top of page
  • Matt Crumpton

Ep 16: The Medical Evidence Part 4 (The Head Wound)


Episode 16


We are in the middle of breaking down the medical evidence in the assassination of President John F Kennedy. In the last episode, we looked at President Kennedy’s back and throat wounds, Governor Connally’s back, chest, right wrist and left thigh wounds, and did a deep dive on the so-called magic bullet, also known as Commission Exhibit 399.


In this episode, we’ll continue to analyze the medical evidence so that we can determine whether the Warren Report conclusions were correct - and if not, what things it got wrong.


What do the facts say about Kennedy’s fatal head wound? What can we learn from watching the Zapruder film? Can we rely on the autopsy photographs that have been released? And is there any factual support for the idea that the autopsy photos, the autopsy x-rays, and the Zapruder film itself - were altered?


Head Wound Generally


The key to solving President Kennedy’s fatal head wound is determining exactly where on his head the bullet entered. If there is an entry point in the back of Kennedy’s head and an exit toward the front, that bodes well for the Warren Report’s conclusion that all of the shots came from the Texas Schoolbook Depository, which was behind the President. However, if there is an entrance wound in the front of his head and exit wound in the rear, that points to a shot from the front and proves that there was a second shooter.


According to the Warren Report, Kennedy was hit QUOTE “in the rear portion of his head, causing a massive and fatal wound. The President [then] fell to the left into Ms. Kennedy’s lap.”[1] The Report goes on to say QUOTE:


The detailed autopsy of President Kennedy performed on the night of November 22 at the Bethesda Naval Hospital led the three examining pathologists to conclude that the smaller hole in the rear of the President's skull was the point of entry and that the large opening on the right side of his head was the wound of exit. The smaller hole on the back of the President's head measured one-fourth of an inch by five-eighths of an inch (6 by 15 millimeters)[2]


Dr. Finck, one of the autopsy doctors, testified that QUOTE "President Kennedy was, in my opinion, shot from the rear. The bullet entered in the back of the head and went out on the right side of his skull ... he was shot from above and behind."[3]


The Warren Report confirms that all three of the doctors who conducted the autopsy concluded that there was a rear entrance and side exit wound in Kennedy’s head. That’s strong evidence supporting the Warren Report’s conclusion that Oswald acted alone and that there were no shots from the front. But what do Warren Report critics say about the head wound?


Precise Location of the Rear Head Entry Wound


Where exactly on the back of Kennedy’s head was the rear entrance wound? The Warren Report said it was at the base of Kennedy’s skull. The Commission’s exact location is shown in a drawing by medical illustration student Harold Rydberg, (who we’ll talk about more later). This drawing is known as CE 388.[4] The drawing puts the bullet entry wound basically in the middle of where Kennedy’s neck and skull come together - just a couple of inches up from where his hairline starts in the back.


But this official entry wound location came into question in 1967 when Attorney General Ramsey Clark appointed a panel of four doctors led by Dr. Russell Fisher to review and analyze the photographs, x-ray films, and documents set forth in the Warren Report. Dr. Fisher and the Clark Panel determined that the actual point of entry was closer to the cowlick area near the top of Kennedy’s skull – not at the base of his skull - as the Warren Report claimed. The difference in entrance wounds between the Clark Panel and the original autopsy was 4.5 inches.[5]


When Congress reconsidered the case a decade later, the HSCA accepted the findings of the Clark Panel doctors over the Warren Report autopsy doctors. The Clark Panel’s location of the head wound entrance is shown in a drawing known as HSCA Exhibit 66.[6] It basically shows the bullet clipping the top right side of Kennedy’s head. And Kennedy is not leaning forward nearly as much as he was in the Warren Report’s drawing – CE 388.


There’s also a famous image of Kennedy’s head with a ruler being held up to the back of it. It shows the back right side being fully intact and a dark spot which looks like an entrance wound at the top of the skull – right where the Clark Panel said it was. This image is known as HSCA Exhibit 48.[7] And while it does a good job of showing the location where the Clark Panel claimed the bullet entered, it is a little misleading. That’s because it is not a picture. It’s an artist rendering.


So, from an evidentiary perspective, it’s meaningless. But, the rendering is so good that it looks like a picture. So, if you just came across it online you would think it was real. What I don’t understand is, why didn’t the HSCA just show the photo of the autopsy instead of having an artist draw a picture of it?


Dr. Fisher from the Clark Panel claims that in the autopsy x-rays and photos they observed a 6.5mm fragment near the top of the rear skull.[8] (Remember, 6.5mm is the exact size of the ammo allegedly fired by Oswald.) The Clark Panel’s discovery of this fragment that raises the question – “how did all of the autopsy doctors and radiologists miss this 6.5 mm fragment at the top of the skull - if the Clark Panel saw it?


Autopsy doctors and government officials who were present at the autopsy don’t remember a 6.5mm fragment being discovered. Dr. Humes, who led the autopsy, when shown this fragment on the x-ray said, “the ones we retrieved I didn’t think were the same size as this. They were considerably smaller. I don’t remember seeing anything that size when I looked at these films.”[9] Dr. Boswell, another autopsy doctor, said, “No, we did not find one that large. I’m sure of that.”[10] Agents Sibert and O’Neill who were present at the autopsy do not recall there being any bullet fragments that were as large as 6.5mm.[11]


During the HSCA hearings, the autopsy doctors were shown photos of the back of Kennedy’s head to confirm that the photos in the archives were consistent with what the doctors saw. In the photos the doctors were shown, there was a red spot near Kennedy’s cowlick that was alleged to be the entrance wound. When the HSCA asked Dr. Finck, the other autopsy doctor, about the photos, he said, “I don’t know what it is. How are these photographs identified as coming from the autopsy of President Kennedy?”[12] There are zero witnesses at Parkland Hospital or the autopsy in Bethesda who noticed a red spot on the top of Kennedy’s head.[13]


When Dr. Humes found out from the HSCA that the official location of the head wound had been changed, he was not persuaded. The HSCA report says, QUOTE “Dr. Humes stated categorically that his physical measurements are correct and emphasized that he had access to the body itself.”[14] Dr. Humes stood by the original autopsy position when interviewed by Journal of the American Medical Association in 1992 and the ARRB in 1996. Dr. Boswell said he never believed the Clark panel was correct in changing the location of the head wound.


Now, you can argue that the original autopsy pathologists were just embarrassed about the big mistake they made – apparently misidentifying the location of the entrance wound of Kennedy’s fatal head shot. That’s what Bugliosi says happened. He thinks the autopsy doctors missed the 6.5mm fragment in Kennedy’s head. But if you’re someone who believes the Warren Report got it right, you would think these doctors would try to do their best. It’s hard to believe that everyone in the room missed that 6.5mm fragment, but that a panel of doctors who never even had access to the body would get it right five years later.


Conspiracy theorists believe that there may have been shenanigans with the X-rays that were relied upon by the Clark Panel. That’s a big accusation. Is there anything to support it? According to Bethesda X-Ray assistant, Jerrold Custer, Dr. John Ebersole made a strange request after the assassination. He said “I need you to do a special duty. I have skull fragments here and I’ve got bullet fragments. I want you to tape the bullet fragments to the skull fragments and take X-rays at different densities. This is for a bust of Kennedy.”[15]


So the man who was responsible for doing the x-rays of Kennedy’s head claims that he was told to stage bullet fragments for a bust of Kennedy. That’s a doozie. We know that Custer had that job. He was interviewed by the ARRB under oath when he made his claims. Even Warren Report defenders like David Von Pein don’t think Custer is lying.[16] Instead, they say that he just must be mistaken because we already know that Oswald was the lone assassin.


Arguments For A Front Entrance and Rear Exit Wound


So, people who believe that Lee Harvey Oswald alone assassinated the president have a choice to make between the autopsy report (which puts the entrance wound at the base of the skull) or the Clark Panel and HSCA position(which puts the entrance wound around the top of the skull). Both things cannot be true. The implication of these conflicting wounds is either that the autopsy doctors and radiologists were very bad at their job or there was fraud of some sort. But if you are a conspiracy theorist, neither the Warren Report position nor the Clark Panel position infers conspiracy. So, what medical evidence do conspiracy theorists offer to prove that Kennedy’s head shot came from the front?


The original statements of most of the Parkland Hospital doctors who treated President Kennedy supported the idea of a massive exit wound in the back of his head. Of the sixteen medical personnel at Parkland who interacted with the president, none of them noted the presence of a small entrance wound in the back of his head.[17] Let’s take a look at what the Parkland Doctors had to say about the nature of the Kennedy’s head wound.


Dr. Charles Crenshaw described the back of Kennedy’s head as looking QUOTE “like a crater, an empty cavity. All I could see there was mangled bloody tissue. From the damage I saw, there was no doubt in my mind that the bullet had entered his head from the front.”[18]


Dr. Kemp Clark, the chief of neurosurgery at Parkland, told the Warren Commission, QUOTE “I … examined the wound in the back of the President's head. This was a large, gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed.”[19]

Dr. Paul Peters claimed that there was a large exit wound in the back of President Kennedy’s head.

“I could see that he had a large about 7 cm opening in the right occipital parietal area. A considerable portion of the brain was missing there. And the occipital cortex, the back portion of the brain was lying down near the opening of the wound and blood was trickling out.”[20]


“I stepped up and looked and I could see inside President Kennedy’s head on the right side near the back. We call it the occipital parietal area. The scalp had been torn apart there and the skull had been blasted open by the effect of the high velocity missile.”[21]


Dr. Perry, the attending surgeon, told the Warren Commission, QUOTE “I noted there was a large wound of the right posterior parietal area in the head exposing lacerated brain.”[22]


Dr. Jones told the Commission, “There was a large defect in the back side of the head as the President lay on the cart with what appeared to be some brain hanging out of this wound …[23]


Dr. Robert McClelland, who may have had the best vantage point of all Parkland doctors, described the head wound this way during his Warren Commission testimony:


As I took the position at the head of the table …, 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.… in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, … of the … posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out.[24]


The cerebellar tissue is from the cerebellum which is located near the brain stem.[25] So, if he can see the cerebellar tissue, that tends to support a wound being lower in the back of the head, as opposed to being on the side of the head.


Dr. McClelland reiterated the same thing when he was interviewed with Dr. Jones by the Sixth Floor Museum in 2013.


“Dr. Perry was assuming the role of the primary surgeon. And as I walked by on the left side of the gurney the President was lying on, Dr. Perry leaned across and handed me a surgical retractor and said Bob, would you go stand at the head of the cart and lean over and put this retractor in his neck where we are going to explore and do a tracheostomy….That put me at the head of the gurney, leaning over the president’s head and looking down from about 18 inches into his head wound, in the back of his wound. So, I had probably the best view of that massive wound in the back of his head from that position where I was helping Dr. Perry and Dr. Baxter do the tracheostomy and exploration of this wound.”[26]

“When I went and stood in that position, the first thing that kind of exclaimed out of my mouth, was I said, My God have you seen the back of his head!? It’s gone? The back half of his brain is gone. And Dr. Carrico, said, No, we just got here. We haven’t had time to look at anything except his neck. And I said, well, the back half of his brain is gone. And as I said that the right half of the Cerebellum, the back part of the brain, fell out of that massive wound in his head onto the cart. So this was obviously a fatal injury to the brain.”[27]


Al Wright, who helped put President Kennedy’s body into the casket at Parkland Hospital said it seemed like the back of the President’s head was soft.


“We picked him up and the back of the head felt like a wet sponge. It was just real soft. Part of the skull was missing.”[28]


You’ve probably seen Secret Service Agent Clint Hill before. He is the agent in the Zapruder film who jumps up on to the back of the presidential limo after shots are fired. Hill filed a report about what he observed in Dallas. In that Secret Service report, Hill says, QUOTE:

“I jumped on to the left rear step of the presidential automobile. Mrs. Kennedy shouted, “They’ve shot his head off!” Then, turned and raised out of her seat as if she were reaching to her right rear toward the back of the car for something that had blown out…”


“As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President’s head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely.”[29]


Immediately after the news was released that Kennedy had died, press secretary Malcolm Kilduff made the following announcement at Parkland Hospital:


“President John F Kennedy died at approximately 1 o clock central standard time today, here in Dallas. He died of a gunshot wound in the brain. Dr. Burkley told me, it’s a simple matter of a bullet right through the head.”[30]


What’s crazy about this statement is that when you look at the video, Kilduff is pointing at his right front temple when he says “right through the head.”


Finally, the summary of the written medical reports from that day at Parkland Hospital describe the head wound as being “in the occipital region of the skull.”[31]


So, there’s a lot of evidence supporting a head shot from the front in the form of eyewitness testimony from Parkland doctors and people who interacted with Kennedy up close after he was shot. Significantly, the written medical reports also support the testimony of the doctors that the wound is in the occipital region, which is more of a lower back head wound than a side head wound – which would be in the parietal region.


We’ve seen the evidence from Parkland, but is there any evidence from Bethesda that supports the existence of a large rear head wound?

Lt. Cmdr William Pitzer was the head of the audio visual department for the Naval Medical School, which worked closely with Bethesda Naval Hospital. According to Pitzer’s close friend, corpsman Dennis David, Pitzer received a call around 4:30pm on November 22, 1963 telling him to come in to Bethesda Naval Hospital. The following Monday or Tuesday, David saw Pitzer crouching over a film-editing machine and Pitzer told him he wanted to show him something.


“I walked in to his office and I saw he was working on some film. He had a movie editor. It was reel to reel runs across the screen. He showed it to me. It was 16mm film of the autopsy. He also had some tissue slides and slides of President Kennedy that were taken while he was on the table at the morgue. We looked at them, kind of horrified at the seriousness of the wound. But, one of the things I remembered was that they had a picture of Kennedy laying on the table as a front view, and all we saw was a little hole in the temple. Then, in another slide, it showed the huge gaping hole in the back. So, Bill and I logically assumed that the wound was a frontal entry wound as opposed to what the Warren Commission later said, it was a shot from behind.”[32]


David says Pitzer showed him film of President Kennedy’s autopsy. He says, “We both noted a small entry wound [in the right side of the forehead]….I had seen gunshot wounds before and have seen a lot of them since. I can assure you that it definitely was an entry wound in the forehead.”[33] Pitzer did not tell David that he took the film, but David assumed that he did, which he would have been in a position to do as head of the A/V department for the medical school. Notably, Bill Pitzer was shot to death on October 29, 1966. The incident was ruled a suicide, but remains disputed today.


Besides Dennis David, there’s another person who claims to have seen secret photographs showing an entrance wound from the front. Joe O’Donnell, a friend of white house photographer Robert Knudsen, says that while he was at the White House, Knudsen showed him photos of Kennedy’s body showing a small hole in the front of his head and a big hole in the back of his head.


“A few days after the assassination, I was at the White House in the press room and Knudsen came to me and said Joe, I have something I want to show you. So I went back to his sort of work room and he pulled out an envelope and showed me about 12 pictures, 5X7. And had all these pictures of the president on his stomach and on his back and you could see the hole here, about three eights of an inch and the back of his head above the line, you could see a big hole, the size of a grapefruit.


And then a couple days later, maybe a day later, he said Joe, you have a minute, I want to show you something. Those pictures that I showed you the other day. These are the same ones, but a little different. I said, no hole. He said, they covered it up. I said, who did that? He said, I didn’t do it.”[34]


We have never seen these photos that allegedly exist. So, it’s really just O’Donnell’s story. Warren Report defenders challenge O’Donnell’s credibility and point to the fact that Knudsen is not on the list of people who attended the autopsy and would not have a reason to have those photos.[35]


But the Assassination Records Review Board found documents proving that Robert Knudsen had, in fact, accompanied Secret Service Agent James Fox to the Navy Processing Center to look at negatives from the autopsy photos.[36] So, yes, Knudsen is on record as having access to the original autopsy photos. It basically comes down to whether you believe that O’Donnell, who indisputably had access to Knudsen at the time, would lie to push a conspiracy.[37]


There’s one more piece of evidence that supports a head shot from the front. Former ARRB researcher Doug Horne notes in his book Inside the ARRB that the mortician who worked on Kennedy also saw a front head wound. Tom Robinson of Gawler’s Funeral Home says he saw a hole in Kennedy’s right temple. He says, QUOTE “The hole was in the hairline. It was a neat wound and did not have to be hidden by make up.” Robinson said he plugged the wound with some wax during the reconstruction. He recalled the wound being about a quarter inch in diameter.[38]


Cerebellum


We’ve brought up the cerebellum a few times in this episode. It’s the portion of the brain that is in the back of the head between the cerebrum and the brain stem. It’s at the very bottom of the head, near where the head and neck come together.


There were eight doctors at Parkland Hospital who claimed to have seen cerebellum in the president’s head wound: Doctors McClelland, Carrico, Clark, Jenkins, Baxter, Perry, Peters, and Grossman.[39] This observation of cerebellum in the head wound means that the wound would have to be low enough for doctors to see the Cerebellum. And, if that is the case, then the official autopsy placement of the wound – on the top right side of the head – would have to be incorrect.


However, Warren Report defenders note that both autopsy doctors Humes and Boswell stated before the ARRB that there was no damage to the cerebellum at all when they removed it.[40] Further, the autopsy photos of the brain prove that there was no damage to the cerebellum.[41]


So who is right about the cerebellum damage: the Parkland doctors or the autopsy doctors and brain photos. Normally, the brain photos would be a slam dunk to conclusively prove the truth and end the conversation. The challenge here, however, as we will soon find out, is that there are real questions about the authenticity of the autopsy photos of the president’s brain.


Sibert and O’Neill on the Head Wound


We previously mentioned the report of FBI agents James Sibert and Frank O’Neill that was generated after the two agents were ordered by J. Edgar Hoover to attend and document the autopsy of President Kennedy on behalf of the FBI. Our earlier discussion of the Sibert and O’Neill report covered their take on the back wound (which they said was a back wound and not a back of the neck wound). Now, let’s hear what Sibert and O’Neill said about Kennedy’s head wound.


First, we’ll go straight to the source – the original 302 report itself from Sibert and O’Neill. That report says that after the President was removed from the casket and the sheets he was wrapped in were taken off, QUOTE “it was also apparent that a tracheotomy had been performed, as well as surgery of the head area, namely the top of the skull.”[42]


This one sentence in the report that talks about surgery at the top of Kennedy’s head has been the source of much speculation about exactly when that surgery would have happened and why. Warren Report critics assert that if there was surgery done at the top of the head, it demonstrates that the body was altered between Parkland hospital and Bethesda where the autopsy was done.


But, this one line about surgery on the top of the head is too important to guess as to its meaning. What did Sibert and O’Neill later say about the head surgery line?


Agent Sibert said quote “When the body was first observed on the autopsy table, it was thought by the doctors that surgery had possibly been performed on the head area and such was reflected in my notes made at the time. However, this was determined not to be correct following detailed inspection and when the piece of bone found in the limousine was brought to the autopsy room in the latter stages of the autopsy.”[43]


Agent O’Neill’s take on the mention of surgery in their report was a little different from Agent Sibert’s. O’Neill said quote “[Dr.] Humes said it was evident that there was some type of a surgical procedure done to the head area or something like that. These were not words that we were making up ourselves. These were words which were said by the doctor at the time. Now, as I understand it, that could have been cutting of the hair, or something to do with this thing in the back….I could not make a determination what he meant by that quite frankly.”[44]


So, the takeaway from the “surgery on the head” line in the Sibert/O’Neill report is that they both heard Dr. Humes say there had been surgery on the head. But, this was not elaborated on. It was not clear exactly what Humes meant, and according to Sibert, Humes probably did not mean that there was actually surgery on the head, or if he did, that was later proven wrong.


What about the location of the head wound? Do Sibert and O’Neill place it in the rear of Kennedy’s head, as the Parkland doctors did, or closer to his right temple, which is what the official autopsy record states?


According to O’Neill, when they took the sheet off of the president’s head, the first thing that struck him was that there was a massive wound on the upper right back of the presidents head, specifically, quote “the back of the head behind the ear.”[45] Sibert said that the doctors did say that the rear head wound was an entry wound, but they didn’t specify where exactly the entrance point was. There were no discussions in the autopsy about the angle of the bullet hitting the skull.[46]


Sibert also made a drawing for the ARRB where he noted the location of the head wound. This drawing shows a large hole on the lower/mid back right side of Kennedy’s head.[47] Both O’Neill and Sibert confirmed that there was no damage to Kennedy’s face and no injuries to the president’s head that were in front of the ear. All of the damage was behind his right ear.[48]


So, we know that Sibert and O’Neill place the head wound at about the same place where many of the Parkland doctors did. This is obviously in a different location from the top right side of the head - where the autopsy and Warren Report place the head wound.[49]


Sibert and O’Neill were both shown some of the official autopsy photos when they testified before the ARRB. Sibert said that the photos he was shown are different from how the body looked when he was there with Agent O’Neill. He said that he recalled photos being taken, but that the body was not cleaned up like the body that appeared in the photos he was shown.[50]


Sibert said quote, “I don’t have a recollection of [the head] being that intact, as compared with these other pictures. I don’t remember seeing anything that was like this photo.…I don’t recall anything like this at all during the autopsy. The wound was more pronounced. And it looks like it could have been reconstructed or something as compared with what my recollection was and those other photographs.[51]


When Agent O’Neill was asked if the autopsy photo that purports to show the president’s brain is what O’Neill remembers seeing at the autopsy, he said quote “No. It appears to be too much…It would seem that the only section of the brain that is missing is this small section over here. To me, that’s not consistent with the way I recall seeing it.”[52]O’Neill said that the brain he was shown photos of before the ARRB was larger than the one he recalls seeing at the autopsy.[53]


So, to conclude Agents Sibert and O’Neill’s position on the head wound is that 1) it was in about the same place that most Parkland doctors put it – the right rear of the head behind the ear – NOT the right temple as the autopsy says, 2) Dr. Humes did say that there was surgery done on the top of the head during the autopsy, but Sibert says that is incorrect and O’Neill says surgery could mean a lot of different things and he isn’t sure what Humes meant, and finally, 3) they both stated that the autopsy photos they were shown of Kennedy’s body and brain were not consistent with what they witnessed when they were present at the autopsy.


Response of Humes and Boswell


We’ve talked about many of the people who are critics of the autopsy. But, what about the autopsy doctors themselves, Captain James Humes and Commander Thornton Boswell? Since the assassination, have they called their work on the autopsy of President Kennedy into question?


The answer is no. While the military doctors acknowledged that they should have called Parkland Hospital to speak with the Dallas doctors before they started the autopsy, both doctors fully and unequivocally supported the autopsy that they conducted.[54]


Regarding the neck wound that was not dissected, Captain Humes said quote “dissecting the neck was totally unnecessary and would have been criminal.”[55] He said that the autopsy doctors quote “decided to quit speculating” around midnight and were “influenced by the fact that [they] knew Jackie Kennedy was waiting upstairs” and that Kennedy’s doctor, Admiral George Burkley, wanted them “to hurry as much as possible.”[56]


Humes and Boswell came forward to the Journal of the American Medical Association after the movie JFK came out because they were QUOTE “tired of being beaten upon by people who are supremely ignorant of the scientific facts of the president’s death.”[57] The doctors continue to stand by the location of the head wound being at the right temple.


Humes said “This is always the pattern of a through and through wound of the cranium. This is a law of physics and it is foolproof – absolutely, unequivocally, and without question.”


Next Time on Solving JFK: We’ll analyze the Zapruder Film to see what it can tell us. We’ll also look at allegations that the film that we have access to today has been materially altered. And we’ll continue to analyze claims by Warren Report critics that the autopsy was forged.


[1] Warren Report at 3. [2] Warren Report at 86. [3] Warren Report at 86. [4] Commission Exhibit 388, https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_388.pdf [5] https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=323#relPageId=3&tab=page [6] http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/infojfk/jfk1/1p252f66.jpg [7] https://www.maryfe rrell.org/pages/The_Moving_Head_Wounds.html [8] Clark Panel Report at 11, https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md59/html/Image10.htm [9] Testimony of James Humes before ARRB at 213, https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/humesa.htm [10] Testimony of J. Thornon Boswell before ARRB at 197, https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/boswella.htm [11] William M. Law, In the Eye of History, p 257, 267 [12] Testimony of Pierre Finck before HSCA, https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/finckhsca.htm [13] James DiEugenio, Reclaiming History at 132. [14] ARRB MD 19, Handwritten Notes of HSCA Counsel Andy Purdy after phone call with Dr. Humes [15] Law, p 263. [16] http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/11 /jfk-assassination-arguments-part-854.html [17] Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p 164. [18] Dr. Charles Crenshaw, Trauma Room One, p 67 [19] http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/clark_w.htm [20] Men Who Killed Kennedy Part 1, at 25:49 [21] Men Who Killed Kennedy Part 5, at 6:38 [22] Testimony of Dr. Perry, 6H9 [23] Testimony of Dr. Jones, 6H52-53 [24] http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/mcclella.htm [25] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebellum [26] https://youtu.be/xuZCxT88cMo, at 13:00 [27] https://youtu.be/xuZCxT88cMo, at 14:30 [28] Men Who Killed Kennedy Part 5, at 10:10 [29] CE 1024, at 742, https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pdf/WH18_CE_1024.pdf [30] Men Who Killed Kennedy Part 1, at 9:03 [31] https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=541&tab=page, at 517 [32] Men Who Killed Kennedy, Part 6 at 22:30 [33] Law, p 180 [34] Men Who Killed Kennedy, Part 7 at 22:00 [35] http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/09/truth-about-joe-odonnell.html [36] https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/staff_memos/pdf/DH_AutPhotoCC.pdf at 5 [37] https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md231/html/md231_0002a.htm [38] Doug Horne, Inside the ARRB, Volume 2, p 600. [39] https://www.jfk-assassination.net/cerebellum.htm [40] https://www.jfk-assassination.net/cerebellum.htm [41] https://www.jfk-assassination.net/cerebellum.htm [42] Sibert and O’Neill Report, Nov 26, 1963, page 4 - https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/md44/html/Image3.htm [43] Affidavit of James Sibert, HSCA - https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=627#relPageId=5 [44] Law, p 70 [45] Id., at pp 60, 117 [46] Id., pp 109-110 [47] ARRB Drawing from James Sibert - https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=719 [48] Law, pp 68, 71 [49] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy [50] Law at 127. [51] Id. at pp 126, 128 [52] Id. at 165. [53] Id. at 166. [54] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1992/05/20/2-jfk-autopsy-pathologists-defend-conclusion-on-fatal-bullet/83e63cf2-ef0b-4dbe-9b27-8da7bbd3fedb/ [55] Id. [56] Id. [57] Id.

84 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page