Released File Shows J. Edgar Hoover Acknowledged Large Rear Head Wound

[Jake Maxwell]

A newly released FBI document discovered by the Mary Ferrell Foundation’s Rex Bradford shows that J. Edgar Hoover's WC testimony was altered to remove his acknowledgment that JFK had a large wound in the back of his head. A page from the original court reporter’s transcript of Hoover’s testimony shows that someone made handwritten changes, and those changes were printed in the published version in 1964.

Anyone can look at the newly released file and see that Hoover's testimony was altered to remove his reference to a large wound in the back of the head. The file shows the word “portions” was penciled in before “of the skull,” while the typewritten words “the back” were crossed out. His original statement was that

. . . the back of the skull had been practically shot off.

This was changed to

. . . portions of the skull had been practically shot off.

See https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=241589#relPageId=29.

This is certainly a substantive change. As many here know, over 40 witnesses, in three different locations, said there was a large wound in the right-rear part of JFK's head. These witnesses include two of the morticians who reassembled the skull after the autopsy, nearly all of the Dallas doctors and nurses (including the two nurses who cleaned the skull and wrapped the head in a sheet), and numerous witnesses at the autopsy.

Hoover almost certainly got his information from Sibert and O'Neill, both of whom said there was a large wound in the right-rear area of the skull. BTW, Sibert and O'Neill flatly rejected the SBT because they knew the back wound was well below the throat wound. Also, when the ARRB showed O'Neill the back-of-head autopsy photo, he said it looked like it had been altered because he saw a large wound in the right-rear part of the head at the autopsy.

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKsibertW.htm

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKoneillFX.htm

https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/medical_testimony/pdf/Oneill_9-12-97.pdf

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26961-fbi-agent-james-sibert-talks-about-jfks-wounds-and-the-autopsy/

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/new-jfk-file-who-altered-the-fbi

Indeed...
Everything Hoover said and did in the aftermath is very suspicious...
Hoover might have even ordered his testimony changed... A bad dude... and
And those who love the WC and Hoover seem irrational, and often resort to ad hominems when their argument is weak...

[Tom Graves]

Indeed...
Everything Hoover said and did in the aftermath is very suspicious...
Hoover might have even ordered his testimony changed... A bad dude... and
And those who love the WC and Hoover seem irrational, and often resort to ad hominems when their argument is weak...

"Former" KGB officer Vladimir Putin and all of his predecessors cherish Jake "Mr. McGoo" Maxwell.

[Royell Storing]

Dear Royell "Broken Record" Storing,

Aww . . . . never mind.

   When it comes to SCIENCE, you bet I'm a "Broken Record".

[Tom Graves]

When it comes to SCIENCE, you bet I'm a "Broken Record".

Comrade Storing,

It's hard to believe that someone like you, who posts about every fifth word in either ALL CAPS or with an uppercase First Letter is scientifically minded.

Instead, it seems to reflect your obsessiveness, dogmatism, and high-strung emotionality.

Did you know that, for starters, the "scientific" Knott Laboratory graphics thingy is from a video game, that it has the sniper firing from the wrong side of the window, and that it doesn't have JBC turned far enough to his right?

LOL!

[Michael T. Griffith]

Dear Michael "'Useful Idiot' or Worse" Griffith, Silbert and O'Neil had a real clear, up-close view of the rear of JFK's shaved head, right? -- Tom

You don't know??? Sibert and O'Neill helped carry in the casket and unload the body. They saw the body unwrapped and placed on the autopsy table. O'Neill said that when they unwrapped the sheets from around the head, they could see a large wound in the back of the head.

Sibert and O'Neill were in the autopsy room from the time the body was brought in until just before the morticians began to prepare the body for burial. They were close enough to see JFK's lumbar scar. They were close enough to hear what Finck, Humes, and Boswell were saying to each other. They were close enough to get a good look at the back wound. They watched the repeated probes of the back wound, when JFK's body was turned and positioned "every which way" to facilitate the probing, which would have given them ample good looks at the back of his head and at the back wound.

And remember: Sibert and O'Neill were interviewed by the HSCA and even drew diagrams of the large head wound--and both placed it in the back of the head, and nowhere near the area above the right ear.

O'Neill told the ARRB that the autopsy photo of the back of the head looked like it had been "doctored in some way," and that the brain in the brain photos did not look like JFK's brain at the autopsy, that the brain at the autopsy was smaller and more damaged. Sibert said the back-of-head photos did not "at all" look like JFK's head during the autopsy, and speculated that scalp had been pulled over the back-of-head wound for the photo.

The WC didn't dare call Sibert and O'Neill to testify. Both would have flatly contradicted the SBT and would provided two more accounts of a large right-rear head wound.

[Royell Storing]

Comrade Storing,

It's hard to believe that someone like you, who posts about every fifth word in either ALL CAPS or with an uppercase First Letter is scientifically minded.

Instead, it seems to reflect your obsessiveness, dogmatism, and high-strung emotionality.

Did you know that, for starters, the "scientific" Knott Laboratory graphics thingy is from a video game, that it has the sniper firing from the wrong side of the window, and that it doesn't have JBC turned far enough to his right?

LOL!

   Knott Lab Forensic SCIENCE is used to track bullet trajectories and then admitted as Evidence in courtrooms across the USA onna daily basis. It's the Gold Standard. Opinions such as yours pale in comparison to the findings of SCIENCE. 

[Lance Payette]

Dear Royell "Broken Record" Storing,

Aww . . . . never mind.

"Aww ... never mind" is precisely the rational response to this forum in its entirety. When was the last discussion here that was actually worth having from either a CT or LN perspective? Post something that's moderately substantive and the regulars are struck dumb. I don't know how many threads I've started to respond to out of sheer boredom and then had precisely that response: Aww ... never mind. I actually miss Team Sock Puppet, ghastly as that thought is even to me. Ditto for the Ed Forum - it's barely worth lurking for three minutes a day. Perhaps the JFKA is simply dead? It's all just ... just ... aww, never mind (although B-O-R-I-N-G is certainly the term that springs to mind).