LNers Can't Explain the Two Back-of-Head Bullet Fragments

[Jack Nessan]

Just bumping this thread to remind readers that WC apologists have no credible explanation for the back-of-head bullet fragments, for the 6.5 mm object, for the autopsy doctors' failure to mention the high fragment trail, and for the fact that the extant autopsy x-rays do not show the EOP-to-right-orbit fragment trail described in the autopsy report and reaffirmed by the autopsy doctors after viewing the autopsy materials for five hours in 1966.

.."and for the fact that the extant autopsy x-rays do not show the EOP-to-right-orbit fragment trail"

Because there was no brain left to leave a trail in. Even you seem to understand that or you did once, anyway.

MG-- "As I said, Dr. Hodges’ observation that in the skull x-rays “a goodly portion of the right brain is apparently missing” has been confirmed by several experts, including Dr. Mantik, Dr. Chesser, and Dr. Aguilar. Dr. Mantik confirmed this both with direct analysis and with OD measurements, determining that over one-half of the right side of the brain is missing in the skull x-rays.
 
Further confirmation of this comes from a surprising source: Dr. James Humes. Humes admitted to JAMA that "two thirds of the right cerebrum had been blown away" (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA], May 27, 1992, p. 2798).
 
We also know that bits of JFK's brain were blown onto 16 surfaces, including the windshields of the two left-trailing patrolmen, the windshield of the follow-up car, Agent Kinney's clothes, Jackie's dress, the rear hood, and on several surfaces inside the limo."

[John Mytton]

.."and for the fact that the extant autopsy x-rays do not show the EOP-to-right-orbit fragment trail"

Because there was no brain left to leave a trail

Exactly, this is so obvious that even blind Freddy could work it out, when Griffith initially posted his "theory", I pointed out with the following visual aid that a large portion of the right hemisphere of Kennedy's brain was blasted out and subsequently the accompanying lead fragments went along with the exploding matter, it's not exactly rocket science. But Griffith never has been the sharpest tool in the shed.



JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

.."and for the fact that the extant autopsy x-rays do not show the EOP-to-right-orbit fragment trail"

Because there was no brain left to leave a trail in. Even you seem to understand that or you did once, anyway.

MG-- "As I said, Dr. Hodges’ observation that in the skull x-rays “a goodly portion of the right brain is apparently missing” has been confirmed by several experts, including Dr. Mantik, Dr. Chesser, and Dr. Aguilar. Dr. Mantik confirmed this both with direct analysis and with OD measurements, determining that over one-half of the right side of the brain is missing in the skull x-rays.
 
Further confirmation of this comes from a surprising source: Dr. James Humes. Humes admitted to JAMA that "two thirds of the right cerebrum had been blown away" (Journal of the American Medical Association [JAMA], May 27, 1992, p. 2798).
 
We also know that bits of JFK's brain were blown onto 16 surfaces, including the windshields of the two left-trailing patrolmen, the windshield of the follow-up car, Agent Kinney's clothes, Jackie's dress, the rear hood, and on several surfaces inside the limo."

So I take it, then, that you now admit that the JFK autopsy brain photos are clearly fake, that they cannot be photos of JFK's brain because they show only "an ounce or two" of brain matter missing? They show a show large front-to-back laceration but virtually no missing brain tissue. Dr. Baden assured Vincent Bugliosi that the brain photos show no more than "an ounce or two" of brain tissue missing. They also show the cerebellum to be undamaged, a fact that led Dr. Finck to question their authenticity when questioned by the HSCA FPP.

I don't think you understand the problems here. For one thing, the large amount of missing brain does not affect the back-of-head fragments because those fragments are in the two layers of the outer table of the skull. Your side has no rational, credible explanation for those fragments and for the 6.5 mm object.

I certainly agree that the x-rays show a large chunk of the right side of the brain missing. Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser have confirmed this with OD measurements. But the autopsy brain photos show virtually no tissue missing from the right side of the brain, no more than "an ounce or two." So either the brain photos do not show JFK's brain or the autopsy x-rays are not x-rays of JFK's skull.

[Jack Nessan]

So I take it, then, that you now admit that the JFK autopsy brain photos are clearly fake, that they cannot be photos of JFK's brain because they show only "an ounce or two" of brain matter missing? They show a show large front-to-back laceration but virtually no missing brain tissue. Dr. Baden assured Vincent Bugliosi that the brain photos show no more than "an ounce or two" of brain tissue missing. They also show the cerebellum to be undamaged, a fact that led Dr. Finck to question their authenticity when questioned by the HSCA FPP.

I don't think you understand the problems here. For one thing, the large amount of missing brain does not affect the back-of-head fragments because those fragments are in the two layers of the outer table of the skull. Your side has no rational, credible explanation for those fragments and for the 6.5 mm object.

I certainly agree that the x-rays show a large chunk of the right side of the brain missing. Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser have confirmed this with OD measurements. But the autopsy brain photos show virtually no tissue missing from the right side of the brain, no more than "an ounce or two." So either the brain photos do not show JFK's brain or the autopsy x-rays are not x-rays of JFK's skull.

So I take it, then, that you now admit that the JFK autopsy brain photos are clearly fake, that they cannot be photos of JFK's brain because they show only "an ounce or two" of brain matter missing? They show a show large front-to-back laceration but virtually no missing brain tissue. Dr. Baden assured Vincent Bugliosi that the brain photos show no more than "an ounce or two" of brain tissue missing. They also show the cerebellum to be undamaged, a fact that led Dr. Finck to question their authenticity when questioned by the HSCA FPP.

Admit to what? I will admit you seem to struggle with understanding what these Dr’s state in their testimonies. Here is what Dr Baden told the HSCA panel:

“Dr. BADEN - Yes. I think, in general, the doctors who perform the autopsy have a better opportunity to make valid observations than those who come later, but in this instance, the photographs taken during the course of the autopsy and the X-rays taken during the course of the autopsy and the autopsy report itself provide sufficient evidence for the panel members to arrive at valid, we feel, valid, independent conclusions.”

“Dr. BADEN - Thank you, sir. There is present evidence of a bullet track only in the upper portion of the skull; these metal fragments have moved a bit because some of the fragments are in the loose scalp tissues and soft tissues that are movable. There is no evidence of any metal fragments in the lower portion of the skull in the X-rays, nor in the photographs. Now, the brain, as was mentioned, is not available for our examination and was not thoroughly examined, nor examined even in the normal fashion, in 1963. However, it was described externally and many photographs were taken of the brain. Miss Dox has prepared a diagram of the brain as seen here, which shows how the brain looked when it was examined and before it was misplaced or lost. This fairly and accurately represents the extensive damage, and injury to the right top of the brain, that I am pointing to, that is apparent in the photographs. This, on the left side, is what the normal brain looks like and what the appearance would be on the right side if it were not injured by the bullet track. We do see some of the lower portion of the brain here, the cerebellum area. This area would have to be injured, in the unanimous opinion of the medical panel, if a bullet entered in the lower scalp area near the external occipital protuberance which is the area of discussion relative to a second
lower bullet in the back of the head. We did not see any photographic or X-ray evidence of, and there is no description indicating any injury of, the brain other than the extensive damage to the right upper part of the brain consistent with the upper track which the panel agrees to.”

 
 
I don't think you understand the problems here. For one thing, the large amount of missing brain does not affect the back-of-head fragments because those fragments are in the two layers of the outer table of the skull. Your side has no rational, credible explanation for those fragments and for the 6.5 mm object.

Isn’t the 6.5mm object considered an artifact not something to do with the bullet?

It has been described as an explosion took place in his brain. You seem to think you can identify what took place in this explosion and how it should appear at least to you.

“Dr. BADEN - Thank you, sir. There is present evidence of a bullet track only in the upper portion of the skull; these metal fragments have moved a bit because some of the fragments are in the loose scalp tissues and soft tissues that are movable. There is no evidence of any metal fragments in the lower portion of the skull in the X-rays, nor in the photographs.”

 
I certainly agree that the x-rays show a large chunk of the right side of the brain missing. Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser have confirmed this with OD measurements. But the autopsy brain photos show virtually no tissue missing from the right side of the brain, no more than "an ounce or two." So either the brain photos do not show JFK's brain or the autopsy x-rays are not x-rays of JFK's skull.

No, the HSCA simply preferred the Autopsy Xrays to the Autopsy photos as a tool to explain what took place. Do you disagree with the conclusion of physically weighing the brain to them estimating the damage based on a photo?

Dr. BADEN - Thank you, sir. There is present evidence of a bullet track only in the upper portion of the skull; these metal fragments have moved a bit because some of the fragments are in the loose scalp tissues and soft tissues that are movable. There is no evidence of any metal fragments in the lower portion of the skull in the X-rays, nor in the photographs. Now, the brain, as was mentioned, is not available for our examination and was not thoroughly examined, nor examined even in the normal fashion, in 1963. However, it was described externally and many photographs were taken of the brain. Miss Dox has prepared a diagram of the brain as seen here, which shows how the brain looked when it was examined and before it was misplaced or lost. This fairly and accurately represents the extensive damage, and injury to the right top of the brain, that I am pointing to, that is apparent in the photographs. This, on the left side, is what the normal brain looks like and what the appearance would be on the right side if it were not injured by the bullet track. We do see some of the lower portion of the brain here, the cerebellum area. This area would have to be injured, in the unanimous opinion of the medical panel, if a bullet entered in the lower scalp area near the external occipital protuberance which is the area of discussion relative to a second
lower bullet in the back of the head. We did not see any photographic or X-ray evidence of, and there is no description indicating any injury of, the brain other than the extensive damage to the right upper part of the brain consistent with the upper track which the panel agrees to.
and this is unanimous, all nine members, that X-rays clearly show the entrance perforation in the skull to be immediately beneath this perforation in the upper scalp skin; and further, although the original examination of the brain was not complete, photographs of the brain were examined by the panel members, and do show the injury to the brain itself is on the top portion of the brain.

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

Did you miss the part of Dr Baden’s testimony where it was ascertained the bullet came from the rear and there was only one bullet? 

Dr Baden “that it is the firm conclusion of the panel that there is no bullet perforation of entrance beneath that brain tissue nor any place on the skull and we find no evidence to support anything but a single gunshot wound of entrance in the back of the President's head.”