Mockup of JFK's headwounds

[dankbaar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR2A4AT9 ... re=related

[Kit Carp]

It's a very nice model....clear and logical.The one big mystery remaining, really, is how all those witnesses at Parkland, and many at Bethesda managed to not see the main portion of damage to the top of the skull. They nearly all reported the rearward orange sized hole, and quite accurately and independantly of one another drew pictures of how his looked....but two score of these witnesses who got an up close look at the state of Kennedy's head did not see the wound pictured so dramatically in Zapruder and modeled here...and some of these people were also at Bethesda!Why is that?There really are two, and only two possible answers.1. The top of skull major wound was somehow hidden by the time Kennedy got to Parkland Hospital. This would require some sort of massive flap that could hide this entire, gigantic wound from the surgeons at Parkland. One could theorize Jackie closing it. The problem with this scenerio is that no one remembers or describes this existing flap at Bethesda. Humes and Boswell clearly state the bone is missing altogether, and Boswell even drew two diagrams showing the massive, gaping hole the doctors encountered. It was not hidden according to them. It was completely visible.This all leaves this theory impossibly weird. What happened to this flap, if it wasnt there when they did the autopsy? Wouldnt it have to be in the coffin? How is it all those bone fragments were brought in later in the autopsy, if the wound was closed to the point it was invisible? None of it makes sense....and, if one views the x-rays, you still are left with a huge conspiracy because this does not in any way match the wounds described by witnesses, nor the autopsy report.2. Scenerio two suggests the "real" bullet wound fractured Kennedy's head pretty badly, but only created a small entrance wound in his forehead, and the orange sized wound in the rear, which is really what one would expect to happen with a hit like this. The Zapruder film clearly shows alteration with the blacked out area on the rear of the President's earlier brown head of hair. You can clearly see the crisp edges of the artwork added to the film. Hollywood special effects experts have all agreed it is artwork added to the film.The mass of tissue...(the "flap).. might be faked as well, and the actual "big wound" on top was created after the body left Dallas, which is really the only explanation for the differing accounts...some with just the rear head wound, and others with the rear head wound plus the huge damage on top.Neither of these two explanations are "easy to swallow". There isnt any other sane conclusion to reach that I have heard offered. The idiotic notion that 40 mostly medical witnesses all peered into a non-existant hole in the rear of Kennedy's head oozing brain matter from the lower rear brain, all with mathcing independant recollections, many written in reports the day of the assassination, is moronic.The fact that the x-rays and photos and autopsy report each tend to support seperate, different, non supporting conclusions, I think, goes a long ways towards pointing to which of the above explnations is the "actual" event which took place. I tend to think that sculpted model represents what the wounds to Kennedy's head looked like, after someone messed with the evidence, later at Bethesda, and not at the time of the shooting. I believe the top of the President's head was fractured, but complete. The conspirators couldnt allow a small entrance wound in the front of his forehead, and a neat orange size rear blowout, so they tampered with the evidence. Lifton always thought it happened en route to Bethesda. Horne places this happening just before the "reported" autopsy, at Bethesda. Certainly, there are a number of witnesses at Bethesda who thought the President had only the rearward wound. I think it's hard to state for certain, where the tampering took place.But, Dr. Boswell, who was the 2nd doctor at Bethesda helping Humes, at his ARRB testimony, calls that suspicious "v" shaped stright line that goes into the Presdient's forehead an "incision".That is very interesting, and telling, if one looks up the word incision in a medical dictionary.Incision: A cut. When making an incision, a surgeon is making a cut.Definitions:1. A cut; a surgical wound; a division of the body parts, usually made with a knife. Bingo!

[Dealey Joe]

[tom jeffers]

i agree, i do not think his whole upper skull was missing. i think there were missing fragments and the whole head was like a cracked egg with only the skin and hair helping it retain some shape. kennedy always had that swoopy hairdo that was long in front and short in back and he constantly used his hand to brush his hair back out of his eyes. that crop of hair along with any residual pieces of hair and skull is what we see in dealey joes pictures. it just looks like a cracked egg that has the white oozing out. it sounds gross but accurate to me.

[ThomZajac]

Kit Carp wrote:It's a very nice model....clear and logical.The one big mystery remaining, really, is how all those witnesses at Parkland, and many at Bethesda managed to not see the main portion of damage to the top of the skull. They nearly all reported the rearward orange sized hole, and quite accurately and independantly of one another drew pictures of how his looked....but two score of these witnesses who got an up close look at the state of Kennedy's head did not see the wound pictured so dramatically in Zapruder and modeled here...and some of these people were also at Bethesda!Why is that?There really are two, and only two possible answers.1. The top of skull major wound was somehow hidden by the time Kennedy got to Parkland Hospital. This would require some sort of massive flap that could hide this entire, gigantic wound from the surgeons at Parkland. One could theorize Jackie closing it. The problem with this scenerio is that no one remembers or describes this existing flap at Bethesda. Humes and Boswell clearly state the bone is missing altogether, and Boswell even drew two diagrams showing the massive, gaping hole the doctors encountered. It was not hidden according to them. It was completely visible.This all leaves this theory impossibly weird. What happened to this flap, if it wasnt there when they did the autopsy? Wouldnt it have to be in the coffin? How is it all those bone fragments were brought in later in the autopsy, if the wound was closed to the point it was invisible? None of it makes sense....and, if one views the x-rays, you still are left with a huge conspiracy because this does not in any way match the wounds described by witnesses, nor the autopsy report.2. Scenerio two suggests the "real" bullet wound fractured Kennedy's head pretty badly, but only created a small entrance wound in his forehead, and the orange sized wound in the rear, which is really what one would expect to happen with a hit like this. The Zapruder film clearly shows alteration with the blacked out area on the rear of the President's earlier brown head of hair. You can clearly see the crisp edges of the artwork added to the film. Hollywood special effects experts have all agreed it is artwork added to the film.The mass of tissue...(the "flap).. might be faked as well, and the actual "big wound" on top was created after the body left Dallas, which is really the only explanation for the differing accounts...some with just the rear head wound, and others with the rear head wound plus the huge damage on top.Neither of these two explanations are "easy to swallow". There isnt any other sane conclusion to reach that I have heard offered. The idiotic notion that 40 mostly medical witnesses all peered into a non-existant hole in the rear of Kennedy's head oozing brain matter from the lower rear brain, all with mathcing independant recollections, many written in reports the day of the assassination, is moronic.The fact that the x-rays and photos and autopsy report each tend to support seperate, different, non supporting conclusions, I think, goes a long ways towards pointing to which of the above explnations is the "actual" event which took place. I tend to think that sculpted model represents what the wounds to Kennedy's head looked like, after someone messed with the evidence, later at Bethesda, and not at the time of the shooting. I believe the top of the President's head was fractured, but complete. The conspirators couldnt allow a small entrance wound in the front of his forehead, and a neat orange size rear blowout, so they tampered with the evidence. Lifton always thought it happened en route to Bethesda. Horne places this happening just before the "reported" autopsy, at Bethesda. Certainly, there are a number of witnesses at Bethesda who thought the President had only the rearward wound. I think it's hard to state for certain, where the tampering took place.But, Dr. Boswell, who was the 2nd doctor at Bethesda helping Humes, at his ARRB testimony, calls that suspicious "v" shaped stright line that goes into the Presdient's forehead an "incision".That is very interesting, and telling, if one looks up the word incision in a medical dictionary.Incision: A cut. When making an incision, a surgeon is making a cut.Definitions:1. A cut; a surgical wound; a division of the body parts, usually made with a knife. Bingo!Excellent post, Kit, thanks for doing it so well and saving me the trouble (and mine wouldn't have been as good).The witnesses at Parkland- most of them medically trained and experienced- provide 'the best evidence' in this case because the body quite clearly fell into the hands of the conspirators after leaving the emergency room.This is one of the beefs I have with Wim: I have asked him on numerous occasions his viewpoint on the matter of body alteration and has refused to give a reply (if I have somehow missed it, I offer my apologies). Wim, could you please let me/us know where you stand on this? And I would like to note that for those of us who have concluded that JFK's body was indeed altered after leaving the emergency room, this does not damage James Files credibility. (Same is true regarding the credibility of the Zapruder film, but I know how you feel about that). Why the deafening silence on this matter? Thom

[dankbaar]

I believe the wounds were worked on to remove ballistic evidence (bullets/fragments). It's clear for example that the throat wound was made bigger. I don't believe the wounds were altered for the purpose of making them look different. That is virtually impossible. It would be a plastic surgery of hours. The autopsy pictures were definitely altered. http://jfkmurdersolved.com/autopsy.htm(see also the video there)

[ThomZajac]

Thanks, Wim, it's good to finally get that squared away.As for me, I'm going with the wounds being precisely what the multitude of witnesses reported at Parkland.Thom

[Kit Carp]

The way to logically consider how the wounds might have been "altered" to make them look different, I think, isnt a matter of covering up. What happened, I think, is that the conspirators "muddied" the evidence as they removed bullets or fragments. They did this by simply and crudely removing skull between the rearward orange sized opening in the President's head and the entry wound in his hairline up front. Boswell's original autopsy notes/sketch actually shows where the incisions they made are. Those two "lines" or "incisions" extend down on either side of Kennedy's head into his face. If you have ever seen how a person's head is autopsied, this is just the sort of incisions that are made, so you can pull the scalp away to get to the skull beneath.(On this link, scroll down to Boswell's Autopsy top of head drawing, and Boswell's drawing for the ARRB (back view, defect highlighted. Note that Boswell claims all this skull was gone!)http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt ... Q9QEwAAThe conspirator then removed the skull on the top right side, so that it ran into the exit wound on the rear of the head. This turned a clear wound of exit into a part of what Boswell describes and drew as a massive, all encompassing wound that covers the back, and the entire right side of Kennedy's head nearly to the front. Finally, they disguised the entry wound in the front by simply peeling back a triangular patch of scalp, and removing the offending bone that showed the entry shot. You can easily see this incision in the above pictures earlier in this thread. The entry wound had to have been very small and neat, or the Parkland doctors would likely have seen it...and none of 'em describe the easy to spot bat-triangle thing we can see so easily in the photo. How is that possible? It isnt!Oh, and very probably, they simply went into the front trach incision, and probed in and down, and found that bullet sitting where Humes describes a "bruise" on top of the President's lung...which explains the missing bullet from the neck wound logically. The incision in the throat was enlarged, by every account. They had to make it bigger, probing the wound for that bullet.That bullet would likely have been of smaller caliber, and likely some military, non frangible, solid sort of thing...similar in makeup to that maligned carcano, in my opinion.No need for fancy explanations. This is the most logical, straightforward way to explain the differences in what a great many witnesses saw, and what the autopsy report doctors stated in their report.The only medical wounds this does not take into account are the back wound or wounds, and the low head entrance wound. I feel there is insufficent evidence to state one way or the other for sure whether these were actual bullet wounds or man-made after the fact inventions. A second bullet wound in the low rear head is damnably hard to account for, as it really ought to have exited out the low front of Kennedy's face, if it struck him while he was sitting up. It is baffling. It is interesting that while Humes has always said this low head rear entry wound was actually in that spot...both Boswell and Finck say it was on a piece of bone brought into the room later. If this was so, perhaps the doctors simply agreed it came from this area of the huge, untidy wound that was nearly half of Kennedy's skull. Perhaps, just as the Harper fragment was actually from the REAR of Kennedy's head, and they called it a piece from the side....this skull piece with an entrance wound was from his TEMPLE, but they needed it to be from the rear...and declared it as such!The back wound is suspicious too, the way it was so shallow. A rifle bullet should not do this. Humes asked the Dallas doctors in his phone calls whether or not the physicans there made any wounds in the President's back, which makes you wonder if Humes might not have wondered what the hell it was too.Personally, I suspect it was created at the time of the altering of the other wounds, to take into account the planted carcano bullet at Parkland as a part of a quite sophisticated and complex CIA-level plan. It was planned ahead of time to ensure Oswald was implicated, but it ended up foiling the perfection of the scheme, when the Zapruder film narrowed the timeline the shots could be fired in. This made the pristine bullet a thorn in the conspirator's side, rather than handy proof of Oswald' guilt.Once Zapruder and others had viewed the film quite early on, and too many people knew it existed, all the plotters could do was make relatively hard to see, minor changes in the home movie. This is why the film survived, and still shows Kennedy reacting from a shot from the front. The changes to the film needed to be relatively subtle, for the sake of the many who had seen it. The plotters were faced with a real dilemma. They could not change major "happenings" in the film. They could drop a few frames, they could mask out wounds, and add bits of detail....but no wholesale changes to the movie were possible, at the time the conspirators got their mitts on it.It took me many years to puzzle out why the Z film was not just destroyed, or, if changes were made, why not remove the back and to the left motion...and that is the reason why. Too many witnesses saw it, too soon, to do that.This reasoning logically covers the reservations most researchers have about why the Z film exists as it does. The conspirators were clever and planned long, but simply were human beings, and could not plan on every eventuality, like Zapruder standing where he was, and filming what he did, and showing the film off so quickly.These last few thoughts are just my opinions. The initial observations about the changes to the President's skull are based on pretty solid evidence, for which there simply is no other reasonable explanation.

[ThomZajac]

Brilliant.Some will argue that the lower back wound was so shallow because JFK was wearing two back braces, but if that were true I'm sure the braces would have been produced as evidence, and I'm fairly certain no bullet holes in them have ever been shown. (Well, I guess this might have created another bullet to explain... has anyone examined the braces?)I, too, think the back wound was added later to a) further implicate a shooter from behind- Oswald, and 2) provide a wound to explain the planted stretcher bullet, which was also used to implicate Oswald.I, like Lifton, am in the minority of those not convinced the president was hit from behind at all. I do think shots were fired from behind, but that they were likely diversionary and necessary to implicate Oswald's position. My main reason for believing this is that no one at Parkland reported a back wound or entry wounds in the rear of the president's head, or anywhere else. The conspirators knew they would have to retrieve the bullets and the way to do this was to fire from the front, enlarge those wounds to retrieve the bullets, add some entry wounds to the rear and then call the entrance wounds exit wounds. I'm not sold on this completely, but the lack of Parkland rear-entries prevents me from jumping on the crossfire bandwagon.Thom

[tom jeffers]

thomi think every effort was to come from behind just as it is in jimmys story. the front shot was a fluke and needed to be dealt with. the conspirators would have no way of knowing who would be looking at the wounds at parkland so a shot from the front was just another loose end for the team to cover up. the priorities had to be as follows:#1 kill jfk#2 kill jfk from anywhere#3 just kill jfk