A snapshot into the mind of Dr. Cyril Wecht

[Gary Craig]

The autopsy doctors were also dealing with a skull that was fractured in multiple places. It must have been like trying to hold a shattered egg in place. I think it's a bit harsh to say the doctors were incompetent or corrupt. These guys were not forensic pathologist and were placed under undue stress by the concerns of the Kennedy family and matters of protocol as to the timing of the President casket being available for national mourning as quickly as possible. Giving a sinister interpretation to what was not a routine post-mortem process is unfounded and without any credible evidence.

They stuck by their original conclusion, of a wound being low in the back of JFK's skull, until their deaths.

[Oscar Navarro]

They stuck by their original conclusion, of a wound being low in the back of JFK's skull, until their deaths.

I don't think so. Dr. Humes agreed with the findings of the HSCA findings. What he had issues with was accepting the difference in length between his original calculations and those arrived at by the HSCA.


Mr. CORNWELL. I would ask you if you would mind stepping to the easel and describing for us what your view, or your opinion, would be as to the location of the entry wound on that X-ray.
Dr. HUMES. OK. I believe, particularly in this rather enhanced picture, I might say, it is a pleasure to have such because I didn't have anything of this kind formerly, that this would be the point of entrance.
Mr. CORNWELL. For the record simply, would you try to describe the point that you just indicated?
Dr. HUMES. Well, in this approximate area would be about where external occipital protuberance would be, the knob we can feel in the back of our head. This would be above it. There is a great enlargement here, so it looks considerably further away than it would be on a standard size film or on the skull and I believe this is above the external occipital protuberance. I think it also shows on the film that Dr. Baden was showing earlier. I think it shows even better in the in the A.P. view, the anterior-posterior view of the skull.
Mr. CORNWELL. So, you, in effect, would agree with the testimony of Dr. Baden that the entry wound on the X-rays is at the point in which there is, simply from a novice point of view, a dislocation or a jutting out.
Dr. HUMES. It is a fracture line that juts out from that.
Mr. CORNWELL. Thank you.
Dr. HUMES. If I might add, and more importantly, I had the opportunity, which none of the gentlemen had to do, to examine the President's skull from the inside when the brain was removed, with great care. There was one, and only one, wound of entrance. I think we are in a somewhat of a semantic discussion as to where it was.
Mr. CORNWELL. And would you agree that the fragments shown in the upper portion of the skull would also be relatively consistent with the same entry location on the skull?
Dr. HUMES. Oh yes, however, this bullet was so disrupted, those fragments I think could virtually be any place.
Mr. CORNWELL. And referring to JFK exhibit F-302---
Dr. HUMES. Which is?
Mr. CORNWELL. The one on the very left, the drawing of the brain, would you also agree that the disruption of the brain, as shown in that drawing, is also in the upper portion and therefore would also be roughly consistent with the same entry location?
Dr. HUMES. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. CORNWELL. Dr. Humes, you have indicated that you, of course, worked under the handicap, which, of course, was caused by conditions beyond your control, during the autopsy and the writing of the report, of not having autopsy photographs to work with; is that correct?
Dr. HUMES. Nor the X-rays by the time we were writing the report.
Mr. CORNWELL. Nor the X-rays. Your initial autopsy report indicated that, as you have just stated, the wound was, indeed, above, I believe the report is worded in terms of "slightly above," the external occipital protuberance. The testimony today indicates that the panel places that at approximately 10 centimeters above the external occipital protuberance. Would that discrepancy be explainable?
Dr. HUMES. Well, I have a little trouble with that; 10 centimeters is a significant--4 inches.
Mr. CORNWELL. I would like to simply ask you a few specific questions in order to determine----
Dr. HUMES. I go back to the fact there was only one, period.
Mr. CORNWELL. To determine whether we can understand how such a discrepaed [sic?][RHS] late at night; is that correct?
Dr. HUMES. That's correct.


One entry wound.

[Gary Craig]

I don't think so. Dr. Humes agreed with the findings of the HSCA findings. What he had issues with was accepting the difference in length between his original calculations and those arrived at by the HSCA.


Mr. CORNWELL. I would ask you if you would mind stepping to the easel and describing for us what your view, or your opinion, would be as to the location of the entry wound on that X-ray.
Dr. HUMES. OK. I believe, particularly in this rather enhanced picture, I might say, it is a pleasure to have such because I didn't have anything of this kind formerly, that this would be the point of entrance.
Mr. CORNWELL. For the record simply, would you try to describe the point that you just indicated?
Dr. HUMES. Well, in this approximate area would be about where external occipital protuberance would be, the knob we can feel in the back of our head. This would be above it. There is a great enlargement here, so it looks considerably further away than it would be on a standard size film or on the skull and I believe this is above the external occipital protuberance. I think it also shows on the film that Dr. Baden was showing earlier. I think it shows even better in the in the A.P. view, the anterior-posterior view of the skull.
Mr. CORNWELL. So, you, in effect, would agree with the testimony of Dr. Baden that the entry wound on the X-rays is at the point in which there is, simply from a novice point of view, a dislocation or a jutting out.
Dr. HUMES. It is a fracture line that juts out from that.
Mr. CORNWELL. Thank you.
Dr. HUMES. If I might add, and more importantly, I had the opportunity, which none of the gentlemen had to do, to examine the President's skull from the inside when the brain was removed, with great care. There was one, and only one, wound of entrance. I think we are in a somewhat of a semantic discussion as to where it was.
Mr. CORNWELL. And would you agree that the fragments shown in the upper portion of the skull would also be relatively consistent with the same entry location on the skull?
Dr. HUMES. Oh yes, however, this bullet was so disrupted, those fragments I think could virtually be any place.
Mr. CORNWELL. And referring to JFK exhibit F-302---
Dr. HUMES. Which is?
Mr. CORNWELL. The one on the very left, the drawing of the brain, would you also agree that the disruption of the brain, as shown in that drawing, is also in the upper portion and therefore would also be roughly consistent with the same entry location?
Dr. HUMES. Yes, sir, I do.
Mr. CORNWELL. Dr. Humes, you have indicated that you, of course, worked under the handicap, which, of course, was caused by conditions beyond your control, during the autopsy and the writing of the report, of not having autopsy photographs to work with; is that correct?
Dr. HUMES. Nor the X-rays by the time we were writing the report.
Mr. CORNWELL. Nor the X-rays. Your initial autopsy report indicated that, as you have just stated, the wound was, indeed, above, I believe the report is worded in terms of "slightly above," the external occipital protuberance. The testimony today indicates that the panel places that at approximately 10 centimeters above the external occipital protuberance. Would that discrepancy be explainable?
Dr. HUMES. Well, I have a little trouble with that; 10 centimeters is a significant--4 inches.
Mr. CORNWELL. I would like to simply ask you a few specific questions in order to determine----
Dr. HUMES. I go back to the fact there was only one, period.
Mr. CORNWELL. To determine whether we can understand how such a discrepaed [sic?][RHS] late at night; is that correct?
Dr. HUMES. That's correct.


One entry wound.

"Dr. Humes agreed with the findings of the HSCA findings."

Wrong!

The verbal wink he gave to Cornwell isn't agreement.

"I think we are in a somewhat of a semantic discussion as to where it was.:

"One entry wound."

The autopsy doctors never claimed more than one wound. They stood by the EOP wound till their deaths.

When critics pointed out that wound location didn't jibe with the WC explanation of events the Clark Panel was tasked with re examining the photos and xrays. They found a trail of metal particles across the top of the skull, presumably from a metal projectile. They promptly moved the entrance wound to align with the metal trail. 4 inches above the EOP!  = 2 wounds.

[Joe Elliott]

The autopsy doctors said the entrance wound was slightly above and slightly to the right of the EOP.

The Clark Panel said well above, 100mm, the EOP.

That's two paths/wounds.
 

Or it may mean that someone is off by 100 mm or 4 inches.

I think the Clark Panel was off by 4 inches.

Metal Fragments can travel away through the brain and end up away from the bullet path.

If there were two bullets and bullets leave metal fragments along the path, why aren?t there two metal fragments paths?

What ballistic expert says that bullets do leave metal fragments that mark the path of the bullet? Experts who work with ballistic gel and run experiments to answer these questions.

[Joe Elliott]

I have observed that over the years the majority of WC critics have come from the left of the political spectrum. IMO, their political leanings have influenced in one form or another their view of the WC conclusions. To date I'm not aware of any criticism or rejection from the right of the conclusions reached by the WC other than that offered by Roger Stone with his theory that Lyndon Johnson was responsible for the assassination. The one common denominator that the most prominent WC critics have in common is that they're intelligent people. Of all the WC critics none I believe fit the intelligent balance sheet more than Dr. Cyril Wecht.( With this observation I'm revealing my bias toward those who are doctors in medicine whom I admire very much.) This is why I'm puzzled by the position taken by Dr. Cyril Wecht when it comes to the JFK assassination. There's no political angle that can be ascribed to his motive. At least none that I have seen.
 

A conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination appeals to both the extreme right and left wing. Anyone who is against Democracy and thinks we would be better off with a Communist dictatorship or a Fascist dictatorship.

Many CTers try to steer people into thinking that parts of the U. S. Government murdered President Kennedy. To get control of the government. And this same group controls the government to this day. If one can believe this one is halfway to convincing them that a non-secret dictatorship is maybe not worse than a secret dictatorship, which democracies seemed to be prone to falling under the control of.

Because extreme right wingers are in more disrepute than left wingers, I think most extreme right wingers keep silent on this, no wishing to harm the Pro-Conspiracy arguments. The left wingers are doing a good enough job convincing people that there was a conspiracy that they don?t need any help, and any help would be counter-productive.

[Gary Craig]

Or it may mean that someone is off by 100 mm or 4 inches.

I think the Clark Panel was off by 4 inches.

Metal Fragments can travel away through the brain and end up away from the bullet path.

If there were two bullets and bullets leave metal fragments along the path, why aren?t there two metal fragments paths?

What ballistic expert says that bullets do leave metal fragments that mark the path of the bullet? Experts who work with ballistic gel and run experiments to answer these questions.

"I think the Clark Panel was off by 4 inches."

Every government inquiry since the Clark Panel announced the 4 inch higher entrance wound in JFK's skull,

including the Rockefeller Commission and the HSCA, has agreed there was a bullet hole in the cowlick area.

Maybe you can share the information that shows they are incorrect.

"If there were two bullets and bullets leave metal fragments along the path, why aren?t there two metal fragments paths?"

I don't know.

My best guess would be that there were 2 different amunitions used. One left a metal trail,

one didn't.

Another possibility is the second shot hit the skull after it had been shattered and there wasn't enough

resistance to fragment it.

[Gary Craig]

A conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination appeals to both the extreme right and left wing. Anyone who is against Democracy and thinks we would be better off with a Communist dictatorship or a Fascist dictatorship.

Many CTers try to steer people into thinking that parts of the U. S. Government murdered President Kennedy. To get control of the government. And this same group controls the government to this day. If one can believe this one is halfway to convincing them that a non-secret dictatorship is maybe not worse than a secret dictatorship, which democracies seemed to be prone to falling under the control of.

Because extreme right wingers are in more disrepute than left wingers, I think most extreme right wingers keep silent on this, no wishing to harm the Pro-Conspiracy arguments. The left wingers are doing a good enough job convincing people that there was a conspiracy that they don?t need any help, and any help would be counter-productive.