
that effectively destabilized much of Kennedy's head. (Particularly the
back and right side.) Many of these fragments were not blasted out of the
skull, but were held together in place only because they remained adhered
to the scalp---which was obviously pliable."

In the case you are pointing to Chris, I would submit that a possible
explanation is that, because there were loose fragments and much missing
bone in the entire right side of the head, what we are seeing in the Zfilm
around this spot is a very large segment or segments of scalp that have
flopped over without dramatically. While I don't agree with Bob's "sewer
shot" conclusions discussed on the linked page, the best blown up images
of this frame I could find come from his website. The following actually
has both BE4 and Z337:


http://jfkhistory.com/LastShot2/BOHDamage.html

Even enlarged and in relatively high quality, IMO the film is a pretty
poor vehicle for detailed study. Still it looks to me like the large
segment(s) of destabilzed right scalp that we see hanging down in the
Zfilm (+ general blood and gore), are actually *obsuring* from view most
of JFK's face *including* the right frontal portion of his head that the
flap in BE4 would have come from. Without a clearer view of that area of
his head, it's difficult to draw any conclusions as to what damage was
actually suffered there. Thus it is difficult to opine on why a forward
flap would exist in BE4 one way or the other.

For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part of
a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.
(Which is a topic also discussed on the linked web page.)


BT

[Anthony Marsh]

You did not ask why it would choose to hinge the way it did. The answer is
that at the moment of impact the bullet is only going at about 2100 fps,
but the shock wave from the IMPACT will travel much faster in the bone.

[miker...@gmail.com]

If you are a zapruder film alterationist proponent please be very clear
about that.

The prosectors did not cause the damage to the top of the head.

Zapruder Frame 313 shows very clearly two large bone fragment being
ejected from the point of impact site on the top of the head.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-b49hhajt8Bo/UcDArT42yXI/AAAAAAAABfs/slIV_yyNLEQ/w796-h615-
no/randolph_fragment_rotated.png

David Lifton started this nonsense ( and I hardly ever use the word
nonsense but it is appropriate for David Liftons theory).

He did correctly interpret the evidence that there was a blow to the TOP
of the Presidents head. But then he went off the deep end and said the
body was snatched and an operation was done on the top of the head.

The bullet struck the top of the head, and the way the skull separated
must have left very clean cuts maybe giving the impression it was
surgical.

In fact, the bullet struck near the top of the head because it came from
the roof of the Criminal Courts Building.

[mainframetech]

Yes, I used to think that myself. But listening to many witnesses who
said that their was skull missing from the BOH cleared me of that notion.
Yes, t here was some flap there, but some skull missing which was obvious,
given all the witness pictures. And there was no other serious damage to
the head. The top of the head, wasn't damaged until the autopsy when
Robinson saw them doing the damage to the skull as they searched for
bullet fragments.

"-She said it was her recollection that the right side of the
President’s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she
had to ask Dr. Perry where the wound was in the first place."

From: http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/boh/parkland_boh/parkland_wound.htm

>
>
> In the case you are pointing to Chris, I would submit that a possible
>
> explanation is that, because there were loose fragments and much missing
>
> bone in the entire right side of the head, what we are seeing in the Zfilm
>
> around this spot is a very large segment or segments of scalp that have
>
> flopped over without dramatically. While I don't agree with Bob's "sewer
>
> shot" conclusions discussed on the linked page, the best blown up images
>
> of this frame I could find come from his website. The following actually
>
> has both BE4 and Z337:
>

See comments above. The side and top of the head were NOT damaged based
on testimony of trained medical personnel at both Parkland and some at
Bethesda. The prosectors were seen to do the damage, including sawing
part of the skull. This occurred a bit before the 'official' autopsy at
8:00pm. All the military assistants had been ordered out of the room, but
not Robinson, who wasn't military. He relates that they damaged the
skull.

>
>
>
>
> http://jfkhistory.com/LastShot2/BOHDamage.html
>
>
>
> Even enlarged and in relatively high quality, IMO the film is a pretty
>
> poor vehicle for detailed study. Still it looks to me like the large
>
> segment(s) of destabilzed right scalp that we see hanging down in the
>
> Zfilm (+ general blood and gore), are actually *obsuring* from view most
>
> of JFK's face *including* the right frontal portion of his head that the
>
> flap in BE4 would have come from. Without a clearer view of that area of
>
> his head, it's difficult to draw any conclusions as to what damage was
>
> actually suffered there. Thus it is difficult to opine on why a forward
>
> flap would exist in BE4 one way or the other.
>

The flap can be seen clearly in my view. As to damage, see my comments
above.

>
>
> For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part of
>
> a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
>
> fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
>
> BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.
>
> (Which is a topic also discussed on the linked web page.)

>2


I think that's stretching it. A flap on a flap...:) Humorously,
Robinson's drawing of the side wound was a bit smaller:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&rel
PageId=3

Now here's a strange bit of information. A woman named Saundra Kay
Spencer who worked in the navy photographic center, was given a set of
photos to develop for the White House. They were not to be seen by anyone
including her, though she had to look at them to be sure they developed
properly. It was all very hush-hush. She developed the set of photos and
when she was shown the current set of photos of the autopsy, she thought
that some of them didn't match the set she developed. The set she did was
all cleaned up around the body with nothing out of place and everything
clean. But more importantly, she remembers a photo of the BOH of JFK.
It had a large hole in it which the regular set didn't have! She drew a
picture of the photo to show the position of the hole she saw in her set:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=679

She noted that the hole was large. Robinson said it 'was the size of
an orange'. He was talking about what he could see, not what was behind a
flap, as was the case with many of the witnesses. Her testimony can be
found at:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=797


Chris

[mainframetech]

Nope. Still off course. The question is why did the flap of skull flap forward in one photo and out and down in another? And why should the 2 images be different from 2 different media?

Chris

[mainframetech]

There is no doubt whatsoever that I believe that the Z-film was altered on certain frames, as well as having certain frames removed to avoid showing things, and that certain frames were 'painted' in and overlaid on the frames around 313-315 at least. To have a spray of blood and brain flash in the air for only 3 frames by itself doesn't make sense. The time 3 frames represents is miniscule. (3/18ths of a second?) If you look at individual frames from about 311 until 320, you will see that at first there are 2 objects on the trunk of the limo (I assume they are trunk hinges). When the kill shot struck JFK Bobby Hargis (motorcycle cop) was blitzed with blood, brain and fluid. He was riding behind and to the left of the limo. He had much to clean off after it was all over. Yet the trunk lid that should have gotten much of that same blast of human material didn't show on the trunk. Of course, neither di the hinges either. The trunk was clear. By 320 the hinges are back and all goes on with a clean trunk. The event can be seen as individual frames here:
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/zfilm/zframe001.html

>
>
> The prosectors did not cause the damage to the top of the head.
>
>
>
> Zapruder Frame 313 shows very clearly two large bone fragment being
>
> ejected from the point of impact site on the top of the head.
>
>
>
> https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-b49hhajt8Bo/UcDArT42yXI/AAAAAAAABfs/slIV_yyNLEQ/w796-h615-
>
> no/randolph_fragment_rotated.png
>
>
>
> David Lifton started this nonsense ( and I hardly ever use the word
>
> nonsense but it is appropriate for David Liftons theory).
>

Which nonsense are you talking about? The bone that was blasted off the BOH of JFK? That was legitimate. Pieces of bone were turned in and taken to Bethesda and given to the prosectors during the autopsy. They fit.

>
>
> He did correctly interpret the evidence that there was a blow to the TOP
>
> of the Presidents head. But then he went off the deep end and said the
>
> body was snatched and an operation was done on the top of the head.
>

It was. Robinson saw it happen. Haven't you checked his sworn testimony? And the body was 'snatched'. They had to get it to a safe place to do an autopsy where they controlled everything. Bethesda was all military. They couldn't leave it to the Dallas medical examiner even when he pointed out that it was against the law to take the body, and of course, the limo had to go too, which also might have evidence on/in it. The worst thing that could happen is that the public saw that it was more than one shooter and therefore a conspiracy. It was critical that Oswald be blamed alone.

>
>
> The bullet struck the top of the head, and the way the skull separated
>
> must have left very clean cuts maybe giving the impression it was
>
> surgical.
>

At one point the prosectors (Humes and Boswell, not Finck) used the saw to cut part of the skull off to get at the brain.

>
>
> In fact, the bullet struck near the top of the head because it came from
>
> the roof of the Criminal Courts Building.

Welp, I can see that as another shooter location. The medically trained people said that there was NO damage to the top of the head at Parkland and even at first at Bethesda, so hitting the top of head didn't happen. Hard to hit the real holes in the head from that building high up. At the rear and the side a small hole, and a small hole in the right forehead just into the hairline .35 inches in diameter.

Here's nurse Audrey Bell speaking who saw the body:
"-She said it was her recollection that the right side of the President’s head, and the top of his head,

were intact, which is why she had to ask Dr. Perry where the wound was in the first place."
From: http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/boh/parkland_boh/parkland_wound.htm

Chris

[Steve Barber]

> >=2

>
>
>
>
>
> I think that's stretching it. A flap on a flap...:) Humorously,
>
> Robinson's drawing of the side wound was a bit smaller:
>

> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&rel=

>
> PageId=3
>
>
>
> Now here's a strange bit of information. A woman named Saundra Kay
>
> Spencer who worked in the navy photographic center, was given a set of
>
> photos to develop for the White House. They were not to be seen by anyone
>
> including her, though she had to look at them to be sure they developed
>
> properly. It was all very hush-hush. She developed the set of photos and
>
> when she was shown the current set of photos of the autopsy, she thought
>
> that some of them didn't match the set she developed. The set she did was
>
> all cleaned up around the body with nothing out of place and everything
>
> clean. But more importantly, she remembers a photo of the BOH of JFK.
>
> It had a large hole in it which the regular set didn't have! She drew a
>
> picture of the photo to show the position of the hole she saw in her set:
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=679
>
>
>
> She noted that the hole was large. Robinson said it 'was the size of
>
> an orange'. He was talking about what he could see, not what was behind a
>
> flap, as was the case with many of the witnesses. Her testimony can be
>
> found at:
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=797
>
>
>
>
>
> Chris

You need to get your hands on Reclaiming History and read the End Notes
chapter on the CD Rom. Bugliosi destroys Spencer's "account".

[Anthony Marsh]

> President�s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

>> =

>
>
> I think that's stretching it. A flap on a flap...:) Humorously,
> Robinson's drawing of the side wound was a bit smaller:

> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&rel=

> PageId=3
>
> Now here's a strange bit of information. A woman named Saundra Kay
> Spencer who worked in the navy photographic center, was given a set of
> photos to develop for the White House. They were not to be seen by anyone
> including her, though she had to look at them to be sure they developed
> properly. It was all very hush-hush. She developed the set of photos and
> when she was shown the current set of photos of the autopsy, she thought
> that some of them didn't match the set she developed. The set she did was
> all cleaned up around the body with nothing out of place and everything
> clean. But more importantly, she remembers a photo of the BOH of JFK.
> It had a large hole in it which the regular set didn't have! She drew a
> picture of the photo to show the position of the hole she saw in her set:
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=679
>

Some of us believe she developed the set of photos taken by Knudsen
after the autopsy for the family.

[Anthony Marsh]

The Harper fragment was determined by the HSCA experts to not be from
the back of the head.

>>
>>
>> He did correctly interpret the evidence that there was a blow to the TOP
>>
>> of the Presidents head. But then he went off the deep end and said the
>>
>> body was snatched and an operation was done on the top of the head.
>>
> It was. Robinson saw it happen. Haven't you checked his sworn testimony? And the body was 'snatched'. They had to get it to a safe place to do an autopsy where they controlled everything. Bethesda was all military. They couldn't leave it to the Dallas medical examiner even when he pointed out that it was against the law to take the body, and of course, the limo had to go too, which also might have evidence on/in it. The worst thing that could happen is that the public saw that it was more than one shooter and therefore a conspiracy. It was critical that Oswald be blamed alone.
>
>>
>>
>> The bullet struck the top of the head, and the way the skull separated
>>
>> must have left very clean cuts maybe giving the impression it was
>>
>> surgical.
>>
> At one point the prosectors (Humes and Boswell, not Finck) used the saw to cut part of the skull off to get at the brain.
>>
>>
>> In fact, the bullet struck near the top of the head because it came from
>>
>> the roof of the Criminal Courts Building.
>
> Welp, I can see that as another shooter location. The medically trained people said that there was NO damage to the top of the head at Parkland and even at first at Bethesda, so hitting the top of head didn't happen. Hard to hit the real holes in the head from that building high up. At the rear and the side a small hole, and a small hole in the right forehead just into the hairline .35 inches in diameter.
>
> Here's nurse Audrey Bell speaking who saw the body:

> "-She said it was her recollection that the right side of the President�s head, and the top of his head,

[Anthony Marsh]

Phony question. False assumption.

> Chris
>

[mainframetech]

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 9:41:25 PM UTC-4, Steve Barber wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 20, 2013 1:16:36 PM UTC-4, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > On Monday, August 19, 2013 10:51:43 PM UTC-4, BT George wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Sunday, August 18, 2013 8:46:15 AM UTC-5, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > In the autopsy photos here:
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > On photo BE4, there is a flap of skull that is clearly hinged to flap
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > forward. On the Z-film frame 337 and frames before and after, we see the
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > >
>
> >
>
> > >
>
> >
>
> > > > flap of skull hinged and flapping out to the right side and down.
>
>
> > > > Other than an altered Z-film, what might cause this anomaly?
>
>
> > > I would think lots of things should be taken into account:
>
>
> > > 1) As I have said to R. Harris, the Zfilm, even enhanced is still far from
>
>
> > > HD quality. Furthermore 1/18 of a second is a minute sliver of time.
>
>
> > > Any analysis of the aftermath of an explosive event like the head shot
>
>
> > > that relies o n a semi-good quality of film and microanalyzing various
>
>
> > > minute moments in time is IMO, fraught with potential interpretation
>
>
> > > risks.
>
>
> > > I certainly would be very cautious making any sweeping conclusions based
>
>
> > > on a handlful of frames, representing fractions of second or at most a
>
>
> > > second or two in total elapsed time.
>

A handful of frames would be 5 frames. That's 5/18ths of a second. The individual frames that show evidence of explosiveness of the head from 313 to 315 are 3 frames and 3/18ths of a second. Do you think that a blast like that should be there and gone in 3/18ths of a second? The many cases that people have found with people in the film doing impossible things at lightning speed suggesting missing frames should be ignored? A picture showing Mary Moorman and friend standing in the street as the limo passes and then in the Z-film they are on the grass looking slightly at the wrong spot when the limo is in view? The showing of those two ladies in white shoes when they both swore they wore black shoes (penny loafers and boat shoes) that day? The Z-film needs some rethinking.

> >
>
> > > 2) As I also indicated in my analysis of his "protrusion" theory, the
>
>
> > > condition of JFK's entire head should be taken into consideration. In one
>
>
> > > of those posts I said:
>
>
> > > "The bullet that struck from behind created massive fractures in the skull
>
>
> > > that effectively destabilized much of Kennedy's head. (Particularly the
>
>
> > > back and right side.) Many of these fragments were not blasted out of the
>
>
> > > skull, but were held together in place only because they remained adhered
>
>
> > > to the scalp---which was obviously pliable."
>
> >

No. I've held a head which had been bashed repeatedly breaking the skull inside. You know it immediately if the skull has been cracked to that degree. I don't know of a single medically trained person at Parkland that handled the head of JFK ever stating that the skull was broken up. Not to mention that Tom Robinson saw the prosectors do damage to the skull (including using a saw) to search for fragments and to get the brain out. It might at first seem clumsy and inappropriate, but it certainly filled the bill to back up the shot from the 6th floor.

>
>
> > Yes, I used to think that myself. But listening to many witnesses who
>
> >
>
> > said that their was skull missing from the BOH cleared me of that notion.
>
> >
>

> > Yes, there was some flap there, but some skull missing which was obvious,

>
> >
>
> > given all the witness pictures. And there was no other serious damage to
>
> >
>
> > the head. The top of the head, wasn't damaged until the autopsy when
>
> >
>
> > Robinson saw them doing the damage to the skull as they searched for
>
> >
>

> > bullet fragments. Read his ARRB testimony.
>
>
> > Nurse Audrey Bell -"She said it was her recollection that the right side of the

Yep. Part of my point exactly. My personal feeling is that looking at the Z-film you CVAN determine which was the flap is 'flapping' during the explosive sequence.

Bugliosi? After I caught him in a lie about the throat wound I gave up on him. Did he suggest that Spencer lied? Did he say she was mistaken? I can't see how he might do that. Have you read HER account of her experience?

I think they need to rename his book to "Rewriting History". He suggested that she had gone against all the experts who said there was no 'large hole' in the BOH, meaning the prosectors. He forgets the over 40 people that saw the 'large hole' and back up Spencer. It's a lawyer presenting his case and leaving out anything that would contradict his beliefs.

Chris

[mainframetech]

> > President’s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

Maybe. She did work for the White House usually. The point is that she got a completely different set of photos than you and I. And her set had a large hole in the BOH. Why would the family keep to the phony story with the silly SBT, when the large hole puts it in the conspiracy venue?

[Anthony Marsh]

>>> President�s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

Yeah, so what? She saw the condition of the head AFTER the autopsy.
After the brain had been removed. We can see that the hole in indeed
massive. It has to be to remove the brain intact for study.
Just seeing a wound on the back of the head does not prove that it was
caused by a shot from the front. You have a simplistic understanding of
ballistics.

[Anthony Marsh]

>>> President�s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

You continue to misrepresent historical documents to push a political
agenda. The autopsy doctors never said there was a large hole in the
back of the head. That is what you believe in.

> Chris
>
>

[mainframetech]

This is from the HSCA interview:

John Ebersole, MD, was the attending radiologist at JFK's autopsy. In
HSCA testimony recently released, Ebersole claimed, "The back of the head
was missing..." (HSCA interview with Ebersole, 3/11/78, p. 3), and when
shown the autopsy photograph with the back of the scalp intact, Ebersole
commented, "You know, my recollection is more of a gaping occipital wound
than this but I can certainly not state that this is the way it looked…
“perhaps about 12:30 (AM) a large fragment of the occipital bone was
received from Dallas and at Dr. Finck's request I X-rayed these (sic)..."
If an occipital bone fragment did arrive late for the autopsy, the defect
must indeed have been posterior. The occipital bone is at the base of the
rear of the skull.

>
>
So we have a difference of opinion with one of the HSCA's own witnesses.

> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> He did correctly interpret the evidence that there was a blow to the TOP
>
> >>
>
> >> of the Presidents head. But then he went off the deep end and said the
>
> >>
>
> >> body was snatched and an operation was done on the top of the head.
>
> >>
>

> > It was. Robinson saw it happen. Haven't you checked his sworn testimony? And the body WAS 'snatched'. They had to get it to a safe place to do an autopsy where they controlled everything. Bethesda was all military. They couldn't leave it to the Dallas medical examiner even when he pointed out that it was against the law to take the body, and of course, the limo had to go too, which also might have evidence on/in it. The worst thing that could happen is that the public saw that it was more than one shooter and therefore a conspiracy. It was critical that Oswald be blamed alone. And for a percentage of people, it worked!

>
>
> >> The bullet struck the top of the head, and the way the skull separated
>
> >>
>
> >> must have left very clean cuts maybe giving the impression it was
>
> >>
>
> >> surgical.
>
> >>
>

> > At one point the prosectors (Humes and Boswell, not Finck) used the saw to cut part of the skull off to get at the brain. That might explain 'surgical' cuts.

>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> In fact, the bullet struck near the top of the head because it came from
>
> >>
>
> >> the roof of the Criminal Courts Building.
>
> >
>

> > Welp, I can see that as another shooter location. The medically trained people said that there was NO damage to the top of the head at Parkland and even at first at Bethesda, so hitting the top of head didn't happen. Hard to hit the real holes in the head from that building high up. At the rear and the side a small hole, and a small hole in the right forehead just into the hairline .25 inches in diameter.

>
> >
>
> > Here's nurse Audrey Bell speaking who saw the body:
>

> > "-She said it was her recollection that the right side of the President’s head, and the top of his head,

[mainframetech]

Phony comment. Typically without ANY backup or logic supplied.
Therefore nothing of importance was said and any noise heard is ignored.
If you have rude comments, back them up. The question stands, and hasn't
been answered yet. The anomaly hasn't been explained and it is beginning
to appear that it cannot be answered. Leaving us with a Z-film that was
modified away from reality.

Another area where the Z-film seems to be lacking is in the debris that
left the head of JFK upon the kill shot striking him. Since Bobby Hargis,
the motorcycle cop who was behind and to the left of the limo was showered
with all kinds of debris, blood, brains and fluids, shouldn't we see this
in the few little frames around 313 to 315?


Chris

[miker...@gmail.com]

> >>> President’s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

As you know well, Moorman was taken about frame 315. There is no blowout
of the back of the head at this point in time. The shot at frame 313
struck the top of the head and exited the right temple area. This also
shows that the Harper Fragment did not come from the back of the head.

http://imageshack.us/a/img21/4483/moormanfullheadcropnega.png

By frame 337 the back of the head is now blown out.
http://imageshack.us/a/img190/8320/z337.jpg


The photographic evidence is very strong that there were two , nearly
simultaneous, shots to the head.

The first shot was from behind.
The second shot was from the right front.

[mainframetech]

> >>> President’s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

Here we go again with me correcting your mistakes. The hole at the BOH
was NOT used to remove the brain. The hole they made in the TOP of the
head was used for that. They also used the saw for that.

> Just seeing a wound on the back of the head does not prove that it was
>
> caused by a shot from the front. You have a simplistic understanding of
>
> ballistics.

Wrong again. The mistakes just keep on coming. My description comes
from work done by Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio, Chief Medical Examiner and
Director of the Regional Crime Laboratory, County of Bexar, San Antonio,
Texas. I think that is enough 'expert' for even you, and his knowledge
far surpasses even YOUR great knowledge of the field.

He said: "Note how the bullet interacts with the head in two stages. In
the first stage, the bullet passes rapidly through, leaving an expanding
temporary cavity in its wake. The separate events of this first stage are
(1) the bullet enters the skull by drilling a small entrance hole [seen
and described by Robinson]; (2) some brain matter is ejected backward out
this hole (tail splash); (3) the bullet, beginning to tumble, passes
through the brain; and (4) the bullet leaves the skull by blasting a large
exit hole [the 'large hole over 40 people saw]." My comments in brackets.
From:
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_topics/wound_ballistics/how_a_high-
speed.html
The only situation we have that fits that description is the striking
the head from in front and blowing out the back of the head. Here is
DiMaio's diagram:
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_topics/wound_ballistics/DiMaio_Fig_
3-2.jpg

Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
diagram exactly.

[mainframetech]

> >>> President’s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

As usual you've left out critical information in your comment. You have failed to point out what document I've "misrepresented" and in what way. The fact that the 3 prosectors said what they were ordered to say carries NO weight when most of the rest of the free-thinking medical world saw a 'large hole' in the BOH. Try to recognize that you have associated yourself with those few that say there was a 'small hole' in the BOH.

I've braced you on this kind of comment before. If you think I've "misrepresented" anything, have the guts to say so and explain yourself. If you think I've got a "political agenda" then have the guts to say so, and say what that agenda is.

To help you understand what has escaped you, I do NOT only 'believe' in a particular scenario for the murder, I see facts that suggest it as well. I also see wacky theories that make it more likely that conspiracy was the order of the day in DP.

Now if you're unable to back yourself up, then I will consider that you've said nothing of importance and I will ignore what little noise I heard, as I have done in the past.
>
>
Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

>>>>> President�s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

I didn't say it was MADE for that. The back of the head was intact until
they unwrapped the head and all the skull bones fell out. Boswell's
diagram for the ARRB shows the huge hole in the op of the head which
extended well into the back of the head. Then they removed more of the
skull to take out the brain. It was easy to take out because it was so
fractured as we can see in the X-rays.

http://the-puzzle-palace.com/Boswell01.JPG

>> Just seeing a wound on the back of the head does not prove that it was
>>
>> caused by a shot from the front. You have a simplistic understanding of
>>
>> ballistics.
>
> Wrong again. The mistakes just keep on coming. My description comes
> from work done by Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio, Chief Medical Examiner and
> Director of the Regional Crime Laboratory, County of Bexar, San Antonio,
> Texas. I think that is enough 'expert' for even you, and his knowledge
> far surpasses even YOUR great knowledge of the field.
>
> He said: "Note how the bullet interacts with the head in two stages. In
> the first stage, the bullet passes rapidly through, leaving an expanding
> temporary cavity in its wake. The separate events of this first stage are
> (1) the bullet enters the skull by drilling a small entrance hole [seen
> and described by Robinson]; (2) some brain matter is ejected backward out
> this hole (tail splash); (3) the bullet, beginning to tumble, passes
> through the brain; and (4) the bullet leaves the skull by blasting a large
> exit hole [the 'large hole over 40 people saw]." My comments in brackets.
> From:

> http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_topics/wound_ballistics/how_a_high-=

> speed.html
> The only situation we have that fits that description is the striking
> the head from in front and blowing out the back of the head. Here is
> DiMaio's diagram:

> http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_topics/wound_ballistics/DiMaio_Fig_=
> 3-2.jpg
>

Di Maio is wrong and misrepresenting the evidence to make it fit the WC
findings. But their bullet did not tumble and exit intact. It broke up
inside the head and exited in several places.
His scenario is only supposition.

> Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
> makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
> The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
> hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
> diagram exactly.
>

No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.

[Anthony Marsh]

>>>>> President�s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

How does this differ from the HSCA solution? So instead of being a WC
defender you want to be a HSCA defender?

> http://imageshack.us/a/img21/4483/moormanfullheadcropnega.png
>
> By frame 337 the back of the head is now blown out.
> http://imageshack.us/a/img190/8320/z337.jpg
>

Make up your mind. You have the shot coming from the rear and you say it
blew out the back of the head?

>
> The photographic evidence is very strong that there were two , nearly
> simultaneous, shots to the head.
>

Great, so when you are caught with contradictions you modify your theory.

> The first shot was from behind.
> The second shot was from the right front.
>

Some people used to believe that. No one still does.

[Anthony Marsh]

I have written about this hundreds of times. You refuse to pay attention.
The appearance of the head wound changed several times during the autopsy.
Jackie closed the flap to keep the the head together. So we don't see
the flap in the earliest autopsy photos. Then as they worked on the head
the flap sometimes became open.

> Therefore nothing of importance was said and any noise heard is ignored.
> If you have rude comments, back them up. The question stands, and hasn't
> been answered yet. The anomaly hasn't been explained and it is beginning
> to appear that it cannot be answered. Leaving us with a Z-film that was
> modified away from reality.
>

Your question is based on false assumptions you have made.

> Another area where the Z-film seems to be lacking is in the debris that
> left the head of JFK upon the kill shot striking him. Since Bobby Hargis,
> the motorcycle cop who was behind and to the left of the limo was showered
> with all kinds of debris, blood, brains and fluids, shouldn't we see this
> in the few little frames around 313 to 315?
>

No. The debris flew up several feet and then fell down on Hargis.

>
> Chris
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

> than this but I can certainly not state that this is the way it looked�
> �perhaps about 12:30 (AM) a large fragment of the occipital bone was

> received from Dallas and at Dr. Finck's request I X-rayed these (sic)..."
> If an occipital bone fragment did arrive late for the autopsy, the defect
> must indeed have been posterior. The occipital bone is at the base of the
> rear of the skull.
>

You're only 35 years behind. Try reading the HSCA volumes sometime
instead of making up crap from 50 years ago. The HSCA experts figured it
out. Dr. Lawrence Angel places the Harper fragment on the TOP of the head.

http://the-puzzle-palace.com/angelray.gif

>>
>>
> So we have a difference of opinion with one of the HSCA's own witnesses.
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> He did correctly interpret the evidence that there was a blow to the TOP
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> of the Presidents head. But then he went off the deep end and said the
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> body was snatched and an operation was done on the top of the head.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>> It was. Robinson saw it happen. Haven't you checked his sworn testimony? And the body WAS 'snatched'. They had to get it to a safe place to do an autopsy where they controlled everything. Bethesda was all military. They couldn't leave it to the Dallas medical examiner even when he pointed out that it was against the law to take the body, and of course, the limo had to go too, which also might have evidence on/in it. The worst thing that could happen is that the public saw that it was more than one shooter and therefore a conspiracy. It was critical that Oswald be blamed alone. And for a percentage of people, it worked!
>>
>>
>>>> The bullet struck the top of the head, and the way the skull separated
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> must have left very clean cuts maybe giving the impression it was
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> surgical.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>> At one point the prosectors (Humes and Boswell, not Finck) used the saw to cut part of the skull off to get at the brain. That might explain 'surgical' cuts.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> In fact, the bullet struck near the top of the head because it came from
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> the roof of the Criminal Courts Building.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Welp, I can see that as another shooter location. The medically trained people said that there was NO damage to the top of the head at Parkland and even at first at Bethesda, so hitting the top of head didn't happen. Hard to hit the real holes in the head from that building high up. At the rear and the side a small hole, and a small hole in the right forehead just into the hairline .25 inches in diameter.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Here's nurse Audrey Bell speaking who saw the body:
>>

>>> "-She said it was her recollection that the right side of the President�s head, and the top of his head,

[John Reagor King]

In article <a5e3932f-4df9-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>,

BT George <brockg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part of
> a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
> fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
> BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.

Exactly. ;-)

[John Reagor King]

In article <44fc77b7-471b-4dc0...@googlegroups.com>,

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In the autopsy photos here:
> http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html
>
> On photo BE4, there is a flap of skull that is clearly hinged to flap
> forward. On the Z-film frame 337 and frames before and after, we see the
> flap of skull hinged and flapping out to the right side and down.
>
> Other than an altered Z-film, what might cause this anomaly?

People at the autopsy handling the man's head, one would think.

[mainframetech]

> >>>>> President’s head, and the top of his head were intact, which is why she

It's sort of humorous watching you try and talk yourself out of the corner you talked yourself into.

I'll have to correct you once again. Paul O'Connor was one of the assistants that opened the casket and got the body out to place on the table.
He stated that there were NO loose bones in the skull at that time. Nor were there any loose bones from the skull in Parkland either.

As I told you, I've had experience with holding the head of someone with multiple breaks in their skull, and you KNOW it when you feel the skull. Those at Parkland that held the head did NOT mention any breakage of the skull in general, only at the BOH where some skull was missing at the 'large hole'.

But fellow, YOUR not a wound ballistics person, why would you say those
things in light of an expert in the field saying otherwise? And if HE was
presenting a supposition, then certainly YOURS must be too. But you see,
the diagram (if you checked it) wasn't specifically for the JFK murder.
It was one of a few different things that can happen depending on various
factors. The 'A' diagram fits our JFK scenario where a bullet hit the
front of the head at the right forehead just inside the hairline, and
passed through the brain building force and a 'bubble' of pressure that
then exploded out the back of the head.

>
>
> > Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
>
> > makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
>
> > The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
>
> > hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
>
> > diagram exactly.
>
>
> No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
>
> you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
>
> temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.
>

What baloney!! I didn't say temple, I said right FOREHEAD. I've shown
the entry point of the bullet at the right forehead many times. If you
check the autopsy photos at:

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html

Now look at the photo labeled 'Groden Superior', you will see where
they covered the point of entry with wax or something similar. Look at
the right forehead. Robinson testified that there was a hole there about
.25 inches in diameter. He no doubt put some morticians wax on it to
cover it. It was perfectly aligned for the bullet to go into the brain as
the head had lolled forward at the time of the kill shot.

You can be sure that the prosectors wouldn't mention this small hole in
the forehead. It was too much like the answer to the whole murder, and
proved conspiracy, being shot from the front. All that time and they had
to keep their mouths shut so nothing got on the record!

[mainframetech]

That all explains the autopsy photo that shows the whole BOH looking the
same, but what answers the question? That the flap in the two pictures
flops in different directions? Naturally it could be caused by someone
painting an overlay on the Z-film, but I was offering a chance to find a
reason other than 'fiddling' with the Z-film over the weekend after the
murder when the film was located for a short time in the hands of the
'Hawkeye Works' of the CIA in Rochester, NY for some odd reason.]

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Because Nurse Bowron wrapped the head with a "small white sheet."

Because I know from other experts when he is wrong.

> presenting a supposition, then certainly YOURS must be too. But you see,
> the diagram (if you checked it) wasn't specifically for the JFK murder.
> It was one of a few different things that can happen depending on various
> factors. The 'A' diagram fits our JFK scenario where a bullet hit the
> front of the head at the right forehead just inside the hairline, and
> passed through the brain building force and a 'bubble' of pressure that
> then exploded out the back of the head.
>

That diagram assumes a perfectly straight line. Which in this case you
don't have from the front.

>>
>>
>>> Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
>>
>>> makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
>>
>>> The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
>>
>>> hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
>>
>>> diagram exactly.
>>
>>
>> No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
>>
>> you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
>>
>> temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.
>>
>
> What baloney!! I didn't say temple, I said right FOREHEAD. I've shown
> the entry point of the bullet at the right forehead many times. If you
> check the autopsy photos at:
>

No, you've been saying right temple.

> http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html
>

I was the first person to say the entrance wound was in the forehead.

[Anthony Marsh]

Full of false assumptions. We can see in the Zapruder film and autopsy
photos that it was hinged in the BACK. Jackie closed it.
The first autopsy photos show it closed.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/24/2013 10:26 AM, John Reagor King wrote:

Since you know nothing about anatomy it is hard to explain to you. Look
up the word DURA. Skull is kept together by dura which is between the
skull and the brain. It sticks to the skull, not the brain.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/24/2013 11:03 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On Saturday, August 24, 2013 10:26:39 AM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
>> In article <a5e3932f-4df9-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> BT George <brockg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part of
>>
>>> a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
>>
>>> fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
>>
>>> BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.
>>
>>
>>
>> Exactly. ;-)
>
>
> That all explains the autopsy photo that shows the whole BOH looking the
> same, but what answers the question? That the flap in the two pictures
> flops in different directions? Naturally it could be caused by someone

No, that's silly. There was only one direction.

> painting an overlay on the Z-film, but I was offering a chance to find a

No one painted anything on the Zapruder film.

> reason other than 'fiddling' with the Z-film over the weekend after the
> murder when the film was located for a short time in the hands of the
> 'Hawkeye Works' of the CIA in Rochester, NY for some odd reason.]
>

How would they know what phony theory to create?

> Chris
>

[mainframetech]

Try and use logic here, even though I have to correct you again. A
sheet wrapped around the head doesn't say anything about whether there are
loose bones in the skull or not. The wrapping might well be there to stop
all the leaking of fluids and blood from the large hole in the BOH. Paul
O'Connor was the assistant that unwrapped the head and placed the body on
the autopsy table. He saw no broken or loose bones at that time. But the
prosectors hadn't yet done their damage to the top of head in their search
for fragments.

Then explain yourself. Name the experts and show they are providing a
better scenario than DiMaio. In other words, your word is no good in this
case. Especially because it's you who has made so many mistakes so
far.

>
>
> > presenting a supposition, then certainly YOURS must be too. But you see,
>
> > the diagram (if you checked it) wasn't specifically for the JFK murder.
>
> > It was one of a few different things that can happen depending on various
>
> > factors. The 'A' diagram fits our JFK scenario where a bullet hit the
>
> > front of the head at the right forehead just inside the hairline, and
>
> > passed through the brain building force and a 'bubble' of pressure that
>
> > then exploded out the back of the head.
>
> >
>
>
>
> That diagram assumes a perfectly straight line. Which in this case you
>
> don't have from the front.
>

I most certainly do, but so does DiMaio. Have you already forgotten the
small .25 inch hole in the right forehead in hopes that it would go away?
It didn't. Picture the bullet going in at that small wound when the head
was slightly forward, and passing through the brain until it reached the
rear portion of the brain where the pressure had built up to such a high
level that it blew out the 'large hole' in the BOH and exited past there
probably to the street. A perfect straight line through the head from the
GK, which was just high enough to clear the limo windshield.

>
>
> >>> Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
>
> >>
>
> >>> makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
>
> >>
>
> >>> The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
>
> >>
>
> >>> hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
>
> >>
>
> >>> diagram exactly.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
>
> >>
>
> >> you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
>
> >>
>
> >> temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.
>

Oh my. Are you feeling OK? Enter the right temple and exit the left
temple? A cross shot? I wasn't proposing anything like that.

> >>
>
> >
>
> > What baloney!! I didn't say temple, I said right FOREHEAD. I've shown
>
> > the entry point of the bullet at the right forehead many times. If you
>
> > check the autopsy photos at:
>
> >
>
>
>
> No, you've been saying right temple.
>

See above. You will find the word 'forehead' there. See? I can supply
backup for what I say.

>
>
> > http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html
>
> >
>
>
>
> I was the first person to say the entrance wound was in the forehead.
>

It's simply amazing the number of things you claim your being first at.

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes, it does. She had to wrap up the head to keep it from falling apart
during transit. And damage to the body did occur when the SS had to RAM
the casket into the doorway to get it on the plane. That broke off one
of the handles.

> all the leaking of fluids and blood from the large hole in the BOH. Paul

The gauze squares were packed in the head wound to sop up the fluids and
blood from the TOP of the head. We can see them sticking out of the hole
in the FRONT of the head on the earliest autopsy photos.

> O'Connor was the assistant that unwrapped the head and placed the body on
> the autopsy table. He saw no broken or loose bones at that time. But the
> prosectors hadn't yet done their damage to the top of head in their search
> for fragments.
>

Because the head had been held together.

Dr. Lawrence Angel was the first to point out the hole which he called a
bullet wound.

> It didn't. Picture the bullet going in at that small wound when the head
> was slightly forward, and passing through the brain until it reached the
> rear portion of the brain where the pressure had built up to such a high

You don't have any straight line trajectory from the hole in the
forehead to some hole in the back of the head.

> level that it blew out the 'large hole' in the BOH and exited past there
> probably to the street. A perfect straight line through the head from the
> GK, which was just high enough to clear the limo windshield.
>

You need to diagram this. Sounds like your weapon would be in the trunk
to produce a trajectory like that. Now you are saying the shot came from
behind and below?

>>
>>
>>>>> Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> diagram exactly.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.
>>
>
> Oh my. Are you feeling OK? Enter the right temple and exit the left
> temple? A cross shot? I wasn't proposing anything like that.
>

It would have to be to match di Maio's straight line trajectory.

>>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> What baloney!! I didn't say temple, I said right FOREHEAD. I've shown
>>
>>> the entry point of the bullet at the right forehead many times. If you
>>
>>> check the autopsy photos at:
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No, you've been saying right temple.
>>
> See above. You will find the word 'forehead' there. See? I can supply
> backup for what I say.

But you keep changing your story.

[BT George]

Who said anything about the brain? I was discussing what appears to be a
flap of some kind seen to be hanging down in the Zfilm, and suggesting one
possible scenario to answer Chris' question about how this flap could be
seen to have "down" while the only visible flap in the autopsy photos is
seen to hinge forward.

(Though I still prefer my first suggestion, that the "downward" flap is
actually blocking our view of part of JFK's face/head that is forward of
it, making it difficult to know what damage was actually suffered there
and to draw definite conclusions on why a flap would exist in BE4 one way
or the other.)

BT

[mainframetech]

Except the body wasn't in that casket...:) If you have something that
says Bowron wrapped the head to keep loose bones from falling out, show it
or give it up. Without some backup, I'm going to ignore it.

>
>
> > all the leaking of fluids and blood from the large hole in the BOH. Paul
>
>
>
> The gauze squares were packed in the head wound to sop up the fluids and
>
> blood from the TOP of the head. We can see them sticking out of the hole
>
> in the FRONT of the head on the earliest autopsy photos.
>

You saw a photo with a hole in the FRONT of the head? I bet you can't
show it to us. It doesn't exist. And there was NO damage to the TOP of
the head until the prosectors made the damage.

>
>
> > O'Connor was the assistant that unwrapped the head and placed the body on
>
> > the autopsy table. He saw no broken or loose bones at that time. But the
>
> > prosectors hadn't yet done their damage to the top of head in their search
>
> > for fragments.
>
>
> Because the head had been held together.
>
>

Oh lordee! Try and use some logic and common sense. You can't prove
the head was being held together and yet you keep acting like it happened!
Listen carefully. The head did NOT have damage to the top until the
prosectors did it. They were seen and it was reported by Robinson. The
people at Parkland also said the same thing that the head was NOT damaged
on top:

http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/boh/parkland_boh/parkland_wound.htm

See Audrey Bell portion.

Sheesh! You're even now contradicting the famous Vincent DiMaio,
forensic pathologist and wound ballistics expert!!! Is there no end to
your expertise?
:))

If the fragments exited in several places, we should have many of them
in the limo, right? But none found.

> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>> His scenario is only supposition.
>
>
> >>> But fellow, YOUR not a wound ballistics person, why would you say those
>
> >>
>
> >>> things in light of an expert in the field saying otherwise? And if HE was
>
>
> >> Because I know from other experts when he is wrong.
>
> >>
>
> > Then explain yourself. Name the experts and show they are providing a
>
> > better scenario than DiMaio. In other words, your word is no good in this
>
> > case. Especially because it's you who has made so many mistakes so
>
> > far.
>

So there are no names placed here so I must assume that was a phony
comment and there weren't any that contradicted DiMaio.

> >
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>> presenting a supposition, then certainly YOURS must be too. But you see,
>
> >>
>
> >>> the diagram (if you checked it) wasn't specifically for the JFK murder.
>
> >>
>
> >>> It was one of a few different things that can happen depending on various
>
> >>
>
> >>> factors. The 'A' diagram fits our JFK scenario where a bullet hit the
>
> >>
>
> >>> front of the head at the right forehead just inside the hairline, and
>
> >>
>
> >>> passed through the brain building force and a 'bubble' of pressure that
>
> >>
>
> >>> then exploded out the back of the head.
>
>
> >> That diagram assumes a perfectly straight line. Which in this case you
>
> >>
>
> >> don't have from the front.
>
> >>
>
> > I most certainly do, but so does DiMaio. Have you already forgotten the
>
> > small .25 inch hole in the right forehead in hopes that it would go away?
>
>
>
> Dr. Lawrence Angel was the first to point out the hole which he called a
>
> bullet wound.
>
>
>
> > It didn't. Picture the bullet going in at that small wound when the head
>
> > was slightly forward, and passing through the brain until it reached the
>
> > rear portion of the brain where the pressure had built up to such a high
>
>
>
> You don't have any straight line trajectory from the hole in the
>
> forehead to some hole in the back of the head.
>
>
>
> > level that it blew out the 'large hole' in the BOH and exited past there
>
> > probably to the street. A perfect straight line through the head from the
>
> > GK, which was just high enough to clear the limo windshield.
>
> >
>
>
>
> You need to diagram this. Sounds like your weapon would be in the trunk
>
> to produce a trajectory like that. Now you are saying the shot came from
>
> behind and below?
>

Oh my. An endless chore trying to correct you. To better understand,
try picturing a shot from the Grassy Knoll toward the limo. It would be
slightly higher than the windshield on the limo and would reach into the
limo passengers. At that time of the kill shot hitting JFK, he had his
head slightly forward and when the bullet hit him it was in the right
forehead and went through the brain to the exit point at the 'large hole'
at the BOH that has been discussed and seen by over 40 people. I can't
make it any clearer than that. Anyone can image that.

>
> >>>>> Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
>
>
> >>>>> makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
>

The diagram goes from left to right, while the murder was (to us) going
right to left.

>
> >>>>> The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
>
>
> >>>>> hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
>
>
> >>>>> diagram exactly.
>

>
> >>>> No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
>
>
> >>>> you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
>
>
> >>>> temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > Oh my. Are you feeling OK? Enter the right temple and exit the left
>
> > temple? A cross shot? I wasn't proposing anything like that.
>
> >
>
>
>
> It would have to be to match di Maio's straight line trajectory.
>
>
>
>
> >>> What baloney!! I didn't say temple, I said right FOREHEAD. I've shown
>
> >>
>
> >>> the entry point of the bullet at the right forehead many times. If you
>
> >>
>
> >>> check the autopsy photos at:
>
>
> >> No, you've been saying right temple.
>
> >>
>
> > See above. You will find the word 'forehead' there. See? I can supply
>
> > backup for what I say.
>
>
>
> But you keep changing your story.
>

Nope. The talk of 'temples and foreheads' was due to your picking at
where the small wound was. We agreed that I would use 'forehead'
henceforth, and that's what I've been doing. Did you forget that
conversation?

[mainframetech]

Of course, another possibility is that the film was painted over at the
point of the bullet strike and a bit after. That was doable in 1963.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/26/2013 10:09 PM, BT George wrote:
> On Sunday, August 25, 2013 3:09:03 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 8/24/2013 10:26 AM, John Reagor King wrote:
>>
>>> In article <a5e3932f-4df9-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>> BT George <brockg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>
>>>> For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part of
>>
>>>> a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
>>
>>>> fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
>>
>>>> BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Exactly. ;-)
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Since you know nothing about anatomy it is hard to explain to you. Look
>>
>> up the word DURA. Skull is kept together by dura which is between the
>>
>> skull and the brain. It sticks to the skull, not the brain.
>
>
> Who said anything about the brain? I was discussing what appears to be a
> flap of some kind seen to be hanging down in the Zfilm, and suggesting one
> possible scenario to answer Chris' question about how this flap could be
> seen to have "down" while the only visible flap in the autopsy photos is
> seen to hinge forward.
>

You still don't know anything about the Dura. Look it up. I don't have
the money to send you to medical school.

> (Though I still prefer my first suggestion, that the "downward" flap is
> actually blocking our view of part of JFK's face/head that is forward of
> it, making it difficult to know what damage was actually suffered there
> and to draw definite conclusions on why a flap would exist in BE4 one way
> or the other.)
>

The flap was sometimes open, sometimes closed. But it always hinged the
same way.

> BT
>
>

[BT George]

Zapruder himself was describing what he saw on television THE VERY SAME
DAY, and it was pretty consistent with what we see in the film now. Was
he already in on the plot and knew how to describe the imagery in a way
consistent with the alteration they would/could make?

If not, didn't the mere telling of his story *dictate* in some ways how
the plotters needed to doctor the film? If so, how *lucky* they were that
that what he said still allowed them room to make the needed "frontal shot
becomes rearward shot" alterations, yet remaining fairly consistent with
his 11-22-63description? Vegas Odds anyone?

BT

[mainframetech]

That's interesting, given the size that Tom Robinson assigned to the
right temple wound:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3

Chris

[mainframetech]

I tend to think it wouldn't matter what he said, it would be close
enough for them to modify the film for their own purposes and the public
and the researchers would just fall into line and believe their own eyes
when they saw it for 'real' in a video clip. It's hard to get away from a
visual image like that. It's what makes Sci-Fi movies work better. I did
get concerned at all the jiggling and waving back and forth that he did
with the camera though. But with the modern techniques they were able to
stabilize it to some degree.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Excuse me? Zapruder said that day that the position of the shooter was
behind him. You need to be a college professor with a degree in
propaganda to change that from the grassy knoll to the TSBD. One trick
is to change his words from "behind me" to "behind the car."

[Anthony Marsh]

On 8/28/2013 11:54 AM, mainframetech wrote:

Too small. Not the size of an orange. And the wrong shape. Almost the
right location. But that was the location of the flap, not the entrance
wound. No bullet makes an entrance wound with that shape.

[Anthony Marsh]

Your message does not make any sense. Just seeing the head explode does
not tell you where the shot came from.
Just Zapruder putting his fingers on his right temple does not tell you
if that is the entrance wound or the exit wound or both.

[Anthony Marsh]

Zavada's examination of the film stock rules out any painting over.

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes it was. Same casket.

> says Bowron wrapped the head to keep loose bones from falling out, show it
> or give it up. Without some backup, I'm going to ignore it.

Just her own words. But you never bother to read what I post hundreds of
times.

Subject: Re: Those "Unreliable" Parkland Nurses 1.
Date: 27 Jun 2003 14:29:18 GMT
From: Martin Shackelford <msh...@concentric.net>
Organization: Concentric Internet Services
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk

In case the copy with the photo doesn't download properly, here's the
text without the photo:

Harrison Livingstone has granted permission for me to post the contents
of a letter from Diana Bowron, dated 24th January 1993, and which
arrived too late for inclusion in High Treason 2. He recently ran across
it again, and thought it might be of interest. The only items omitted
are several personal notes, salutations, and her married name, which she
asked not be published.

The Cover Letter:

I have enclosed two photostats of photographs which may be of help to you.

1. From the Illustrated London News dated Nov 30th 1963 showing the
arrival of the casket at Andrews Air Force Base. That is the casket in
which we placed the President's body. The colour was bronzeand according
to the people from the funeral home it was the best they had.

2. From the Hospital Highlights the news letter of the Dallas County
Hospital District, of the trauma room where Kennedy was treated. The
photograph was taken for that edition of the news letter so it shows the
room as it was at the time of the assassination. I thought it might help
with the placement or non-placement of photographs, eg. tiles, also
gurney covers which were black. As I remember all the wall tiles in the
emergency room were the same height.

I understood the last time I was in Dallas, about two years after the
assassination, that the Emergency Room was to be moved and enlarged so I
am assuming that it no longer exists in its original form.

[Note: The photostats were not enclosed, as both pictures are widely
available.]

[A copy of a JFK back photo, F5, is enclosed, indicating "This is where
I remember the wound," but adding, "This is not the back I saw." The
location is indicated on the attached copy of the photo.]

[The main statement follows:]

The following is in answer to your questions.

When the president expired everyone left the room apart from Miss
Hinchcliffe, a male orderly and myself. We tidied the room and changed
the linen on the gurney and washed the body as best we could. Miss
Hinchcliffe and the orderly left the room, but I was told to remain with
the body until the casket arrived. I was told that I had to stay because
I had been one of the people who had taken the body from the car. I
remained in the room while the widow paid her respects. After she had
left I was asked, by a man I assumed was Secret Service, to collect all
pieces of skull and brain I could find and place them in a plastic bag
which he gave me. This I did and returned the bag to him (there were
only a few fragments of bone that had stuck to the dressings and towels
that we had used to pack the hole in the back of the head). I remained
in the room until the people from the funeral home arrived. After we had
placed the body in the casket and it had been closed I was allowed to
leave. During the time I was with the body only the widow and the priest
came into the room, any dealings I had with the Secret Service were done
in the doorway; no one else entered the room and no photographs were taken.

Apart from 2-3 mins, when I left the trauma room to collect blood from
the Blood Bank, I was with the body from the car until it was placed in
the casket.
Being new to the establishment, I was assigned to Minor Medicine and
Surgery, which was across the hall from the Triage desk and the major
sections of the Emergency room. It being very quiet, there were only two
or three patients waiting for the results of tests, I was talking with
the Triage nurse when the call went up for gurneys. I grabbed a gurney
in the hall and together with an orderly ran to the entrance. I saw that
the person in the back of the car was injured so I climbed in to render
what assistance I could until such time as we could move him to a
trolley, then to the trauma room (others were assisting the Governor in
the front seat). I saw that there was a massive amount of blood on the
back seat and in order to find the cause I lifted his head and my
fingers went into a large wound in the back of his head; I turned his
head and seeing the size of the wound realized that I could not stop the
bleeding. I turned his head back and saw an entry wound in the front of
the throat, I could feel no pulse at the jugular and having seen the
extent of the injury to the back of the head I assumed that he was dead.
(not my job, only a Doctor can certify death) When we got the President
to the Trauma room, word had reached the Trauma team and they were ready
with I.Vs etc. I worked with the team, assisting where needed for about
10 mins (time is difficult to judge in those circumstances), when I was
told to go to the Blood Bank. I was away 2-3 mins and on my return I
continued to assist where needed until the President was declared dead.

Miss Margaret Hinchcliffe and an African-American orderly and I prepared
the body for the coffin. [Marginal note: David Sanders]

I observed no strange activity of any kind and saw no bullets.

As explained above, I thought after examination in the car that he was
dead. There was no damage to the front of his face, only the gaping
wound in the back of his head and the entry wound in his throat.

When we prepared the body for the coffin we washed the face and closed
the eyes; there was no damage to the face, there was no flap of scalp on
the right, neither was there a laceration pointing toward the right
eyebrow from the scalp.

When we were preparing the body for the coffin we rolled it over in
order to remove the bloodstained sheet from underneath and to wipe away
the blood from the back of the body. I saw another entry wound in the
upper back (the other entry wound being in the front of the throat).
With reference to the photograph The Back (F5) I only saw one wound, and
not the number of wounds in the photograph; I do not think that the
photo (F5) is of the President. I have marked for you on the photostat
that you sent me where I think the entry wound was.

I first saw the large wound in the back of the head in the car; when we
were preparing the body for the coffin I had the opportunity to examine
it more closely. It was about 5ins in diameter, there was no flap of
skin covering it, just a fraction of skin along part of the edges of
bone, there was however some hair hanging down from the top of the head
which was caked with blood, and most of the brain was missing. The wound
was so large I could almost put my whole fist inside.

When we prepared the body I washed as much blood as I could from the
hair; while doing this I didnot see any other wound either in the
temples or in other parts of the head.

I did not see anything suspicious about any of the doctors, though there
were far more doctors there than they should have been; perhaps because
it was the president they all wanted to get in on the act. You must
remember that I had only been there a short time and I did not know all
the doctors, some I never saw again, but they were all known to each
other. With regard to a post: in this context I think it would refer to
a gathering of the doctors after the event, to discuss the case. This
was standard practice, when more than one or two doctors were involved.

When the body was placed in the coffin the wound at the back of the head
was packed with gauze squares and wrapped in small white sheet, there
was no terrycloth or other type of towel used.

The coffin or casket was bronze with plain fittings, as in the enclosed
photograph. [This refers to the Andrews Air Force Base photo.]

I don't think the body was removed from the coffin. After I left the
Trauma room I was in a position to see if any one entered or left the
room. No one entered or left until they removed the coffin.

A clear plastic sheet was placed in the bottom of the coffin, which may
have been a mattress cover; the body was wrapped in at the most two
sheets plus the one around the head, all the sheets were white and none
had zips. There was no "body bag".

Perhaps the following will be of interest to you.

As soon as the coffin left the trauma room, I went back to Minor Med.
and Surg. to resume my work: I don't know anything about the fight with
Earl Rose, which happened at that time.

When I arrived there I found that the patients had been moved elsewhere,
and the department had been taken over by the Vice President and his
staff. They were getting ready to leave when I got there, as they passed
me I heard the Vice President say to his wife "Make a note of what
everyone says and does".

Again I hope this is of some help to you.

[Signed] Diana Bowron

>
>
>>
>>
>>> all the leaking of fluids and blood from the large hole in the BOH. Paul
>>
>>
>>
>> The gauze squares were packed in the head wound to sop up the fluids and
>>
>> blood from the TOP of the head. We can see them sticking out of the hole
>>
>> in the FRONT of the head on the earliest autopsy photos.
>>
> You saw a photo with a hole in the FRONT of the head? I bet you can't
> show it to us. It doesn't exist. And there was NO damage to the TOP of
> the head until the prosectors made the damage.
>
>>
>>
>>> O'Connor was the assistant that unwrapped the head and placed the body on
>>
>>> the autopsy table. He saw no broken or loose bones at that time. But the
>>
>>> prosectors hadn't yet done their damage to the top of head in their search
>>
>>> for fragments.
>>
>>
>> Because the head had been held together.
>>
>>
> Oh lordee! Try and use some logic and common sense. You can't prove
> the head was being held together and yet you keep acting like it happened!
> Listen carefully. The head did NOT have damage to the top until the
> prosectors did it. They were seen and it was reported by Robinson. The
> people at Parkland also said the same thing that the head was NOT damaged
> on top:
>

Nonsense. There was a huge hole in the top of the head into which Nurse
Bowron packed gauze squares. We can see them sticking out in the
earliest autopsy photos.

> http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/boh/parkland_boh/parkland_wound.htm
>

None of them place their fingers where they drew the hole.

Yeah, so what? Even experts can be wrong.

> forensic pathologist and wound ballistics expert!!! Is there no end to
> your expertise?
> :))
>
> If the fragments exited in several places, we should have many of them
> in the limo, right? But none found.

No, you are thinking of an Oswald Carcano bullet. I am thinking of a
different bullet. An explosive bullet.

>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>>> His scenario is only supposition.
>>
>>
>>>>> But fellow, YOUR not a wound ballistics person, why would you say those
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> things in light of an expert in the field saying otherwise? And if HE was
>>
>>
>>>> Because I know from other experts when he is wrong.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>> Then explain yourself. Name the experts and show they are providing a
>>
>>> better scenario than DiMaio. In other words, your word is no good in this
>>
>>> case. Especially because it's you who has made so many mistakes so
>>
>>> far.
>>
> So there are no names placed here so I must assume that was a phony
> comment and there weren't any that contradicted DiMaio.
>

I didn't offer any names.

No, it could not go over the windshield.

> head slightly forward and when the bullet hit him it was in the right
> forehead and went through the brain to the exit point at the 'large hole'
> at the BOH that has been discussed and seen by over 40 people. I can't
> make it any clearer than that. Anyone can image that.
>

You can't diagram a straight line trajectory.

>>
>>>>>>> Look at 'A' which fits our case. The bullet comes in from the left and
>>
>>
>>>>>>> makes a tunnel and it widens out and explodes out the rear of the head.
>>
> The diagram goes from left to right, while the murder was (to us) going
> right to left.
>
>>
>>>>>>> The entry point is the small hole in the right forehead just in the
>>
>>
>>>>>>> hairline that Robinson saw from close up to the body. This fits DiMaio's
>>
>>
>>>>>>> diagram exactly.
>>
>
>>
>>>>>> No, and again you refuse to show exactly where your bullet enters. If
>>
>>
>>>>>> you place the entrance in the right temple then it would exit the left
>>
>>
>>>>>> temple, not the back of the head to match Di Maio's straight line path.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>
>>
>>> Oh my. Are you feeling OK? Enter the right temple and exit the left
>>
>>> temple? A cross shot? I wasn't proposing anything like that.
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> It would have to be to match di Maio's straight line trajectory.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>> What baloney!! I didn't say temple, I said right FOREHEAD. I've shown
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> the entry point of the bullet at the right forehead many times. If you
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>> check the autopsy photos at:
>>
>>
>>>> No, you've been saying right temple.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>> See above. You will find the word 'forehead' there. See? I can supply
>>
>>> backup for what I say.
>>
>>
>>
>> But you keep changing your story.
>>
> Nope. The talk of 'temples and foreheads' was due to your picking at
> where the small wound was. We agreed that I would use 'forehead'
> henceforth, and that's what I've been doing. Did you forget that
> conversation?
>

You started confusing the issue by saying "temple/forehead" as if they
were both the same thing.

[mainframetech]

Sadly, many people heard the shots come from behind THEM, which would be
the TSBD. How about that shots were fired from both places and maybe a
few others? Given all the bullet strikes all over Dealey Plaza, it
suggests a few different shooter locations.

Chris

[mainframetech]

You've gone off the reservation again. The point of showing the drawing
that Robinson made of the right temple wound was to show how small he
thought it was. As to the 'size of an orange' Robinson was speaking of
the 'large hole' in the BOH. If you are thinking that the large wound on
the right side of the head (coupled with the top of head wound) is what's
being talked about, Robinson saw the prosectors make the damage to the top
of the head.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

I've only post it a few thousand times. But you never pay attention.

http://the-puzzle-palace.com/entrance_F8.jpg

[John Reagor King]

In article <c9d5c634-2340-4978...@googlegroups.com>,

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Saturday, August 24, 2013 10:26:39 AM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
> > In article <a5e3932f-4df9-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>,
> > BT George <brockg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part
> > > of
> > > a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
> > > fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
> > > BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.
> >
> > Exactly. ;-)
>
> That all explains the autopsy photo that shows the whole BOH looking the
> same, but what answers the question? That the flap in the two pictures
> flops in different directions?

A "flap" would obviously "flap" in at least two different directions.

> Naturally it could be caused by someone
> painting an overlay on the Z-film, but I was offering a chance to find a
> reason other than 'fiddling' with the Z-film over the weekend after the
> murder when the film was located for a short time in the hands of the
> 'Hawkeye Works' of the CIA in Rochester, NY for some odd reason.]

I've given a reason other than alteration to the film: Jackie closed the
big gory "flaps" on the right side of her husband's head that were
forward of the ear. Or will you dispute Bill Newman's claim that the
right side of JFK's head opened up? He wasn't looking through a
viewfinder at the time.

[John Reagor King]

In article <29a632b4-7e82-4448...@googlegroups.com>,

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 21, 2013 4:29:17 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> > On 8/20/2013 1:16 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> >
> > > Now here's a strange bit of information. A woman named Saundra Kay
> > > Spencer who worked in the navy photographic center, was given a set of
> > > photos to develop for the White House. They were not to be seen by
> > > anyone
> > > including her, though she had to look at them to be sure they developed
> > > properly. It was all very hush-hush. She developed the set of photos and
> > > when she was shown the current set of photos of the autopsy, she thought
> > > that some of them didn't match the set she developed. The set she did
> > > was
> > > all cleaned up around the body with nothing out of place and everything
> > > clean. But more importantly, she remembers a photo of the BOH of JFK.
> > > It had a large hole in it which the regular set didn't have! She drew a
> > > picture of the photo to show the position of the hole she saw in her set:
> >
> > > http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=679
> >
> >
> > Some of us believe she developed the set of photos taken by Knudsen
> > after the autopsy for the family.
> >
> Maybe. She did work for the White House usually. The point is that she
> got a completely different set of photos than you and I. And her set had a
> large hole in the BOH.

It is a shame that not one of these photos has become public.

> Why would the family keep to the phony story with
> the silly SBT, when the large hole puts it in the conspiracy venue?

What family? The Kennedys? One of the most coverup-prone families that
has ever been in politics in the entire history of this country?

Not even slightly surprising.

What would be surprising is that they didn't cover up more than they did.

[BT George]

I *didn't* say that Zapruder claimed he heard (or saw) a shot from behind.
I am talking about his general description of the scene and the way he
described Kennedy's head opening up. (There were no obvious
inconsistencies with his description and what we still see in the film
today.)

I will leave the propaganda to certain NE-based researchers. :-)

[mainframetech]

Zavada's authentication was discredited by Horne's examination of his
work and work on the Z-film. See his 4th volume. And Zavada was to
authenticate the film, not have anything whatsoever to do with the
content.

Chris

[mainframetech]

Nope. Won't do. The Parkland doctors that handled the head did NOT
report any skull cracking or other damage of that type. Only the 'large
hole' in the BOH. If there had been any cracking in the skull, it would
have been obvious, I know that from personal experience.

>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> that effectively destabilized much of Kennedy's head. (Particularly the
>

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> back and right side.) Many of these fragments were not blasted out of the
>

>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> skull, but were held together in place only because they remained adhered
>
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> to the scalp---which was obviously pliable."
>

You might want to explain the 3 skull pieces that were later delivered
to Bethesda from Dallas during the autopsy. The ones that blew off the
BOH.

Absolutely and completely false. There is NO hole in the FRONT of the head.
Only a small hole in the right forehead in the hairline. Look through
the statement by Nurse Bowron above. Note how many times she refers to
the 'large hole' in the BOH of JFK. Here they are:

"...there were only a few fragments of bone that had stuck to the

dressings and towels that we had used to pack the hole in the back of the
head)."

---

"There was no damage to the front of his face, only the gaping wound in

the back of his head and the entry wound in his throat." [Note she called
the throat wound an 'entry']

---

"When we prepared the body for the coffin we washed the face and closed
the eyes; there was no damage to the face, there was no flap of scalp on
the right, neither was there a laceration pointing toward the right

eyebrow from the scalp." [this means the slits seen on the cheek happened
after Parkland]

---

"I first saw the large wound in the back of the head in the car; when we
were preparing the body for the coffin I had the opportunity to examine it

more closely. It was about 5 ins in diameter, there was no flap of skin

covering it, just a fraction of skin along part of the edges of bone,
there was however some hair hanging down from the top of the head which
was caked with blood, and most of the brain was missing. The wound was so

large I could almost put my whole fist inside." [pretty clear memory, of
course, this was the president]

---

"When the body was placed in the coffin the wound at the back of the head
was packed with gauze squares and wrapped in small white sheet, there was

no terrycloth or other type of towel used." [so the wound in the BOH was
large enough to pack with gauze squares]

There is no doubt that there was a large hole in the BOH of JFK, and
there was none of the damage reported in the autopsy that the prosectors
made while searching for bullet fragments.

> >>
>
> > You saw a photo with a hole in the FRONT of the head? I bet you can't
>
> > show it to us. It doesn't exist. And there was NO damage to the TOP of
>
> > the head until the prosectors made the damage.
>

I see no reply here, so the comment was another phony.

>
> >>> O'Connor was the assistant that unwrapped the head and placed the body on
>
> >>
>
> >>> the autopsy table. He saw no broken or loose bones at that time. But the
>
> >>
>
> >>> prosectors hadn't yet done their damage to the top of head in their search
>
> >>
>
> >>> for fragments.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Because the head had been held together.
>

False. See the statement of Nurse Bowron above. She completely
disembowels you on that score.

> >>
>
> >>
>
> > Oh lordee! Try and use some logic and common sense. You can't prove
>
> > the head was being held together and yet you keep acting like it happened!
>
> > Listen carefully. The head did NOT have damage to the top until the
>
> > prosectors did it. They were seen and it was reported by Robinson. The
>
> > people at Parkland also said the same thing that the head was NOT damaged
>
> > on top:
>
>
> Nonsense. There was a huge hole in the top of the head into which Nurse
>
> Bowron packed gauze squares. We can see them sticking out in the
>
> earliest autopsy photos.
>

False. A complete and major error!! Luckily, I'm here to straighten
out your constant errors. See Bowron's statement above. She was clear
that there was no damage to the top of heads. Stop insisting on it, if
you have a favorite scenario that depends on it, get a new scenario. The
old one is proven wrong.


>
>
> > http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/boh/parkland_boh/parkland_wound.htm
>
Check Bowron's statement and drawing of the 'large hole' in the BOH of
JFK and nothing elsewhere.

> >
>
>
>
> None of them place their fingers where they drew the hole.
>

Close enough. It all proves a 'large hole' back there.

>
>
> > See Audrey Bell portion.
>
>
> >>>>> As I told you, I've had experience with holding the head of someone with multiple breaks in their skull, and you KNOW it when you feel the skull. Those at Parkland that held the head did NOT mention any breakage of the skull in general, only at the BOH where some skull was missing at the 'large hole'.
>
>
> >>>>>> http://the-puzzle-palace.com/Boswell01.JPG
>

What a laugh! You saved a drawing of the largest piece of missing skull
in the whole case!! If a piece of skull like that were missing, the
photos of the head would have shown the head all caved in with no
support!!! Just idiotic. How can anyone even come near thinking any of
that is true to life?
And where are the many missing pieces? They found 3 pieces, but they
wouldn't add up to that monster hole shown in the top of the head, which
wasn't there when the body arrived at Bethesda. Mind you, the drawing is
by one of the 3 prosectors, who all agree on what Boswell was drawing.
Makes it obvious who was full of it and was ordered to give the idea that
the kill shot came from the 6th floor and behind. And his placement of
the 'bullet hole' in the BOH seems a bit off from the photos...:)

Since you put yourself forward as an 'expert' smarter than the
recognized top people in the fields of forensic pathology and wound
ballistics, I guess YOU too can be wrong. In a comparison, I choose
DiMaio. You lose.

>
>
> > forensic pathologist and wound ballistics expert!!! Is there no end to
>
> > your expertise?
>
> > :))
>
> >
>
> > If the fragments exited in several places, we should have many of them
>
> > in the limo, right? But none found.
>
>
>
> No, you are thinking of an Oswald Carcano bullet. I am thinking of a
>
> different bullet. An explosive bullet.
>

Ah! An explosive bullet! The saga continues.

>
>
> >>>>>> His scenario is only supposition.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> But fellow, YOUR not a wound ballistics person, why would you say those
>
>
> >>>>> things in light of an expert in the field saying otherwise? And if HE was
>
>
> >>>> Because I know from other experts when he is wrong.
>
>
> >>> Then explain yourself. Name the experts and show they are providing a
>
> >>
>
> >>> better scenario than DiMaio. In other words, your word is no good in this
>
> >>
>
> >>> case. Especially because it's you who has made so many mistakes so
>
> >>
>
> >>> far.
>
> >>
>
> > So there are no names placed here so I must assume that was a phony
>
> > comment and there weren't any that contradicted DiMaio.
>
>
> I didn't offer any names.
>

Yep, that was my assumption when no names appeared. I guess you didn't
find any you could use to contradict DiMaio, eh?

>
>
> >>>>> presenting a supposition, then certainly YOURS must be too. But you see,
>
>
> >>>>> the diagram (if you checked it) wasn't specifically for the JFK murder.
>
>
> >>>>> It was one of a few different things that can happen depending on various
>
>
> >>>>> factors. The 'A' diagram fits our JFK scenario where a bullet hit the
>
>
> >>>>> front of the head at the right forehead just inside the hairline, and
>
>
> >>>>> passed through the brain building force and a 'bubble' of pressure that
>
>
> >>>>> then exploded out the back of the head.
>
>
> >>>> That diagram assumes a perfectly straight line. Which in this case you
>
>
> >>>> don't have from the front.
>
>
> >>> I most certainly do, but so does DiMaio. Have you already forgotten the
>
> >>
>
> >>> small .25 inch hole in the right forehead in hopes that it would go away?
>
>
> >> Dr. Lawrence Angel was the first to point out the hole which he called a
>
>
> >> bullet wound.
>
> >>

For a change you have found someone I agree with. I call it a bullet wound too. And an entry at that.

>
>
> >>> It didn't. Picture the bullet going in at that small wound when the head
>
> >>
>
> >>> was slightly forward, and passing through the brain until it reached the
>
> >>
>
> >>> rear portion of the brain where the pressure had built up to such a high
>
>
> >> You don't have any straight line trajectory from the hole in the
>
>
> >> forehead to some hole in the back of the head.
>
>
> >>> level that it blew out the 'large hole' in the BOH and exited past there
>
> >>
>
> >>> probably to the street. A perfect straight line through the head from the
>
> >>
>
> >>> GK, which was just high enough to clear the limo windshield.
>
>
> >> You need to diagram this. Sounds like your weapon would be in the trunk
>
> >>
>
> >> to produce a trajectory like that. Now you are saying the shot came from
>
> >>
>
> >> behind and below?
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > Oh my. An endless chore trying to correct you. To better understand,
>
> > try picturing a shot from the Grassy Knoll toward the limo. It would be
>
> > slightly higher than the windshield on the limo and would reach into the
>
> > limo passengers. At that time of the kill shot hitting JFK, he had his
>
>
>
> No, it could not go over the windshield.
>

LOL! You decided that? You became a ballistics person? Actually it
could go over the windshield, but the shot would also have come a bit from
the side, so given JFK's position with head forward, it all works out.
Nice straight line for the kill shot.

>
>
> > head slightly forward and when the bullet hit him it was in the right
>
> > forehead and went through the brain to the exit point at the 'large hole'
>
> > at the BOH that has been discussed and seen by over 40 people. I can't
>
> > make it any clearer than that. Anyone can image that.
>
>
> You can't diagram a straight line trajectory.
>

I'm not going to diagram anything. You've got a brain, use it to image
the path I described.

Hey, that's great! Are you going to stick with it and fight for it?
Or change your mind as soon as someone says something in agreement?

[Anthony Marsh]

So you think the triangle is a bullet entrance wound? You see many
triangular bullets?

[mainframetech]

Recently Nurse Bowron's statement from about 1993 was copied here and
she said that there was almost NO flaps of skin and just a little hair
hanging down over the 'large hole' (she called it a 'gaping hole') at the
BOH of JFK. She was in the position of cleaning up the ER and JFK's body
somewhat.

She also noted that there were no damages other than the throat wound
(she called it an 'entry wound') and a wound in the back and the 'gaping
wound' in the BOH.

Chris

[mainframetech]

There are some people that were in Dealey Plaza that said that there
was indeed what seemed to be an explosion of JFK's head. But that it blew
out to the 'back and to the left'. Bobby Hargis that drove the motorcycle
to the left and behind the limo got pelted with brain, blood and fluids
from the blast of JFK's head. A few other people on the grass near the
limo also said they saw material blow out the BACK of the head. But that
would have suggested a different shooter than Oswald so that had to be
covered up.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Close. How many flaps do YOU see? 5, 10, 200?

[Anthony Marsh]

We've been over this hundreds of times. You don't have any witnesses
saying that. We can SEE the debris going up from the TOP of the head.
Nothing from the rear of the head.

> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Gee, I wonder who posted it here. You certainly didn't have it.

> she said that there was almost NO flaps of skin and just a little hair
> hanging down over the 'large hole' (she called it a 'gaping hole') at the
> BOH of JFK. She was in the position of cleaning up the ER and JFK's body
> somewhat.
>

And she packed gauze squares into that gaping hole. We can SEE the gauze
squares in the right front of the head.

> She also noted that there were no damages other than the throat wound
> (she called it an 'entry wound') and a wound in the back and the 'gaping
> wound' in the BOH.
>

Most Pakrland people thought it was an entrance wound. That does not
prove it was.

> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

The examine of the film stock ruled out any painting on the film.

> Chris
>

[mainframetech]

Based on what the Parkland personnel saw, none on the right side of
JFK's temple. And the wound that Robinson saw after the autopsy wasn't
too large either:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3

The question wasn't how many flaps anyway. It was why does the flap
flop sideways and down in the Z-film, and flops forward in the autopsy
photos?

Try and stay with the program.

Chris

[John Reagor King]

In article <0fdd1c55-e2ae-4fa5...@googlegroups.com>,

mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, August 29, 2013 3:59:37 PM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
> > In article <c9d5c634-2340-4978...@googlegroups.com>,
> > mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Naturally it could be caused by someone
> > > painting an overlay on the Z-film, but I was offering a chance to find a
> > > reason other than 'fiddling' with the Z-film over the weekend after the
> > > murder when the film was located for a short time in the hands of the
> > > 'Hawkeye Works' of the CIA in Rochester, NY for some odd reason.]
> >
> > I've given a reason other than alteration to the film: Jackie closed the
> > big gory "flaps" on the right side of her husband's head that were
> > forward of the ear. Or will you dispute Bill Newman's claim that the
> > right side of JFK's head opened up? He wasn't looking through a
> > viewfinder at the time.
>
> Recently Nurse Bowron's statement from about 1993 was copied here and
> she said that there was almost NO flaps of skin and just a little hair
> hanging down over the 'large hole' (she called it a 'gaping hole') at the
> BOH of JFK.

Of course not, because there *weren't* any flaps of bone and scalp
around the BOH hole. I said that Jackie closed the flaps on the *right*
*side* of JFK's head, not the rear of his head. In the rear of his head
there were no flaps that could be closed.

> She was in the position of cleaning up the ER and JFK's body
> somewhat.
>
> She also noted that there were no damages other than the throat wound
> (she called it an 'entry wound') and a wound in the back and the 'gaping
> wound' in the BOH.

Naturally.

[Anthony Marsh]

I didn't ask that. I asked how many YOU see. That's why I capitalized
the word "YOU" for emphasis, like shouting.
And you refuse to answer the question.

> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3
>
> The question wasn't how many flaps anyway. It was why does the flap
> flop sideways and down in the Z-film, and flops forward in the autopsy
> photos?
>

False assumptions.

[mainframetech]

False. You can see the Z-film IMAGE of material going up from the top
of head that was for the suckers on the Z-film. You did NOT see the
actual brain, blood and fluids leaving the head. Bobby Hargis and at
least one witness on the grass near the limo when the kill shot hit saw
the actual material go back and to the left, right to where Hargis was,
and he was peppered with the material, so check his testimony:

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscaharg.htm

Chris

[mainframetech]

Wrong again! :) I didn't refuse to answer. YOU refused to think when I
posed the question in the first place. My question spoke of one flap on
the Z-film and one on the autopsy photo. That answered (in advance) your
comment which gave a definite sound of being a rhetorically cynical
comment. I guess you want to change the subject to escape the things we
were discussing, which were what Robinson saw at the autopsy, and the
smallness in size of the right temple wound he drew.

>
>
> > http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3
>
> >
>
> > The question wasn't how many flaps anyway. It was why does the flap
>
> > flop sideways and down in the Z-film, and flops forward in the autopsy
>
> > photos?
>
>
> False assumptions.
>

Are you losing it? I thought you had seen the photos, and that you were
a slave to all that 'hard' physical evidence. I guess not. Maybe you're
coming to realize that the Z-film was 'fiddled' with to fool the great
unwashed out there.

[Anthony Marsh]

Pure fantasy. You think that triangle is a bullet wound? When you have
seen triangular bullets?

>>
>>
>>> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3
>>
>>>
>>
>>> The question wasn't how many flaps anyway. It was why does the flap
>>
>>> flop sideways and down in the Z-film, and flops forward in the autopsy
>>
>>> photos?
>>
>>
>> False assumptions.
>>
>
> Are you losing it? I thought you had seen the photos, and that you were
> a slave to all that 'hard' physical evidence. I guess not. Maybe you're
> coming to realize that the Z-film was 'fiddled' with to fool the great
> unwashed out there.
>

You are misrepresenting the evidence.

[Anthony Marsh]

So you have to claim that the Zapruder film is fake. What about the
other films that don't show what you claim? You have to call ALL the
evidence fake.

[mainframetech]

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 3:09:20 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 8/31/2013 1:50 PM, mainframetech wrote:
>
> > On Friday, August 30, 2013 8:16:53 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> >> On 8/30/2013 12:45 PM, mainframetech wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> On Thursday, August 29, 2013 9:26:39 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>> On 8/29/2013 3:59 PM, John Reagor King wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> In article <c9d5c634-2340-4978...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> mainframetech <mainfr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>> On Saturday, August 24, 2013 10:26:39 AM UTC-4, John Reagor King wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>> In article <a5e3932f-4df9-4cc3...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>> BT George <brockg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>> For that matter, it could even be that the BE4 "flap" was actually part
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>> of
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>> a bigger flap made up of tissue and loose (but still adhering) bone
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>> fragments that flopped down in the Z film, but is no longer apparent in
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>> BE4 because of the way Boswell is holding the mascerated scalp together.
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>> Exactly. ;-)
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>> That all explains the autopsy photo that shows the whole BOH looking the
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>> same, but what answers the question? That the flap in the two pictures
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>> flops in different directions?
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> A "flap" would obviously "flap" in at least two different directions.
>
> >>

To and fro, surely. But not the 2 different directions specified in the question.

>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
>
> >>>>>> Naturally it could be caused by someone
>
> >>
>
> >>>>>> painting an overlay on the Z-film, but I was offering a chance to find a
>
>
> >>>>>> reason other than 'fiddling' with the Z-film over the weekend after the
>
>
> >>>>>> murder when the film was located for a short time in the hands of the
>
>
> >>>>>> 'Hawkeye Works' of the CIA in Rochester, NY for some odd reason.]
>
>
> >>>>> I've given a reason other than alteration to the film: Jackie closed the
>
> >>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>
>
> >>>>> big gory "flaps" on the right side of her husband's head that were
>
>
> >>>>> forward of the ear. Or will you dispute Bill Newman's claim that the
>
>
> >>>>> right side of JFK's head opened up? He wasn't looking through a
>
>
> >>>>> viewfinder at the time.
>

If Tom Robinson is accurate, then the right side of the head didn't 'open up', but might have exhibited a small wound as Robinson drew. However all this is escaping the question that was asked.

> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>>> Close. How many flaps do YOU see? 5, 10, 200?
>
>
> >>> Based on what the Parkland personnel saw, none on the right side of
>
> >>
>
> >>> JFK's temple. And the wound that Robinson saw after the autopsy wasn't
>
> >>
>
> >>> too large either:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> I didn't ask that. I asked how many YOU see. That's why I capitalized
>
> >>
>
> >> the word "YOU" for emphasis, like shouting.
>
> >>
>
> >> And you refuse to answer the question.
>
> >>
>
> > Wrong again! :) I didn't refuse to answer. YOU refused to think when I
>
> > posed the question in the first place. My question spoke of one flap on
>
> > the Z-film and one on the autopsy photo. That answered (in advance) your
>
> > comment which gave a definite sound of being a rhetorically cynical
>
> > comment. I guess you want to change the subject to escape the things we
>
> > were discussing, which were what Robinson saw at the autopsy, and the
>
> > smallness in size of the right temple wound he drew.
>
>
> Pure fantasy. You think that triangle is a bullet wound? When you have
>
> seen triangular bullets?
>

Lordee! You're off the reservation again! Now I have to be in
correction mode with you again. No one said anything about the triangular
wound being a bullet wound or triangular bullets. However, I can guess
(so don't hold me to it) that if there were also a shot into the back of
the head, that it might have come out at the right temple. But that would
be on top of the BOH 'large hole' that everyone saw. Are you trying to
escape the question again?

>
>
> >>> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=350&relPageId=3
>
>
> >>> The question wasn't how many flaps anyway. It was why does the flap
>
> >>
>
> >>> flop sideways and down in the Z-film, and flops forward in the autopsy
>
> >>
>
> >>> photos?
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> False assumptions.
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> > Are you losing it? I thought you had seen the photos, and that you were
>
> > a slave to all that 'hard' physical evidence. I guess not. Maybe you're
>
> > coming to realize that the Z-film was 'fiddled' with to fool the great
>
> > unwashed out there.
>
>
> You are misrepresenting the evidence.
>

Impossible, since you've not specified how I 'misrepresented' anything.
Now, if you had said how I had done that, I might respond, but you didn't
want to fill out your statement with the proper information so that we
know what you're talking about. Are you still trying to escape the
question?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

You said it was the entrance wound seen before the start of the autopsy.
Yet we can't see it on the photos.
Now you're changing your story and maybe it's the exit wound.

[mainframetech]

I said nothing of the kind. The entrance wound was mentioned by
Robinson after the autopsy when he was doing his part of the work of
preparing the body. And I've pointed out the wound point in the autopsy
photos. It was located in photo 'Groden Superior' on page:

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/index.html

Note the mess in the right forehead where they've put morticians wax or
some similar cover up. Robinson states that's where the .25 inch hole
was.