Even the government itself admitted in the 70's there was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

[Freewill]

2. Dr. Malcolm Perry

Please note I am providing SWORN testimony not internet conspiracy theory BS.

Mr. SPECTER - Based on your observations of the neck wound alone, do you have a sufficient basis to form an opinion as to whether it was an entrance wound or an exit wound.
Dr. PERRY - No, sir. I was unable to determine that since I did not ascertain the exact trajectory of the missile. The operative procedure which I performed was restricted to securing an adequate airway and insuring there was no injury to the carotid artery or jugular vein at that level and at that point I made the procedure.
Mr. SPECTER - Based on the appearance of the neck wound alone, could it have been either an entrance or an exit wound?
Dr. PERRY - It could have been either.
Mr. SPECTER - Permit me to supply some additional facts, Dr. Perry, which I shall ask you to assume as being true for purposes of having you express an opinion.
Assume first of all that the President was struck by a 6.5 mm. copper-jacketed bullet fired from a gun having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, with the weapon being approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, with the bullet striking him at an angle of declination of approximately 45 degrees, striking the President on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, being 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, passing through the President's body striking no bones, traversing the neck and sliding between the large muscles in the posterior portion of the President's body through a fascia channel without violating the pleural cavity but bruising the apex of the right pleural cavity, and bruising the most apical portion of the right lung inflicting a hematoma to the right side of the larynx, which you have just described, and striking the trachea causing the injury which you described, and then exiting from the hole that you have described in the midline of the neck.
Now, assuming those facts to be true, would the hole which you observed in the neck of the President be consistent with an exit wound under those circumstances?
Dr. PERRY - Certainly would be consistent with an exit wound.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, assuming one additional fact that there was no bullet found in the body of the President, and assuming the facts which I have just set forth to be true, do you have an opinion as to whether the wound which you observed in the President's neck was an entrance or an exit wound?
Dr. PERRY - A full jacketed bullet without deformation passing through skin would leave a similar wound for an exit and entrance wound and with the facts which you have made available and with these assumptions, I believe that it was an exit wound.
Mr. SPECTER - Do you have sufficient facts available to you to render an opinion as to the cause of the injury which you observed in the President's head?
Dr. PERRY - No, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you had an opportunity to examine the autopsy report?
Dr. PERRY - I have.
Mr. SPECTER - And are the facts set forth in the autopsy report consistent with your observations and views or are they inconsistent in any way with your findings and opinions?
Dr. PERRY - They are quite consistent and I noted initially that they explained very nicely the circumstances as we observed them at the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Could you elaborate on that last answer, Dr. Perry?
Dr. PERRY - Yes There was some considerable speculation, as you will recall, as to whether there were one or two bullets and as to from whence they came. Dr. Clark and I were queried extensively in respect to this and in addition Dr. Carrico could not determine whether there were one or two bullets from our initial examination.
I say that because we did what was necessary in the emergency procedure, and abandoned any efforts of examination at the termination. I did not ascertain the trajectory of any of the missiles. As a result I did not know whether there was evidence for 1 or 2 or even 3 bullets entering and at the particular time it was of no importance.
Mr. SPECTER - But based on the additional factors provided in the autopsy report, do you have an opinion at this time as to the number of bullets there were?
Dr. PERRY - The wounds as described from the autopsy report and coupled with the wounds I have observed it would appear there were two missiles that struck the President.
Mr. SPECTER - And based on the additional factors which I have provided to you by way of hypothetical assumption, and the factors present in the autopsy report from your examination of that report, what does the source of the bullets seem to have been to you?
Dr. PERRY - That I could not say. I can only determine their pathway, on the basis of these reports within the President's body.
As to their ultimate source not knowing any of the circumstances surrounding it, I would not have any speculation.
Mr. SPECTER - From what direction would the bullets have come based on all of those factors?
Dr. PERRY - The bullets would have come from behind the President based on these factors.
Mr. SPECTER - And from the level, from below or above the President?
Dr. PERRY - Not having examined any of the. wounds with the exception of the anterior neck wounds, I could not say. This wound, as I noted was about 5 mm., and roughly circular in shape. There is no way for me to determine.

Here is the testimony in its entirety: Testimony Of Dr. Malcolm Perry

Ass meet 7.

 

[Freewill]

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

His actual testimony, sworn: Testimony Of Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

Mr. SPECTER - Now, going back to the wound which you observed in the neck, did you see that wound before the tracheotomy was performed?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; I did, because I was just connecting up the endotracheal tube to the machine at the time and that's when Dr. Carrico said there was a wound in the neck and I looked at it.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you describe that wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I'm afraid my description of it would not be as accurate, of course, as that of the surgeons who were doing the tracheotomy, because my look was a quick look before connecting up the endotracheal tube to the apparatus to help in ventilation and respiration for the patient, and I was aware later in the day, as I should have put it in the report, that I thought this was a wound of exit because it was not a clean wound, and by "clean" clearly demarcated, round, punctate wound which is the usual wound of an entrance wound, made by a missile and at some speed. Of course, entrance wounds with a lobbing type missile, can make a jagged wound also, but I was of the impression and I recognized I had the impression it was an exit wound. However, my mental appreciation for a wound--for the wound in the neck, I believe, was sort of--was overshadowed by recognition of the wound in the scalp and skull plate.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the wound in the neck as specifically as you can at this moment?
Dr. JENKINS - I believe so.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, will you now describe the wound which you observed in the head?
Dr. JENKINS - Almost by the time I was--had the time to pay more attention to the wound in the head, all of these other activities were under way. I was busy connecting up an apparatus to respire for the patient, exerting manual pressure on the breathing bag or anesthesia apparatus, trying to feel for a pulse in the neck, and then reaching up and feeling for one in the temporal area, seeing about connecting the cardioscope or directing its being connected, and then turned attention to the wound in the head.
Now, Dr. Clark had begun closed chest cardiac massage at this time and I was aware of the magnitude of the wound, because with each compression of the chest, there was a great rush of blood from the skull wound. Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any wounds immediately below the massive loss of skull which you have described?
Dr. JENKINS - On the right side?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes, sir.
Dr. JENKINS - No---I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process.
Mr. SPECTER - The autopsy report discloses no such development, Dr. Jenkins.
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I was feeling for---I was palpating here for a pulse to see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so I thought there was a wound there also.


Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Jenkins, would your observation of the wound and your characterization of it as an exit hole be consistent with a set of facts which I will ask you to assume for purposes of giving me your view or opinion.
Assume, first of all, if you will, that President Kennedy had a wound on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, measuring 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, and that the missile was a 6.5 mm. jacketed bullet fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second and approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, and that after entering the President's body at the point indicated, the missile traveled between two strap muscles and through a fascia plane without violating the pleura cavity, and then struck the right side of the trachea and exited through the throat, would the throat wound which you observed be consistent with such a wound inflicted in the manner I have just described?
Dr. JENKINS - As far as I know, it wouldn't be inconsistent with it, Mr. Specter.
Mr. SPECTER - What has your experience been with gunshot wounds, that is, to what extent have you had experience with such wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, having been Chief of the Anesthesia Service here for this 16 years, we have a rather large trauma emergency service, and so I see gunshot wounds many times a week. I'm afraid I couldn't hazard a guess at the moment as to how many we see a year, and I'm afraid probably if I knew, I would not like to admit to this number, but I do go further in saying that my main interest is not in the tracks of the wounds. My main interest is what physiological changes that they have caused to the patient that I am to anesthetize or a member of the department is to anesthetize, what has happened to the cardiovascular system, respiratory, and neurological, and so I am aware of the wounds of entrance and exit only by a peripheral part of my knowledge and activities during the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any formal training in ballistics or in exit wounds or entrance wounds--bullet wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - No, I have not.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you talked to any representative of the Federal Government at any time prior to today?
Dr. JENKINS - Oh, there was a man whose name I don't remember now, who showed what looked like the proper credentials from the FBI, who came to ask only whether the report I had submitted to Mr. Price for the hospital record or for Mr. Price's record constituted all the reports I had. That's the only time and that was the extent of our conversation, I think.

Dr. JENKINS - Well, from my knowledge of the wound in the neck, this would not have been fatal, except for one thing, and that is--you have not told me whether the wound with its point of entrance and point of exit had contacted the vertebral column in its course?
Mr. SPECTER - It did not.
Dr. JENKINS - In that case I would not expect this wound to have been fatal.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your view, Dr. Jenkins, as to whether the wounds which you observed were caused by one or two bullets?
Dr. JENKINS - I felt quite sure at the time that there must have been two bullets--two missiles.
Mr. SPECTER - And, Dr. Jenkins, what was your reason for that?
Dr. JENKINS - Because the wound with the exploded area of the scalp, as I interpreted it being exploded, I would interpret it being a wound of exit, and the appearance of the wound in the neck, and I also thought it was a wound of exit.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever changed any of your original opinions in connection with the wounds received by President Kennedy?
Dr. JENKINS - I guess so. The first day I had thought because of his pneumothorax, that his wound must have gone--that the one bullet must have traversed his pleura, must have gotten into his lung cavity, his chest cavity, I mean, and from what you say now, I know it did not go that way. I thought it did.
Mr. SPECTER - Aside from that opinion, now, have any of your other opinions about the nature of his wounds or the sources of the wounds been changed in any way?
Dr. JENKINS - No; one other. I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a wound there (indicating).
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating the left temporal area?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; the left temporal, which could have been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating), but you have answered that for me. This was my only other question about it.
Mr. SPECTER - So, that those two points are the only ones on which your opinions have been changed since the views you originally formulated?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.
Mr. SPECTER - On the President's injuries?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.

Ass meet 7.

The truth shall make you free.

 

[Freewill]

Testimony Of Dr. Ronald Coy Jones

He apparently didn't know there was more then one shot.

Testimony Of Dr. Ronald Coy Jones

Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Jones, did you have any speculative thought as to accounting for the point of wounds which you observed on the President, as you thought about it when you were treating the President that day, or shortly thereafter?
Dr. JONES - With no history as to the number of times that the President had been shot or knowing the direction from which he had been shot, and seeing the wound in the midline of the neck, and what appeared to be an exit wound in the posterior portion of the skull, the only speculation that I could have as far as to how this could occur with a single wound would be that would enter the anterior neck and possibly strike a vertebral body and then change its course and exit in the region of the posterior portion of the head. However, this was--there was some doubt that a missile that appeared to be of this high velocity would suddenly change its course by striking, but at the present-at that time, if I accounted for it on the basis of one shot, that would have been the way I accounted for it.
Mr. SPECTER - And would that account take into consideration the extensive damage done to the top of the President's head?
Dr. JONES - If this were the course of the missile, it probably--possibly could have accounted for it, although I would possibly expect it to do a tremendous amount of damage to the vertebral column that it hit and if this were a high velocity missile would also think that the entrance wound would probably be larger than the one that was present at the time we saw

 

[Freewill]

OK, I am bored and it takes awhile to do research on cherry picked BS.

So, now that I have not ignored ONE piece of "evidence" presented can the conspiracy theory proponents explain two things to me? One, explain the blood splatter shown clearly in the videos and pictures YOU provide? Second, why must you become so offensive when backed into a corner?

 

[Rockland]

Freewill, the two videos you posted are too clear for 7-Upchuck. You should know by now that 7 only uses deliberately blurry videos and gifs to make his point. Please degrade your videos by several generations and try again.

 

[7forever]

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

His actual testimony, sworn: Testimony Of Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

Mr. SPECTER - Now, going back to the wound which you observed in the neck, did you see that wound before the tracheotomy was performed?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; I did, because I was just connecting up the endotracheal tube to the machine at the time and that's when Dr. Carrico said there was a wound in the neck and I looked at it.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you describe that wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I'm afraid my description of it would not be as accurate, of course, as that of the surgeons who were doing the tracheotomy, because my look was a quick look before connecting up the endotracheal tube to the apparatus to help in ventilation and respiration for the patient, and I was aware later in the day, as I should have put it in the report, that I thought this was a wound of exit because it was not a clean wound, and by "clean" clearly demarcated, round, punctate wound which is the usual wound of an entrance wound, made by a missile and at some speed. Of course, entrance wounds with a lobbing type missile, can make a jagged wound also, but I was of the impression and I recognized I had the impression it was an exit wound. However, my mental appreciation for a wound--for the wound in the neck, I believe, was sort of--was overshadowed by recognition of the wound in the scalp and skull plate.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the wound in the neck as specifically as you can at this moment?
Dr. JENKINS - I believe so.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, will you now describe the wound which you observed in the head?
Dr. JENKINS - Almost by the time I was--had the time to pay more attention to the wound in the head, all of these other activities were under way. I was busy connecting up an apparatus to respire for the patient, exerting manual pressure on the breathing bag or anesthesia apparatus, trying to feel for a pulse in the neck, and then reaching up and feeling for one in the temporal area, seeing about connecting the cardioscope or directing its being connected, and then turned attention to the wound in the head.
Now, Dr. Clark had begun closed chest cardiac massage at this time and I was aware of the magnitude of the wound, because with each compression of the chest, there was a great rush of blood from the skull wound. Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any wounds immediately below the massive loss of skull which you have described?
Dr. JENKINS - On the right side?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes, sir.
Dr. JENKINS - No--I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process.
Mr. SPECTER - The autopsy report discloses no such development, Dr. Jenkins.
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I was feeling for---I was palpating here for a pulse to see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so I thought there was a wound there also.


Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Jenkins, would your observation of the wound and your characterization of it as an exit hole be consistent with a set of facts which I will ask you to assume for purposes of giving me your view or opinion.
Assume, first of all, if you will, that President Kennedy had a wound on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, measuring 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, and that the missile was a 6.5 mm. jacketed bullet fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second and approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, and that after entering the President's body at the point indicated, the missile traveled between two strap muscles and through a fascia plane without violating the pleura cavity, and then struck the right side of the trachea and exited through the throat, would the throat wound which you observed be consistent with such a wound inflicted in the manner I have just described?
Dr. JENKINS - As far as I know, it wouldn't be inconsistent with it, Mr. Specter.
Mr. SPECTER - What has your experience been with gunshot wounds, that is, to what extent have you had experience with such wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, having been Chief of the Anesthesia Service here for this 16 years, we have a rather large trauma emergency service, and so I see gunshot wounds many times a week. I'm afraid I couldn't hazard a guess at the moment as to how many we see a year, and I'm afraid probably if I knew, I would not like to admit to this number, but I do go further in saying that my main interest is not in the tracks of the wounds. My main interest is what physiological changes that they have caused to the patient that I am to anesthetize or a member of the department is to anesthetize, what has happened to the cardiovascular system, respiratory, and neurological, and so I am aware of the wounds of entrance and exit only by a peripheral part of my knowledge and activities during the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any formal training in ballistics or in exit wounds or entrance wounds--bullet wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - No, I have not.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you talked to any representative of the Federal Government at any time prior to today?
Dr. JENKINS - Oh, there was a man whose name I don't remember now, who showed what looked like the proper credentials from the FBI, who came to ask only whether the report I had submitted to Mr. Price for the hospital record or for Mr. Price's record constituted all the reports I had. That's the only time and that was the extent of our conversation, I think.

Dr. JENKINS - Well, from my knowledge of the wound in the neck, this would not have been fatal, except for one thing, and that is--you have not told me whether the wound with its point of entrance and point of exit had contacted the vertebral column in its course?
Mr. SPECTER - It did not.
Dr. JENKINS - In that case I would not expect this wound to have been fatal.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your view, Dr. Jenkins, as to whether the wounds which you observed were caused by one or two bullets?
Dr. JENKINS - I felt quite sure at the time that there must have been two bullets--two missiles.
Mr. SPECTER - And, Dr. Jenkins, what was your reason for that?
Dr. JENKINS - Because the wound with the exploded area of the scalp, as I interpreted it being exploded, I would interpret it being a wound of exit, and the appearance of the wound in the neck, and I also thought it was a wound of exit.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever changed any of your original opinions in connection with the wounds received by President Kennedy?
Dr. JENKINS - I guess so. The first day I had thought because of his pneumothorax, that his wound must have gone--that the one bullet must have traversed his pleura, must have gotten into his lung cavity, his chest cavity, I mean, and from what you say now, I know it did not go that way. I thought it did.
Mr. SPECTER - Aside from that opinion, now, have any of your other opinions about the nature of his wounds or the sources of the wounds been changed in any way?
Dr. JENKINS - No; one other. I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a wound there (indicating).
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating the left temporal area?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; the left temporal, which could have been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating), but you have answered that for me. This was my only other question about it.
Mr. SPECTER - So, that those two points are the only ones on which your opinions have been changed since the views you originally formulated?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.
Mr. SPECTER - On the President's injuries?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.

Ass meet 7.

The truth shall make you free.

The truth exposes your defeat.

kennedy witnesses bethesda
JAMES CURTIS JENKINS: the other laboratory technologist who worked with the autopsy team on JFK, Jenkins was at that time in a Ph.D. program in pathology. ( High Treason II , p. 226) The HSCA's Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy reported that Jenkins "said he saw a head wound in the "...middle temporal region back to the occipital." (HSCA interview with Curtis Jenkins, Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy, 8-29-77. JFK Collection, RG 233, Document #002193, p.4) He told author, David Lifton, "I would say that parietal and occipital section on the right side of the head--it was a large gaping area...It had just been crushed, and kind of blown apart, toward the rear." (Lifton, Best Evidence ", p. 616) When Lifton told Jenkins that photographs showed that the back of the head was essentially intact, except for a small bullet entry wound at the top, he responded, "That's not possible, That is totally--you know, there's no possible way. Okay? It's not possible." ( Best Evidence , p. 617) Jenkins told Livingstone, "Everything from just above the right ear back was fragmented...there was (an absence of scalp and bone) along the midline just above the occipital area...this (wound) would not have been low enough to have gotten into the cerebellum." ( High Treason II , p. 228). Jenkins' views, whether as given by the HSCA, Livingstone, or Lifton, are noteworthy by their consistency, and as Jenkins was in a Ph.D. pathology program, his anatomic specificity is of value.

 

[7forever]

looks very much intact for a back of head that was blown away...
did "THEY" DOCTOR THE AUTOPSY PHOTOS TOO?

It can't be intact because the autopsy report had the occipital region as part of the exit wound. Your autopsy photo was faked.

Missile Wounds

1. There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right
involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the
temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual
absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures
approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p62uutgNN4c]John Cleese, Connie Booth - Bookshop - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Rockland]

The truth exposes your defeat blah blah blah.

Deleting and re-posting the same doe snot multiple times doesn't magically make it come true.

Where's your sycophant and comedy partner 9/11 today? The two of you are like Cheech and Chong on crack.

 

[7forever]

It shows a wound with nothing clear.

One of many facts, you cannot explain the blood splatter shown clearly in Zapruder and x-rays YOU won't provide? His face was clear, as according to the autopsy report/photos, and eyewitnesses.

Jfk's face was clear in reality. But, the x-rays and front of frame 313 and 327 show it removed. This cannot be reconciled without copping to film and x-ray alteration.

 

[Freewill]

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

His actual testimony, sworn: Testimony Of Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

Mr. SPECTER - Now, going back to the wound which you observed in the neck, did you see that wound before the tracheotomy was performed?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; I did, because I was just connecting up the endotracheal tube to the machine at the time and that's when Dr. Carrico said there was a wound in the neck and I looked at it.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you describe that wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I'm afraid my description of it would not be as accurate, of course, as that of the surgeons who were doing the tracheotomy, because my look was a quick look before connecting up the endotracheal tube to the apparatus to help in ventilation and respiration for the patient, and I was aware later in the day, as I should have put it in the report, that I thought this was a wound of exit because it was not a clean wound, and by "clean" clearly demarcated, round, punctate wound which is the usual wound of an entrance wound, made by a missile and at some speed. Of course, entrance wounds with a lobbing type missile, can make a jagged wound also, but I was of the impression and I recognized I had the impression it was an exit wound. However, my mental appreciation for a wound--for the wound in the neck, I believe, was sort of--was overshadowed by recognition of the wound in the scalp and skull plate.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the wound in the neck as specifically as you can at this moment?
Dr. JENKINS - I believe so.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, will you now describe the wound which you observed in the head?
Dr. JENKINS - Almost by the time I was--had the time to pay more attention to the wound in the head, all of these other activities were under way. I was busy connecting up an apparatus to respire for the patient, exerting manual pressure on the breathing bag or anesthesia apparatus, trying to feel for a pulse in the neck, and then reaching up and feeling for one in the temporal area, seeing about connecting the cardioscope or directing its being connected, and then turned attention to the wound in the head.
Now, Dr. Clark had begun closed chest cardiac massage at this time and I was aware of the magnitude of the wound, because with each compression of the chest, there was a great rush of blood from the skull wound. Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any wounds immediately below the massive loss of skull which you have described?
Dr. JENKINS - On the right side?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes, sir.
Dr. JENKINS - No--I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process.
Mr. SPECTER - The autopsy report discloses no such development, Dr. Jenkins.
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I was feeling for---I was palpating here for a pulse to see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so I thought there was a wound there also.


Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Jenkins, would your observation of the wound and your characterization of it as an exit hole be consistent with a set of facts which I will ask you to assume for purposes of giving me your view or opinion.
Assume, first of all, if you will, that President Kennedy had a wound on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, measuring 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, and that the missile was a 6.5 mm. jacketed bullet fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second and approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, and that after entering the President's body at the point indicated, the missile traveled between two strap muscles and through a fascia plane without violating the pleura cavity, and then struck the right side of the trachea and exited through the throat, would the throat wound which you observed be consistent with such a wound inflicted in the manner I have just described?
Dr. JENKINS - As far as I know, it wouldn't be inconsistent with it, Mr. Specter.
Mr. SPECTER - What has your experience been with gunshot wounds, that is, to what extent have you had experience with such wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, having been Chief of the Anesthesia Service here for this 16 years, we have a rather large trauma emergency service, and so I see gunshot wounds many times a week. I'm afraid I couldn't hazard a guess at the moment as to how many we see a year, and I'm afraid probably if I knew, I would not like to admit to this number, but I do go further in saying that my main interest is not in the tracks of the wounds. My main interest is what physiological changes that they have caused to the patient that I am to anesthetize or a member of the department is to anesthetize, what has happened to the cardiovascular system, respiratory, and neurological, and so I am aware of the wounds of entrance and exit only by a peripheral part of my knowledge and activities during the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any formal training in ballistics or in exit wounds or entrance wounds--bullet wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - No, I have not.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you talked to any representative of the Federal Government at any time prior to today?
Dr. JENKINS - Oh, there was a man whose name I don't remember now, who showed what looked like the proper credentials from the FBI, who came to ask only whether the report I had submitted to Mr. Price for the hospital record or for Mr. Price's record constituted all the reports I had. That's the only time and that was the extent of our conversation, I think.

Dr. JENKINS - Well, from my knowledge of the wound in the neck, this would not have been fatal, except for one thing, and that is--you have not told me whether the wound with its point of entrance and point of exit had contacted the vertebral column in its course?
Mr. SPECTER - It did not.
Dr. JENKINS - In that case I would not expect this wound to have been fatal.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your view, Dr. Jenkins, as to whether the wounds which you observed were caused by one or two bullets?
Dr. JENKINS - I felt quite sure at the time that there must have been two bullets--two missiles.
Mr. SPECTER - And, Dr. Jenkins, what was your reason for that?
Dr. JENKINS - Because the wound with the exploded area of the scalp, as I interpreted it being exploded, I would interpret it being a wound of exit, and the appearance of the wound in the neck, and I also thought it was a wound of exit.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever changed any of your original opinions in connection with the wounds received by President Kennedy?
Dr. JENKINS - I guess so. The first day I had thought because of his pneumothorax, that his wound must have gone--that the one bullet must have traversed his pleura, must have gotten into his lung cavity, his chest cavity, I mean, and from what you say now, I know it did not go that way. I thought it did.
Mr. SPECTER - Aside from that opinion, now, have any of your other opinions about the nature of his wounds or the sources of the wounds been changed in any way?
Dr. JENKINS - No; one other. I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a wound there (indicating).
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating the left temporal area?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; the left temporal, which could have been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating), but you have answered that for me. This was my only other question about it.
Mr. SPECTER - So, that those two points are the only ones on which your opinions have been changed since the views you originally formulated?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.
Mr. SPECTER - On the President's injuries?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.

Ass meet 7.

The truth shall make you free.

The truth exposes your defeat.

kennedy witnesses bethesda
JAMES CURTIS JENKINS: the other laboratory technologist who worked with the autopsy team on JFK, Jenkins was at that time in a Ph.D. program in pathology. ( High Treason II , p. 226) The HSCA's Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy reported that Jenkins "said he saw a head wound in the "...middle temporal region back to the occipital." (HSCA interview with Curtis Jenkins, Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy, 8-29-77. JFK Collection, RG 233, Document #002193, p.4) He told author, David Lifton, "I would say that parietal and occipital section on the right side of the head--it was a large gaping area...It had just been crushed, and kind of blown apart, toward the rear." (Lifton, Best Evidence ", p. 616) When Lifton told Jenkins that photographs showed that the back of the head was essentially intact, except for a small bullet entry wound at the top, he responded, "That's not possible, That is totally--you know, there's no possible way. Okay? It's not possible." ( Best Evidence , p. 617) Jenkins told Livingstone, "Everything from just above the right ear back was fragmented...there was (an absence of scalp and bone) along the midline just above the occipital area...this (wound) would not have been low enough to have gotten into the cerebellum." ( High Treason II , p. 228). Jenkins' views, whether as given by the HSCA, Livingstone, or Lifton, are noteworthy by their consistency, and as Jenkins was in a Ph.D. pathology program, his anatomic specificity is of value.

Ok let's explain it better. First of all everyone who testified to the fact states that the president was never turned over. So how would any wound in the back be seen especially by someone not working on saving the president directly? Second he changed his story although I believe honestly.

MARION THOMAS JENKINS, MD--In a contemporaneous note dated
11-22-63, Jenkins described "a great laceration
on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital) (sic), causing
a great defect in the skull plate so that there was herniation
and laceration of great areas of the brain, even to the extent that
the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." (WC--Exhibit
#392) To the Warren Commission's Arlen Specter Dr. Jenkins said,
""Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the
cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound..."
(WC--V6:48) Jenkins told Specter that the temporal and
occipital wound was a wound of exit: "...the wound with the exploded
area of the scalp, as I interpreted it being exploded, I
would interpret it being a wound of exit..." (WC--V6:51.)

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Note that Jenkin's earliest account included a couple of elements that
can be used to imply a back of the head wound: the mention of
cerebellum and of occipital bone. But he also says that the wound was
"temporal" and on the "right side of the head."

Saying that he is describing the back of the head blown out requires
that the "temporal" and "right side of the head" statements be
ignored.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Jenkins described a wound in JFK's left temple to Specter:
Jenkins:"...I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area,
right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process." Specter:
"The autopsy report discloses no such development, Dr. Jenkins."
Jenkins: "Well, I was feeling for--I was palpating here for a pulse to
see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and
this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so
I thought there was a wound there also." A few moments later Jenkins
again pursued the possibility that there had been a wound in the left
temple: "...I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the
left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline,
because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a
wound there (indicating) (sic). Specter: "Indicating the left
temporal area?" Jenkins: "Yes; the left temporal, which could have
been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating) (sic-presumably
pointing to where he had identified the wound in prior testimony--the
right rear of the skull), but you have answered that for me (that 'the
autopsy report discloses no such development')." (WC-V6:51)

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

Jenkins recollection of a left temporal wound does put a lot of this
testimony into context. He's flat, dead wrong, but certainly honestly
wrong. In fact, the medical testimony is peppered with such
inaccurate statements.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

In an interview with the HSCA's Andy Purdy on 11-10-77 Marion Jenkins
was said to have expressed that as an anesthesiologist he (Jenkins)
"...was positioned at the head of the table so he had one of the
closest views of the head wound...believes he was '...the only one who
knew the extent of the head wound.') (sic)...Regarding the head wound,
Dr. Jenkins said that only one segment of bone was blown out--it was a
segment of occipital or temporal bone. He noted that a portion of the
cerebellum (lower rear brain) (sic) was hanging out from a hole in the
right--rear of the head." (Emphasis added) (HSCA-V7:286-287) In an
interview with the American Medical News published on 11-24-78 Jenkins
said, "...(Kennedy) had part of his head blown away and part of his
cerebellum was hanging out.". (emphasis added)

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

So Jenkins says the missing bone was "occipital or temporal" -- he's
not sure which. So of course Aguilar simply assumes he meant
"occipital," in spite of Jenkins' own uncertainty.

At this point in the historical narrative, Aguilar leaves two very
important pieces of evidence out.

Where several of the other Parkland doctors are concerned, Aguilar
extensively quotes interviews done in 1979 by Harry Livingstone and
Ben Bradlee, Jr., the latter of the BOSTON GLOBE. The problem is that
the GLOBE, after interviewing Jenkins, classified him as a witness who
SUPPORTED the authenticity of the autopsy photos. Livingstone admits
this in HIGH TREASON (p. 42). He assures us that the BOSTON GLOBE was
mistaken.

Aguilar also doesn't tell his readers that Jenkins went to the
National Archives in 1988 under the auspices of NOVA and examined the
autopsy photos and x-rays. Presumably, if he is really a "back of the
head" witness, he'll condemn then as fakes. But instead he says that:

"Nothing that I've seen would make me think it had been changed from
what happened that day."

In regard to his statement about "cerebellum," Jenkins said "I knew
very well that the wound was anterior to that . . . " but goes on to
say that he did see structures in the brain that looked like
cerebellum.

Perhaps in response to this, Aguilar turns to attacking Jenkins:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Amazingly, in an interview with author Gerald Posner on March 3, 1992,
Jenkins' recollection had changed dramatically. "The description of
the cerebellum was my fault," Jenkins insisted, "When I read my report
over I realized there could not be any cerebellum. The autopsy photo,
with the rear of the head intact and a protrusion in the parietal
region, is the way I remember it. I never did say occipital." (Posner,
G. "Case Closed", p. 312) Jenkins has obviously forgotten that in his
own note prepared, typed, and signed on the day of the assassination,
Jenkins said, "a great laceration on the right side of the head
(temporal and occipital) (sic)", and HSCA's Purdy reported that
Jenkins said "occipital or temporal bone" was blown out.

When told by Posner that Robert McClelland, MD had claimed, "I saw a
piece of cerebellum fall out on the stretcher." Jenkins responded,
"Bob (McClelland) is an excellent surgeon. He knows anatomy. I hate to
say Bob is mistaken, but that is clearly not right...". (Posner G.
Case Closed. p.313). Clearly, Jenkins had forgotten that he himself
had claimed that 'cerebellum was hanging out' (as had Ronald Coy
Jones, MD--see below). [Might this controversy be resolved in Jenkins'
and Jones' favors? Possibly Jenkins believes that cerebellum was
'hanging out' but that it had not reached the surface of the gurney
despite the close proximity of the skull in the supine position to its
surface?]

Jenkins, however, was not through with discrediting McClelland. To
Posner, Jenkins explained how McClelland had made an error, which
McClelland later corrected, that there was a wound in JFK's left
temple. "I'll tell you how that happened," Jenkins explained, "When
Bob McClelland came into the room, he asked me, 'Where are his
wounds?' And at that time I was operating a breathing bag with my
right hand, and was trying to take the President's temporal pulse, and
I had my finger on his left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left
temple as the wound." (Posner G. "Case Closed". p.313) Ignoring the
absurdity of such a supposition for the moment, Jenkins failed to
reveal an important part of the story. Jenkins failed to tell Posner,
who was apparently too uninformed to know, that it was Jenkins himself
who had most strikingly claimed that there was an entrance wound in
the left temple, as Jenkins' Commission testimony cited above proves.

As we will see, Dr. Jenkins' faulty, and possibly self-serving memory
seems to have frequently plagued him. It is a testament to JAMA's and
Posner's laxity in fact-checking that Jenkins' recollections are so
unquestioningly reported. Both Breo and Posner quickly attempted to
discredit those who, like McClelland, did not share their biases, and
ignored many stupendous inconsistencies of 'allies', such as Jenkins'.
(see next chapter). Nonetheless, Jenkins' earliest, 'unenhanced'
recollections must be given greatest weight and considered the most
likely to be reliable, as in any police investigation. Fortunately,
they also agree with the earliest recollections of other Parkland
witnesses, an important corroborative factor.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

So Aguilar is attacking Jenkins' "faulty and possibly self-serving
memory." Yet the only real evidence Aguilar has that his memory is
"faulty" is the fact that Jenkins testimony is inconvenient.

Aguilar touts Jenkins "earliest recollections," yet his "earliest
recollections" were mixed and equivocal, as we have seen.

And Jenkins, faced with the autopsy materials, unequivocally said that
they corresponded to what he remembered.

 

[Rockland]

I'm afraid you're wasting your time, Freewill. 7-Upchuck's elevator doesn't go all the way to the top. He's a couple of cans short of a six-pack. His souffle has fallen. He's not playing with a full dick. That wasn't a typo.

 

[Freewill]

I'm afraid you're wasting your time, Freewill. 7-Upchuck's elevator doesn't go all the way to the top. He's a couple of cans short of a six-pack. His souffle has fallen. He's not playing with a full dick. That wasn't a typo.

I have never seen one conspiracy advocates ever change their mind regardless of the evidence. But I have some enjoyment in watching them try and defend the indefensible.

 

[daws101]

looks very much intact for a back of head that was blown away...
did "THEY" DOCTOR THE AUTOPSY PHOTOS TOO?

It can't be intact because the autopsy report had the occipital region as part of the exit wound. Your autopsy photo was faked.

Missile Wounds

1. There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right
involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the
temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual
absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures
approximately 13 cm. in greatest diameter.

please note 7'S lack of basic understanding OF ANATOMY


There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right
involving chiefly the parietal bone





but extending somewhat into the
temporal and occipital regions.

what this means is a large section of the RIGHT SIDE OF THE SKULL was missing
and a small area of the back RIGHT SIDE of the skull was damaged.

 

[Bfgrn]

OK, I am bored and it takes awhile to do research on cherry picked BS.

So, now that I have not ignored ONE piece of "evidence" presented can the conspiracy theory proponents explain two things to me? One, explain the blood splatter shown clearly in the videos and pictures YOU provide? Second, why must you become so offensive when backed into a corner?

Let me ask some questions...

Why are you so fixated on the Warren Report findings as being true?

The Warren Commission relied solely on the FBI for evidence and witnesses called.

We now know that the highest levels of government (LBJ, J Edgar Hoover and the Justice Dept.) decided the outcome of the Warren Commission the moment Oswald expired.


Memo from the Attorney General's office to the White House:

Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General

November 25, 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.

I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.

I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort.

Nicholas deB. Katzenbach

Deputy Attorney General

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If the shot came from the 6th floor of the TSDB, struck the back of President Kennedy's head at a downward angle, where is the exit wound that would be in his face???

He was shot in the temple (just like Asst. Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff shows after talking to the Parkland doctors)

And the back of his head was blown out, just like Dr. McClelland shows in the sketch he drew and the picture, along with about 20 other Parkland doctors, nurses and medical assistants saw.

ROBERT McCLELLAND, MD: "...I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered...so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out...." (WC--V6:33)

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

His actual testimony, sworn: Testimony Of Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

Mr. SPECTER - Now, going back to the wound which you observed in the neck, did you see that wound before the tracheotomy was performed?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; I did, because I was just connecting up the endotracheal tube to the machine at the time and that's when Dr. Carrico said there was a wound in the neck and I looked at it.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you describe that wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I'm afraid my description of it would not be as accurate, of course, as that of the surgeons who were doing the tracheotomy, because my look was a quick look before connecting up the endotracheal tube to the apparatus to help in ventilation and respiration for the patient, and I was aware later in the day, as I should have put it in the report, that I thought this was a wound of exit because it was not a clean wound, and by "clean" clearly demarcated, round, punctate wound which is the usual wound of an entrance wound, made by a missile and at some speed. Of course, entrance wounds with a lobbing type missile, can make a jagged wound also, but I was of the impression and I recognized I had the impression it was an exit wound. However, my mental appreciation for a wound--for the wound in the neck, I believe, was sort of--was overshadowed by recognition of the wound in the scalp and skull plate.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the wound in the neck as specifically as you can at this moment?
Dr. JENKINS - I believe so.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, will you now describe the wound which you observed in the head?
Dr. JENKINS - Almost by the time I was--had the time to pay more attention to the wound in the head, all of these other activities were under way. I was busy connecting up an apparatus to respire for the patient, exerting manual pressure on the breathing bag or anesthesia apparatus, trying to feel for a pulse in the neck, and then reaching up and feeling for one in the temporal area, seeing about connecting the cardioscope or directing its being connected, and then turned attention to the wound in the head.
Now, Dr. Clark had begun closed chest cardiac massage at this time and I was aware of the magnitude of the wound, because with each compression of the chest, there was a great rush of blood from the skull wound. Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any wounds immediately below the massive loss of skull which you have described?
Dr. JENKINS - On the right side?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes, sir.
Dr. JENKINS - No--I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process.
Mr. SPECTER - The autopsy report discloses no such development, Dr. Jenkins.
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I was feeling for---I was palpating here for a pulse to see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so I thought there was a wound there also.


Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Jenkins, would your observation of the wound and your characterization of it as an exit hole be consistent with a set of facts which I will ask you to assume for purposes of giving me your view or opinion.
Assume, first of all, if you will, that President Kennedy had a wound on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, measuring 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, and that the missile was a 6.5 mm. jacketed bullet fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second and approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, and that after entering the President's body at the point indicated, the missile traveled between two strap muscles and through a fascia plane without violating the pleura cavity, and then struck the right side of the trachea and exited through the throat, would the throat wound which you observed be consistent with such a wound inflicted in the manner I have just described?
Dr. JENKINS - As far as I know, it wouldn't be inconsistent with it, Mr. Specter.
Mr. SPECTER - What has your experience been with gunshot wounds, that is, to what extent have you had experience with such wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, having been Chief of the Anesthesia Service here for this 16 years, we have a rather large trauma emergency service, and so I see gunshot wounds many times a week. I'm afraid I couldn't hazard a guess at the moment as to how many we see a year, and I'm afraid probably if I knew, I would not like to admit to this number, but I do go further in saying that my main interest is not in the tracks of the wounds. My main interest is what physiological changes that they have caused to the patient that I am to anesthetize or a member of the department is to anesthetize, what has happened to the cardiovascular system, respiratory, and neurological, and so I am aware of the wounds of entrance and exit only by a peripheral part of my knowledge and activities during the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any formal training in ballistics or in exit wounds or entrance wounds--bullet wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - No, I have not.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you talked to any representative of the Federal Government at any time prior to today?
Dr. JENKINS - Oh, there was a man whose name I don't remember now, who showed what looked like the proper credentials from the FBI, who came to ask only whether the report I had submitted to Mr. Price for the hospital record or for Mr. Price's record constituted all the reports I had. That's the only time and that was the extent of our conversation, I think.

Dr. JENKINS - Well, from my knowledge of the wound in the neck, this would not have been fatal, except for one thing, and that is--you have not told me whether the wound with its point of entrance and point of exit had contacted the vertebral column in its course?
Mr. SPECTER - It did not.
Dr. JENKINS - In that case I would not expect this wound to have been fatal.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your view, Dr. Jenkins, as to whether the wounds which you observed were caused by one or two bullets?
Dr. JENKINS - I felt quite sure at the time that there must have been two bullets--two missiles.
Mr. SPECTER - And, Dr. Jenkins, what was your reason for that?
Dr. JENKINS - Because the wound with the exploded area of the scalp, as I interpreted it being exploded, I would interpret it being a wound of exit, and the appearance of the wound in the neck, and I also thought it was a wound of exit.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever changed any of your original opinions in connection with the wounds received by President Kennedy?
Dr. JENKINS - I guess so. The first day I had thought because of his pneumothorax, that his wound must have gone--that the one bullet must have traversed his pleura, must have gotten into his lung cavity, his chest cavity, I mean, and from what you say now, I know it did not go that way. I thought it did.
Mr. SPECTER - Aside from that opinion, now, have any of your other opinions about the nature of his wounds or the sources of the wounds been changed in any way?
Dr. JENKINS - No; one other. I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a wound there (indicating).
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating the left temporal area?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; the left temporal, which could have been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating), but you have answered that for me. This was my only other question about it.
Mr. SPECTER - So, that those two points are the only ones on which your opinions have been changed since the views you originally formulated?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.
Mr. SPECTER - On the President's injuries?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.

Ass meet 7.

The truth shall make you free.

The truth exposes your defeat.

kennedy witnesses bethesda
JAMES CURTIS JENKINS: the other laboratory technologist who worked with the autopsy team on JFK, Jenkins was at that time in a Ph.D. program in pathology. ( High Treason II , p. 226) The HSCA's Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy reported that Jenkins "said he saw a head wound in the "...middle temporal region back to the occipital." (HSCA interview with Curtis Jenkins, Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy, 8-29-77. JFK Collection, RG 233, Document #002193, p.4) He told author, David Lifton, "I would say that parietal and occipital section on the right side of the head--it was a large gaping area...It had just been crushed, and kind of blown apart, toward the rear." (Lifton, Best Evidence ", p. 616) When Lifton told Jenkins that photographs showed that the back of the head was essentially intact, except for a small bullet entry wound at the top, he responded, "That's not possible, That is totally--you know, there's no possible way. Okay? It's not possible." ( Best Evidence , p. 617) Jenkins told Livingstone, "Everything from just above the right ear back was fragmented...there was (an absence of scalp and bone) along the midline just above the occipital area...this (wound) would not have been low enough to have gotten into the cerebellum." ( High Treason II , p. 228). Jenkins' views, whether as given by the HSCA, Livingstone, or Lifton, are noteworthy by their consistency, and as Jenkins was in a Ph.D. pathology program, his anatomic specificity is of value.

the truth exposes his defeat in the fact he blatanlty ignores what all the dallas doctors said,what witnesse saw,has been caught lying about jean hill and cyril wecht,but most importantly,ignores the photographic evidence taken that day tof multiple bullets photographed that could not be traced back to oswald proving there were MULTIPLE shooters as well as ignoring the warren commission members committed treason altering witness testimonys. as well as ignoring the HSCA investigation concluded there was a second shooter.

disinfo troll exposed.

 

[Rockland]

{huge wall of 7-Upchuck's doe snot removed}

the truth exposes his defeat

{more bat guano disposed of}

disinfo troll exposed.

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

His actual testimony, sworn: Testimony Of Dr. Marion Thomas Jenkins

Mr. SPECTER - Now, going back to the wound which you observed in the neck, did you see that wound before the tracheotomy was performed?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; I did, because I was just connecting up the endotracheal tube to the machine at the time and that's when Dr. Carrico said there was a wound in the neck and I looked at it.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you describe that wound as specifically as you can?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I'm afraid my description of it would not be as accurate, of course, as that of the surgeons who were doing the tracheotomy, because my look was a quick look before connecting up the endotracheal tube to the apparatus to help in ventilation and respiration for the patient, and I was aware later in the day, as I should have put it in the report, that I thought this was a wound of exit because it was not a clean wound, and by "clean" clearly demarcated, round, punctate wound which is the usual wound of an entrance wound, made by a missile and at some speed. Of course, entrance wounds with a lobbing type missile, can make a jagged wound also, but I was of the impression and I recognized I had the impression it was an exit wound. However, my mental appreciation for a wound--for the wound in the neck, I believe, was sort of--was overshadowed by recognition of the wound in the scalp and skull plate.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you now described the wound in the neck as specifically as you can at this moment?
Dr. JENKINS - I believe so.
Mr. SPECTER - Now, will you now describe the wound which you observed in the head?
Dr. JENKINS - Almost by the time I was--had the time to pay more attention to the wound in the head, all of these other activities were under way. I was busy connecting up an apparatus to respire for the patient, exerting manual pressure on the breathing bag or anesthesia apparatus, trying to feel for a pulse in the neck, and then reaching up and feeling for one in the temporal area, seeing about connecting the cardioscope or directing its being connected, and then turned attention to the wound in the head.
Now, Dr. Clark had begun closed chest cardiac massage at this time and I was aware of the magnitude of the wound, because with each compression of the chest, there was a great rush of blood from the skull wound. Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound; there was part of the brain tissue, broken fragments of the brain tissue on the drapes of the cart on which the President lay.
Mr. SPECTER - Did you observe any wounds immediately below the massive loss of skull which you have described?
Dr. JENKINS - On the right side?
Mr. SPECTER - Yes, sir.
Dr. JENKINS - No--I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline and right above the zygomatic process.
Mr. SPECTER - The autopsy report discloses no such development, Dr. Jenkins.
Dr. JENKINS - Well, I was feeling for---I was palpating here for a pulse to see whether the closed chest cardiac massage was effective or not and this probably was some blood that had come from the other point and so I thought there was a wound there also.


Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Jenkins, would your observation of the wound and your characterization of it as an exit hole be consistent with a set of facts which I will ask you to assume for purposes of giving me your view or opinion.
Assume, first of all, if you will, that President Kennedy had a wound on the upper right posterior thorax just above the upper border of the scapula, measuring 14 cm. from the tip of the right acromion process and 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process, and that the missile was a 6.5 mm. jacketed bullet fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second and approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President, and that after entering the President's body at the point indicated, the missile traveled between two strap muscles and through a fascia plane without violating the pleura cavity, and then struck the right side of the trachea and exited through the throat, would the throat wound which you observed be consistent with such a wound inflicted in the manner I have just described?
Dr. JENKINS - As far as I know, it wouldn't be inconsistent with it, Mr. Specter.
Mr. SPECTER - What has your experience been with gunshot wounds, that is, to what extent have you had experience with such wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - Well, having been Chief of the Anesthesia Service here for this 16 years, we have a rather large trauma emergency service, and so I see gunshot wounds many times a week. I'm afraid I couldn't hazard a guess at the moment as to how many we see a year, and I'm afraid probably if I knew, I would not like to admit to this number, but I do go further in saying that my main interest is not in the tracks of the wounds. My main interest is what physiological changes that they have caused to the patient that I am to anesthetize or a member of the department is to anesthetize, what has happened to the cardiovascular system, respiratory, and neurological, and so I am aware of the wounds of entrance and exit only by a peripheral part of my knowledge and activities during the time.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever had any formal training in ballistics or in exit wounds or entrance wounds--bullet wounds?
Dr. JENKINS - No, I have not.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you talked to any representative of the Federal Government at any time prior to today?
Dr. JENKINS - Oh, there was a man whose name I don't remember now, who showed what looked like the proper credentials from the FBI, who came to ask only whether the report I had submitted to Mr. Price for the hospital record or for Mr. Price's record constituted all the reports I had. That's the only time and that was the extent of our conversation, I think.

Dr. JENKINS - Well, from my knowledge of the wound in the neck, this would not have been fatal, except for one thing, and that is--you have not told me whether the wound with its point of entrance and point of exit had contacted the vertebral column in its course?
Mr. SPECTER - It did not.
Dr. JENKINS - In that case I would not expect this wound to have been fatal.
Mr. SPECTER - What is your view, Dr. Jenkins, as to whether the wounds which you observed were caused by one or two bullets?
Dr. JENKINS - I felt quite sure at the time that there must have been two bullets--two missiles.
Mr. SPECTER - And, Dr. Jenkins, what was your reason for that?
Dr. JENKINS - Because the wound with the exploded area of the scalp, as I interpreted it being exploded, I would interpret it being a wound of exit, and the appearance of the wound in the neck, and I also thought it was a wound of exit.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever changed any of your original opinions in connection with the wounds received by President Kennedy?
Dr. JENKINS - I guess so. The first day I had thought because of his pneumothorax, that his wound must have gone--that the one bullet must have traversed his pleura, must have gotten into his lung cavity, his chest cavity, I mean, and from what you say now, I know it did not go that way. I thought it did.
Mr. SPECTER - Aside from that opinion, now, have any of your other opinions about the nature of his wounds or the sources of the wounds been changed in any way?
Dr. JENKINS - No; one other. I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal area, right above the zygomatic bone in the hairline because there was blood there and I thought there might have been a wound there (indicating).
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating the left temporal area?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes; the left temporal, which could have been a point of entrance and exit here (indicating), but you have answered that for me. This was my only other question about it.
Mr. SPECTER - So, that those two points are the only ones on which your opinions have been changed since the views you originally formulated?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.
Mr. SPECTER - On the President's injuries?
Dr. JENKINS - Yes, I think so.

Ass meet 7.

The truth shall make you free.

The truth exposes your defeat.

kennedy witnesses bethesda
JAMES CURTIS JENKINS: the other laboratory technologist who worked with the autopsy team on JFK, Jenkins was at that time in a Ph.D. program in pathology. ( High Treason II , p. 226) The HSCA's Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy reported that Jenkins "said he saw a head wound in the "...middle temporal region back to the occipital." (HSCA interview with Curtis Jenkins, Jim Kelly and Andy Purdy, 8-29-77. JFK Collection, RG 233, Document #002193, p.4) He told author, David Lifton, "I would say that parietal and occipital section on the right side of the head--it was a large gaping area...It had just been crushed, and kind of blown apart, toward the rear." (Lifton, Best Evidence ", p. 616) When Lifton told Jenkins that photographs showed that the back of the head was essentially intact, except for a small bullet entry wound at the top, he responded, "That's not possible, That is totally--you know, there's no possible way. Okay? It's not possible." ( Best Evidence , p. 617) Jenkins told Livingstone, "Everything from just above the right ear back was fragmented...there was (an absence of scalp and bone) along the midline just above the occipital area...this (wound) would not have been low enough to have gotten into the cerebellum." ( High Treason II , p. 228). Jenkins' views, whether as given by the HSCA, Livingstone, or Lifton, are noteworthy by their consistency, and as Jenkins was in a Ph.D. pathology program, his anatomic specificity is of value.

the truth exposes his defeat in the fact he blatanlty ignores what all the dallas doctors said,what witnesse saw,has been caught lying about jean hill and cyril wecht,but most importantly,ignores the photographic evidence taken that day tof multiple bullets photographed that could not be traced back to oswald proving there were MULTIPLE shooters as well as ignoring the warren commission members committed treason altering witness testimonys. as well as ignoring the HSCA investigation concluded there was a second shooter.

disinfo troll exposed.

Sent from my NWO shill phone using TapYourLine II.

 

[Freewill]

Could he actually see the back of JFK's head? No, he says he couldn't.

ROBERT McCLELLAND, MD In testimony at Parkland taken before Arlan
Specter on 3-21-64, McClelland described the head wound as, "...I
could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right
posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had
been shattered...so that the parietal bone was protruded up through
the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior
half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its
lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such
a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself
and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue,
posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been
blasted out...." (WC--V6:33) Later he said, "...unfortunately the loss
of blood and the loss of cerebral and cerebellar tissues were so great
that the efforts (to save Kennedy's life) were of no avail."
(Emphasis added throughout) (WC--V6:34) McClelland made clear that he
thought the rear wound in the skull was an exit wound (WC-V6:35,37).
McClelland ascribed the cause of death to, "...massive head injuries
with loss of large amounts of cerebral and cerebellar tissues and
massive blood loss." (WC--V6:34)

McClelland's unwillingness to change his recollection has recently
attracted detractors in the aftermath of Charles Crenshaw's book,
"Conspiracy of Silence". McClelland told Posner, "I saw a piece of
cerebellum fall out on the stretcher." (Posner, G. "CC.", p. 311,
paper). To dismiss McClelland, Posner quotes Malcolm Perry, "I am
astonished that Bob (McClelland) would say that....It shows such poor
judgment, and usually he has such good judgment." (Posner G. "Case
Closed". p. 311, paper.) Perry's own inconsistent and unreliable
memory lessens the merit of his opinions of others, as we will see.

<Quote off>---------------------------------------------

It's interesting that Aguliar used McClelland as a "back of the head
witness in spite of the fact that McClelland *explicitly* said he
could not see the back of the head!

From McClelland's Warren Commission testimony.

<Quote on>-----------------------------------------------

Dr. MCCLELLAND. As I took the position at the head of the table that I
have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in
such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and
I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been
extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of
the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp
and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as
well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral
haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way
that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior
cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted
out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly
from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted
open.

[Then later]

Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe anything in the nature of a wound on
his body other than that which you have already described for me?
Dr. McCLELLAND. No.
Mr. SPECTER. In what position was President Kennedy maintained
from the time you saw him until the pronouncement of death ?
Dr. McCLELLAND. On his back on the cart.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. On his what?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dr. McCLELLAND. On his back on the stretcher.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. Was he on the stretcher at all times?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dr. McCLELLAND. Yes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. In the trauma room No. 1 you described, is there any
table onto which he could be placed from the stretcher?
Dr. McCLELLAND. No; generally we do not move patients from the
stretcher until they are ready to go into the operating room and then
they are moved onto the operating table.
Mr. SPECTER. Well, in fact, was he left on the stretcher all
during the course of these procedures until he was pronounced dead?
Dr. McCLELLAND. That's right.
Mr. SPECTER. Then, at any time was he positioned in a way where
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
you could have seen the back of his body?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dr. McCLELLAND. No.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any gunshot wound on his back?
Dr. McCLELLAND. No.

[Then later]

Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe the condition of the back of the
President's head ?
Dr. McCLELLAND. Well, partially; not, of course, as I say, we did

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
not lift his head up since it was so greatly damaged. We attempted to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
avoid moving him any more than it was absolutely necessary, but I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
could see, of course, all the extent of the wound.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. You saw a large opening which you have already
described?
Dr. McCLELLAND. I saw the large opening which I have described.

<Quote off>----------------------------------------------------

So McClelland saw "all the extent of the wound" from his place at the
head of the table, looking down into the skull, while Kennedy's head
was flat against the pad on the gurney.

People often cite as evidence that McClelland was a "back of the head"
witness a drawing that appeared in Josiah Thompson's book "Six Seconds
in Dallas," that shows the back of the head (mostly occipital bone)
blown out.

But Thompson has made it clear, in a variety of contexts, that the
drawing was neither drawn by McClelland, nor approved by the doctor.

Rather, it was done by a medical illustrator based on McClelland's
*verbal* description.

Interestingly, the drawing showed *no* damage to the top of
the head. This should be an embarrassment to people like Aguilar, who
believe there most certainly *was* damage to the top of the head.

But McClelland has not been consistent in his drawings. In THE MEN
WHO KILLED KENNEDY he drew the head wound as a deep furrow from the
back of Kennedy's head to the front, on the right hand side.

In fact, McClelland has hardly been the model of consistency that
Aguilar claims.

In 1988, under the auspices of NOVA, he and three other doctors from
Parkland went to the National Archives to look at the original autopsy
photos and x-rays. Check out this URL:

Parkland Doctors Confront Autopsy Materials

Then there is the following account of his 1992 testimony, as posted
here by Joe Durnavich:

>Tracy Riddle posted the following a while back, taken from a conference
>hosted by Livingstone. McCelland's statement that he stood above the
>wound looking down into it doesn't reconcile with his claim of seeing the
>wound in back of the head. Given McCelland's statement below, how could
>he see into a wound in back of the head such that he could see a large
>cavity that extended "down into the head" with one third of the brain
>blasted out?

>--- Begin Quote -----------

>Dallas Medical Conference: Researcher H.E. Livingstone gathered together
>in the Grand Ballroom of the Stouffer Hotel in Dallas - for the first
>time - several members of the Parkland and Bethesda teams for a
>discussion, 4/6/1991. It was filmed for a future documentary. Those who
>attended included: James Jenkins, Phillip Williams, Floyd Riebe, Paul
>O'Connor, Aubrey Rike, Robert McClelland, and Audrey Bell.

>...

>McClelland made it clear that about one third of the brain had been
>blasted out. "That there was not only a horrible gaping wound but that
>it was a cavity that extended down into the head. And as I stood there
>holding the retractor, I was looking down into it all the time. I was no
>more than eighteen inches away from the wound all the time, standing
>just above it, which was ten to fifteen minutes at least...And during
>that time I had a strong impression that a portion of what appeared to
>be the cerebellum fell backward through the wound onto the scalp and
>hair that was hanging back from the head...The way the wound was
>described by Mr. Jenkins squares very well with what I saw. I think that
>the reason my wound [in his drawing made years before] seems lower was
>because" of the hair hanging down over part of it. "I could not tell
>what percentage of the scalp was missing or still present over the
>wound. At the National Archives [for Nova] it was my assumption - and it
>was just an assumption - that there was enough of the flap left to pull
>up over the back portion of the wound and to hide the back portion and
>the front portion of the wound, not because it was covering the front
>portion of the wound, but simply from the camera angle it didn't permit
>that portion of the wound to be seen." The witnesses remembered a
>"graying" area on the right side of the skull above the ear.

So it seems he is backing away from the original drawing, and
reasonably so.

Then there is the fact that, speaking before a Rotary Club in 2013, he
said "He was in terrible shape; the right side of his brain had
been blown out." Not back. Side.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/aguilar/McClelland.pdf

In sum, McClelland has been about as inconsistent as other doctors
that Aguilar believes are now lying about what they saw. Does that
make him a liar? No, just a normal witness.

Which is why witness testimony is not a reliable means of resolving
medical issues like this.

Testimony found here: Testimony Of Dr. Robert Nelson Mcclelland

Now if you do need more, and you apparently do, here is the HSCA evalutation of the x-ray evidence that clears up the many various "opinions" of where the head was damaged. It also evaluates if the xrays were faked.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/autopsy2.txt

(610) To summarize, the skull and torso radiographs taken at
autopsy match the available ante mortem films of the President in
such a wealth of intricate morphological detail that there can be no
reasonable doubt that they are in fact X-rays of John F. Kennedy, and
no other person.

 

[Bfgrn]

Could he actually see the back of JFK's head? No, he says he couldn't.

ROBERT McCLELLAND, MD In testimony at Parkland taken before Arlan
Specter on 3-21-64, McClelland described the head wound as, "...I
could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right
posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had
been shattered...so that the parietal bone was protruded up through
the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior
half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its
lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such
a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself
and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue,
posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been
blasted out...." (WC--V6:33) Later he said, "...unfortunately the loss
of blood and the loss of cerebral and cerebellar tissues were so great
that the efforts (to save Kennedy's life) were of no avail."
(Emphasis added throughout) (WC--V6:34) McClelland made clear that he
thought the rear wound in the skull was an exit wound (WC-V6:35,37).
McClelland ascribed the cause of death to, "...massive head injuries
with loss of large amounts of cerebral and cerebellar tissues and
massive blood loss." (WC--V6:34)

McClelland's unwillingness to change his recollection has recently
attracted detractors in the aftermath of Charles Crenshaw's book,
"Conspiracy of Silence". McClelland told Posner, "I saw a piece of
cerebellum fall out on the stretcher." (Posner, G. "CC.", p. 311,
paper). To dismiss McClelland, Posner quotes Malcolm Perry, "I am
astonished that Bob (McClelland) would say that....It shows such poor
judgment, and usually he has such good judgment." (Posner G. "Case
Closed". p. 311, paper.) Perry's own inconsistent and unreliable
memory lessens the merit of his opinions of others, as we will see.

<Quote off>---------------------------------------------

It's interesting that Aguliar used McClelland as a "back of the head
witness in spite of the fact that McClelland *explicitly* said he
could not see the back of the head!

From McClelland's Warren Commission testimony.

<Quote on>-----------------------------------------------

Dr. MCCLELLAND. As I took the position at the head of the table that I
have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in
such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and
I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been
extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of
the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp
and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as
well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral
haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way
that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior
cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted
out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly
from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted
open.

[Then later]

Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe anything in the nature of a wound on
his body other than that which you have already described for me?
Dr. McCLELLAND. No.
Mr. SPECTER. In what position was President Kennedy maintained
from the time you saw him until the pronouncement of death ?
Dr. McCLELLAND. On his back on the cart.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. On his what?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dr. McCLELLAND. On his back on the stretcher.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. Was he on the stretcher at all times?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dr. McCLELLAND. Yes.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. In the trauma room No. 1 you described, is there any
table onto which he could be placed from the stretcher?
Dr. McCLELLAND. No; generally we do not move patients from the
stretcher until they are ready to go into the operating room and then
they are moved onto the operating table.
Mr. SPECTER. Well, in fact, was he left on the stretcher all
during the course of these procedures until he was pronounced dead?
Dr. McCLELLAND. That's right.
Mr. SPECTER. Then, at any time was he positioned in a way where
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
you could have seen the back of his body?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Dr. McCLELLAND. No.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe any gunshot wound on his back?
Dr. McCLELLAND. No.

[Then later]

Mr. SPECTER. Did you observe the condition of the back of the
President's head ?
Dr. McCLELLAND. Well, partially; not, of course, as I say, we did

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
not lift his head up since it was so greatly damaged. We attempted to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
avoid moving him any more than it was absolutely necessary, but I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
could see, of course, all the extent of the wound.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. SPECTER. You saw a large opening which you have already
described?
Dr. McCLELLAND. I saw the large opening which I have described.

<Quote off>----------------------------------------------------

So McClelland saw "all the extent of the wound" from his place at the
head of the table, looking down into the skull, while Kennedy's head
was flat against the pad on the gurney.

People often cite as evidence that McClelland was a "back of the head"
witness a drawing that appeared in Josiah Thompson's book "Six Seconds
in Dallas," that shows the back of the head (mostly occipital bone)
blown out.

But Thompson has made it clear, in a variety of contexts, that the
drawing was neither drawn by McClelland, nor approved by the doctor.

Rather, it was done by a medical illustrator based on McClelland's
*verbal* description.

Interestingly, the drawing showed *no* damage to the top of
the head. This should be an embarrassment to people like Aguilar, who
believe there most certainly *was* damage to the top of the head.

But McClelland has not been consistent in his drawings. In THE MEN
WHO KILLED KENNEDY he drew the head wound as a deep furrow from the
back of Kennedy's head to the front, on the right hand side.

In fact, McClelland has hardly been the model of consistency that
Aguilar claims.

In 1988, under the auspices of NOVA, he and three other doctors from
Parkland went to the National Archives to look at the original autopsy
photos and x-rays. Check out this URL:

Parkland Doctors Confront Autopsy Materials

Then there is the following account of his 1992 testimony, as posted
here by Joe Durnavich:

>Tracy Riddle posted the following a while back, taken from a conference
>hosted by Livingstone. McCelland's statement that he stood above the
>wound looking down into it doesn't reconcile with his claim of seeing the
>wound in back of the head. Given McCelland's statement below, how could
>he see into a wound in back of the head such that he could see a large
>cavity that extended "down into the head" with one third of the brain
>blasted out?

>--- Begin Quote -----------

>Dallas Medical Conference: Researcher H.E. Livingstone gathered together
>in the Grand Ballroom of the Stouffer Hotel in Dallas - for the first
>time - several members of the Parkland and Bethesda teams for a
>discussion, 4/6/1991. It was filmed for a future documentary. Those who
>attended included: James Jenkins, Phillip Williams, Floyd Riebe, Paul
>O'Connor, Aubrey Rike, Robert McClelland, and Audrey Bell.

>...

>McClelland made it clear that about one third of the brain had been
>blasted out. "That there was not only a horrible gaping wound but that
>it was a cavity that extended down into the head. And as I stood there
>holding the retractor, I was looking down into it all the time. I was no
>more than eighteen inches away from the wound all the time, standing
>just above it, which was ten to fifteen minutes at least...And during
>that time I had a strong impression that a portion of what appeared to
>be the cerebellum fell backward through the wound onto the scalp and
>hair that was hanging back from the head...The way the wound was
>described by Mr. Jenkins squares very well with what I saw. I think that
>the reason my wound [in his drawing made years before] seems lower was
>because" of the hair hanging down over part of it. "I could not tell
>what percentage of the scalp was missing or still present over the
>wound. At the National Archives [for Nova] it was my assumption - and it
>was just an assumption - that there was enough of the flap left to pull
>up over the back portion of the wound and to hide the back portion and
>the front portion of the wound, not because it was covering the front
>portion of the wound, but simply from the camera angle it didn't permit
>that portion of the wound to be seen." The witnesses remembered a
>"graying" area on the right side of the skull above the ear.

So it seems he is backing away from the original drawing, and
reasonably so.

Then there is the fact that, speaking before a Rotary Club in 2013, he
said "He was in terrible shape; the right side of his brain had
been blown out." Not back. Side.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/aguilar/McClelland.pdf

In sum, McClelland has been about as inconsistent as other doctors
that Aguilar believes are now lying about what they saw. Does that
make him a liar? No, just a normal witness.

Which is why witness testimony is not a reliable means of resolving
medical issues like this.

Testimony found here: Testimony Of Dr. Robert Nelson Mcclelland

Now if you do need more, and you apparently do, here is the HSCA evalutation of the x-ray evidence that clears up the many various "opinions" of where the head was damaged. It also evaluates if the xrays were faked.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/autopsy2.txt

(610) To summarize, the skull and torso radiographs taken at
autopsy match the available ante mortem films of the President in
such a wealth of intricate morphological detail that there can be no
reasonable doubt that they are in fact X-rays of John F. Kennedy, and
no other person.

You have found your patron saint. EVERYTHING from John McAdams comes the the same end. Oswald acted alone and the Warren Commission was a REAL investigation...

SOME COMMENTS ON JOHN MCADAMS’ KENNEDY ASSASSINATION HOME PAGE

You should read this book...

Warren Commission