Did the Clark Panel Examine a Different Set of JFK Autopsy Skull X-Rays?

[Michael T. Griffith]

I have sometimes wondered if the Clark Panel was given an earlier version of the altered JFK autopsy skull x-rays, a version that differed from the final version, i.e., the one now in evidence at the National Archives.

Why? Because it is often overlooked that the Clark Panel said the fragment trail on the lateral skull x-rays ran parallel with the EOP and was consistent with the fragment trail described in the autopsy report! Yet, the extant skull x-rays do not show bullet fragments near the EOP, and do not show a trail of fragments leading from the EOP to a point near the right orbit. Instead, they show a high fragment trail that has a cluster of tiny fragments in the right frontal region and a fragment trail going from the cluster backward and upward and never reaching the rear outer table.

The Clark Panel said the fragments were above “a horizontal plane through the floor of the anterior fossa of the skull,” i.e., a horizontal line parallel with the EOP and thus consistent with the autopsy report’s description of “along a line corresponding with a line joining the above-described small occipital wound and the right supra-orbital ridge”!

Even more incredibly and erroneously, and in contradiction to their claim that the high fragment trail was the trail described in the autopsy report, the Clark Panel claimed the high fragment trail lined up with the revised entry site. This is astounding because the revised entry site (aka the cowlick entry site) is about 4 inches higher than the EOP site given in the autopsy report. Moreover, as Dr. David O. Davis informed the HSCA, the high fragment trail is actually about 5 cm (1.9 inches) above the cowlick entry site (1 HSCA 201). Dr. Gary Aguilar concurs:

Therefore, the trail of fragments is 5 cm higher than the “above-mentioned hole”
[the cowlick entry site]. And so, if extended posteriorly, the fragment trail does not
pass through the “above-mentioned hole,” but 5 cm above it. (https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_3.htm)

So what skull x-rays were the Clark Panel experts examining? The fragment trail they described is nowhere to be seen on the autopsy skull x-rays now in evidence. Either (1) the panel members were legally blind, or (2) they were lying about what the x-rays showed (keep in mind the x-rays had not been released and were not expected to be released for many decades), or (3) they were looking at an earlier version of the altered skull x-rays.

Also, where is the entry site that could explain the fragments in the high fragment trail? Keep in mind that the high fragment trail does not extend to the back of the skull and is 1.9 inches above the now-debunked cowlick entry site. It is concentrated in the right frontal region and dissipates toward the back of the head, and falls well short of the back of the head.

And, again, why does the autopsy report say nothing about the high fragment trail? Why does the autopsy report describe a low fragment trail that is nowhere to be seen on the extant skull x-rays? Try to fathom how even a first-year medical student could have mistaken a fragment trail near the top of the head for a fragment trail that started several inches lower at the EOP and that ran to a point just above the right eye.

[Michael T. Griffith]

The Clark Panel's statements about the fragment trail and the cowlick entry site are not the only indications that they either viewed a different set of JFK autopsy skull x-rays or purposely misrepresented what they saw. The Clark Panel also claimed that no bullet fragments were visible on the left side of the brain and that no fragments appeared below a horizonal line through the bottom of the front fossa of the skull (the front/anterior fossa houses the frontal lobes of the brain). Said the panel,

None can be visualized on the left side of brain and none below a horizontal
plane through the floor of the anterior fossa of the skull. (p. 11)

However, there are in fact fragments in the left side of JFK’s brain, and there are also fragments lying below the “horizontal plane” of the floor of the anterior fossa, on both the left and right sides of the skull.

Now, how did these four experienced, well-trained forensic experts miss the fragments on the left side of the brain and the fragments below the floor of the front fossa?

The Clark Panel consisted of Dr. William H. Carnes, professor of pathology, University of Utah; Dr. Russell S. Fisher, the famed Baltimore medical examiner; Dr. Russell H. Morgan, the head of the radiology department at Johns Hopkins University; and Dr. Alan R. Moritz, professor of pathology at Case Western Reserve University.

It is hard to fathom how all four of these experts could have failed to notice the left-side fragments and the fragments below the floor of the front fossa of the skull. Surely they would have seen them, if they had been on the x-rays they examined.

The only innocent explanation is that all four of those experts somehow "missed" those fragments, a wildly implausible idea.

[Joffrey van de Wiel]

[Michael T. Griffith]

That is an excellent video.

I have yet to see a single WC apologist try to explain (1) why the autopsy doctors said nothing about the high fragment trail so plainly visible on the extant JFK skull x-rays, and (2) why the skull x-rays contain no trace of the low fragment trail that the autopsy doctors described in the autopsy report, that Dr. Humes described in his WC testimony, and that the autopsy doctors reaffirmed after viewing the autopsy materials for five hours in November 1966.

The only response I've seen is "people make mistakes." No, three pathologists don't make those kinds of mistakes, and they don't repeat those mistakes after getting to review the autopsy materials for five hours. 

As Dr. Joseph Riley noted, the two wound paths through the brain--cortical and subcortical--were separate and distinct from each other, and they had no point of junction, so they must have been made by two bullets.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Bumping this thread to bring to the front clear evidence of fraud in the autopsy materials. The same people who dismiss the idea that some evidence was altered or fabricated and that some government-hired experts lied or blundered are the same folks who continue to decline to explain the many facts that these things occurred.

In 1975, Dr. Fred Hodges, then the chief of neuroradiology at the John Hopkins medical school, was asked to examine the JFK autopsy materials for the Rockefeller Commission. Among other things, he noted in his report that a "goodly portion" of the right brain was "missing":

AP and two lateral views show. . . . A goodly portion of the right brain is
apparently missing and the anterior part of the right cranial cavity contains air.
(https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32027#relPageId=3, p. 2)

The absence of a good portion of the right side of the brain means the autopsy brain photos are fraudulent. They show no more than 1-2 ounces of brain tissue missing from the entire brain, as confirmed by none other than HSCA FPP chairman Dr. Michael Baden in a recorded interview with Vincent Bugliosi.

Dr. Hodges’ observation that in the skull x-rays “a goodly portion of the right brain is apparently missing” has been confirmed by Dr. David Mantik, Dr. Michael Chesser, and Dr. Gary Aguilar. Dr. Mantik confirmed this both with direct observation and with optical density measurements, determining that over half of the right side of the brain is missing in the skull x-rays.

Further confirmation of a large amount of missing brain 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).

Even the ARRB's forensic radiologist, Dr. John Fitzpatrick, who was loathe to see any evidence of fraud in the autopsy materials, said that the upper-right dark region on the AP x-ray indicates "some absence of brain" (Meeting Report: Independent Review of JFK Autopsy X-Rays and Photographs By Outside Consultant, 2/9/96, ARRB, p. 1).

But, as mentioned, the autopsy brain photos show only 1-2 ounces of brain tissue missing from the entire brain. Also, the autopsy report gives the weight of the brain as an impossible 1,500 grams, 10% larger than the average male brain weight. 1,500 grams equals 52.9 ounces, which means that the brain photos show only 2-4% of the brain missing, but the skull x-rays show much more missing brain than just 2-4%. And keep in mind that the brain photos are supposed to show the same brain that splattered 16 surfaces with brain matter during the shooting.

[Jarrett Smith]

Bumping this thread to bring to the front clear evidence of fraud in the autopsy materials. The same people who dismiss the idea that some evidence was altered or fabricated and that some government-hired experts lied or blundered are the same folks who continue to decline to explain the many facts that these things occurred.

In 1975, Dr. Fred Hodges, then the chief of neuroradiology at the John Hopkins medical school, was asked to examine the JFK autopsy materials for the Rockefeller Commission. Among other things, he noted in his report that a "goodly portion" of the right brain was "missing":

AP and two lateral views show. . . . A goodly portion of the right brain is
apparently missing and the anterior part of the right cranial cavity contains air.
(https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32027#relPageId=3, p. 2)

The absence of a good portion of the right side of the brain means the autopsy brain photos are fraudulent. They show no more than 1-2 ounces of brain tissue missing from the entire brain, as confirmed by none other than HSCA FPP chairman Dr. Michael Baden in a recorded interview with Vincent Bugliosi.

Dr. Hodges’ observation that in the skull x-rays “a goodly portion of the right brain is apparently missing” has been confirmed by Dr. David Mantik, Dr. Michael Chesser, and Dr. Gary Aguilar. Dr. Mantik confirmed this both with direct observation and with optical density measurements, determining that over half of the right side of the brain is missing in the skull x-rays.

Further confirmation of a large amount of missing brain 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).

Even the ARRB's forensic radiologist, Dr. John Fitzpatrick, who was loathe to see any evidence of fraud in the autopsy materials, said that the upper-right dark region on the AP x-ray indicates "some absence of brain" (Meeting Report: Independent Review of JFK Autopsy X-Rays and Photographs By Outside Consultant, 2/9/96, ARRB, p. 1).

But, as mentioned, the autopsy brain photos show only 1-2 ounces of brain tissue missing from the entire brain. Also, the autopsy report gives the weight of the brain as an impossible 1,500 grams, 10% larger than the average male brain weight. 1,500 grams equals 52.9 ounces, which means that the brain photos show only 2-4% of the brain missing, but the skull x-rays show much more missing brain than just 2-4%. And keep in mind that the brain photos are supposed to show the same brain that splattered 16 surfaces with brain matter during the shooting.

https://youtu.be/71VZxdYxSAQ?t=3727

Dr. Salyer tells how the real wound was.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Dr. Salyer tells how the real wound was.

That's a good video. A number of other Parkland doctors have said the autopsy photos are not accurate and/or have been altered. A lot of people don't understand that the wound was tangential, that the bullet created a flap along the right side of the head before it exited the right-rear part of the skull--that's what Dr. Salyer was describing. Dr. Crenshaw described the same thing. Notice, too, what Nurse Bell said in the segment after Salyer's segment: that they lifted up the scalp to show her the entire wound.

Dr. Salyer's observation that the autopsy photo he was handling showed two small rounded beveled wounds near each other is devastating to the lone-gunman case.

This being said, these points don't specifically deal with the problems under discussion: the drastic conflict between the skull x-rays and the brain photos, the failure of the autopsy doctors to mention the high fragment trail, the Clark Panel's failure to mention obvious brain damage, the fact that the skull x-rays show no low fragment trail, etc., etc.