Classified Documents on the JFK assassination to Be Released

Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
gcthomas said:
Torso entry wounds are usually not large, but this was a skull wound and not straight on, so you can't go by what you see on Hollywood movies.
Click to expand...

Are you really this dense? I am not going by what I see in the movies but what the doctors at Parkland thought about the head wound. Dr. Charles Crenshaw had observed hundreds of gunshot wounds prior to the assassination and he certainly knew the difference between an entrance wound and an exit wound:

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/...=0b36355c190ec7c34aacac69c29e4930&action=view

Crenshaw said that the wound in the back of the head was an exit wound. He also said that the wound in the throat was an entrance wound. It seems as if you really know very little either about the facts surrounding the assassination or the facts concerning exit wounds and entrance wounds.
 
gcthomas

gcthomas

New member
Jerry Shugart said:
Are you really this dense? I am not going by what I see in the movies but what the doctors at Parkland thought about the head wound. Dr. Charles Crenshaw had observed hundreds of gunshot wounds prior to the assassination and he certainly knew the difference between an entrance wound and an exit wound:

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/...=0b36355c190ec7c34aacac69c29e4930&action=view

Crenshaw said that the wound in the back of the head was an exit wound. He also said that the wound in the throat was an entrance wound. It seems as if you really know very little either about the facts surrounding the assassination or the facts concerning exit wounds and entrance wounds.
Click to expand...

Odd things can happen with skulls, and of the good doctor was just going on the size of the wound then he should be deferring to the forensic pathologists who would inspect the shape of the broken edges of the bone. Did the emergency doctor inspect the inside edges of the the bone? The witness statements suggest not. Being an experienced surgeon does not make him and expert forensics investigator, naturally.
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
gcthomas said:
Go on, give a reason why the forensic analysis was won. Not just because you like the conspiracy idea, but one rooted in evidence rather than opinion.
Click to expand...

You woudn't know "evidence" if it hit you right between the eyes!

You have already made up your little mind that there was no conspiracy and since you cannot be wrong you just ignore the evidence which proves that you are wrong!
 
gcthomas

gcthomas

New member
Jerry Shugart said:
You woudn't know "evidence" if it hit you right between the eyes!

You have already made up your little mind that there was no conspiracy and since you cannot be wrong you just ignore the evidence which proves that you are wrong!
Click to expand...

I haven't made my mind up, but the omits is on the conspiracy theorists to provide evidence rather than convoluted opinions. Please, of you have the evidence that so convinced you, post it. So far the only 'evidence' presented has been someone's opinion that a big hole just has to be the exit, and claims about witness comments that turned out not to be quite what was claimed.

Why on earth should that convince anyone?
 
gcthomas

gcthomas

New member
musterion said:
Not discussing this with a leftist limey. Go bow to your inbred royals.
Click to expand...

There we go, that's the way to avoid answering a question - go straight for the junior high level of insult. I take it you couldn't muster any, you know, actual reasons to believe in the conspiracy?
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
gcthomas said:
I haven't made my mind up, but the omits is on the conspiracy theorists to provide evidence rather than convoluted opinions. Please, of you have the evidence that so convinced you, post it.
Click to expand...

OK, I will give you the testimony of just a few of the doctors and nurses who were eye-witnesses to the head wound. And since the description given by some of them speak of the wound being in the occipital region of the skull. For that click on the following link:

https://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs...=yhs-mozilla-100&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-100

Next, here is the eye-witness testimony of just some of them who described a large wound in the back of the head:

KEMP CLARK, MD: Professor and Director of Neurological Surgery at Parkland,
"...in the occipital region of the skull... Through the head wound, blood and brain were extruding... There was a large wound in the right occipitoparietal region, from which profuse bleeding was occurring... There was considerable loss of scalp and bone tissue. Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were extruding from the wound." (WC--CE#392)

CHARLES JAMES CARRICO, MD: "The (skull) wound that I saw was a large gaping wound, located in the right occipitoparietal area. I would estimate to be about 5 to 7 cm. in size, more or less circular, with avulsions of the calvarium and scalp tissue. As I stated before, I believe there was shredded macerated cerebral and cerebellar tissues both in the wounds and on the fragments of the skull attached to the dura." (6H6)

GENE AIKIN, MD: "The back of the right occipitalparietal portion of his head was shattered with brain substance extruding." (WC-V6:65.)

NURSE DIANA HAMILTON BOWRON: "...there was blood all over this neck and shoulders. There was a gaping wound in the back of his head." (Livingstone, Killing the Truth , p. 180)

There are many more nurses and doctors besides these who also described the wound as being in the same place.

But by the time the autopsy photos were taken that gaping wound had disappeared and had been replaced by a small entry wound higher up.

Now, here is the question for you. Were all of the witnesses at Parkand wrong? Did they all make the same mistake and all of them saw a gaping wound in the back of the head even though there was never such a wound?

And was Secret Service agent Clint Hill also seeing things which were not there because he was in the back seat with JFK on the way to Parkland and he also described a large wound in the back of the head.

How do you explain the disappearance of the large head wound in the back of the head which so many witnesses described?
 
gcthomas

gcthomas

New member
Jerry Shugart said:
How do you explain the disappearance of the large head wound in the back of the head which so many witnesses described?
Click to expand...

Again, none of those mentions an "exit" wound, must s wound. None of the reports I've read days there wasn't a very large hole- where do you get the idea that the large wound has been hidden?

The bullet wound forensics page I shared earlier has a diagram of this injury as an example, and it shows the large wound in context. Just because it is large does not mean it was an exit wound - that is just naïve supposition.
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
gcthomas said:
Again, none of those mentions an "exit" wound, must s wound. None of the reports I've read days there wasn't a very large hole- where do you get the idea that the large wound has been hidden?
Click to expand...

The large head wound many at Parkland saw which was in the back of the head cannot be seen on any of the autopsy photos found here:

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/autopsy.htm

Scroll down just a little and you will see photos of the back of the head and the head wound many saw at the back of the head are no longer there!

How do you explain that?
 
Last edited:
WatchmanOnTheWall

WatchmanOnTheWall

Well-known member
The Mafia provided the fire power, the Cubans helped organise the hit along with factions within the CIA, police and JFK's personal security team. LBJ headed this cabal but the driving forces behind all these faction was the fear of loosing money and the avarice of gaining money. JFK was in the process of removing the federal private banking system and the Rothschild banking dynasty who own it didn't want this of course. Basically JFK had made too many powerful enemies. 911 is a similar story.
 
R

rexlunae

New member
musterion said:
50+ years later and assets would still be at risk with a full document dump? Bull.
Click to expand...

Of course, part of the process of releasing the documents is actually going through the archives and figuring out which files are actually relevant. That's work that someone has to do.
 
Jerry Shugart

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
gcthomas said:
Again, none of those mentions an "exit" wound, must s wound. None of the reports I've read days there wasn't a very large hole- where do you get the idea that the large wound has been hidden?
Click to expand...

The large head wound many at Parkland saw which was in the back of the head cannot be seen on any of the autopsy photos found here:

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/autopsy.htm

Scroll down just a little and you will see photos of the back of the head and the head wound many saw at the back of the head is no longer there!

How do you explain that?
 
gcthomas

gcthomas

New member
Jerry Shugart said:
The large head wound many at Parkland saw which was in the back of the head cannot be seen on any of the autopsy photos found here:

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/autopsy.htm

Scroll down just a little and you will see photos of the back of the head and the head wound many saw at the back of the head is no longer there!

How do you explain that?
Click to expand...

The pictures are not of good quality - I think you are seeing what you want to see. I see no issues with the photos.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top