An important point that I did not include in the OP is the fact that the autopsy evidence shows two separate, disconnected wound paths in the brain, i.e., the subcortical and cortical damage to JFK's brain. There is no wound path or fragment trail between these two wound paths—in other words, these are two separate, unconnected wound paths. The cortical damage is near the very top of the skull; it is close to the high fragment trail and is on the outer (or cortical) surface of the brain. The subcortical wound path is nearly 2 inches below the cortical damage and spans the length of the brain from front to back. The first expert to note these two separate wound paths was Dr. Joseph Riley, a neuroscientist who specialized in neuroanatomy.
British researcher Martin Hay has said the following on this issue:
. . . There were two separate and distinct areas of damage to the President’s brain, in the cortical and subcortical regions, and “no evidence of continuity” between the two. “An entrance wound located in the posteromedial parietal area cannot account for the subcortical damage. An entrance wound in the occipital region, as determined by the autopsy prosectors, may account for the subcortical damage but cannot account for the dorsolateral cortical damage.” As Dr. Riley concluded, “The cortical and subcortical wounds are anatomically distinct and could not have been produced by a single bullet. The fundamental conclusion is inescapable: John Kennedy’s head wounds could not have been caused by one bullet.” (https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/robert-a-wagner-the-assassination-of-jfk-perspectives-half-a-century-later)The cortical damage was described in detail by the HSCA FPP (7 HSCA 131). The subcortical damage was described in detail by the autopsy doctors in the supplemental autopsy report (CE 391, p. 1). Incredibly, however, the HSCA FPP never specifically described the subcortical damage, and the autopsy doctors said nothing about the cortical damage! More on this in a minute.
In his article “The Head Wounds of John Kennedy: One Bullet Cannot Account for the Injuries,” Dr. Riley explained the problem posed for the lone-gunman theory by these two separate areas of damage:
In addition to the cortical damage just described, there was massive subcortical damage. This subcortical damage was far more extensive in terms of volume of tissue damaged than the damage to the superficial cerebral cortex. In non-technical language, in addition to damage to the outside layer of the brain, there was massive damage deep inside as well, extending the entire anterior-posterior length of the brain. . . .
To understand this damage, it is important to keep several points in mind. First, when a bullet passes through the brain, it causes many types of damage in addition to direct mechanical damage from the missile. The multiple factors that can cause this additional damage need not be described here. The point, however, is that this wound may be viewed as a "cylinder of disruption" with a radius of approximately one inch that extends from back to front and passes through the center of the brain. . . .
Even the most superficial examination of the evidence demonstrates that the high entrance wound cannot account for all of the posterior subcortical damage, yet the Panel [the HSCA FPP] provides no explanation or analysis of the subcortical wounds. It is difficult to understand how a panel of competent forensic pathologists could have ignored the subcortical damage in their report. Clearly, the "high" entrance wound does not and cannot account for the observed subcortical damage. (“The Head Wounds of John Kennedy: One Bullet Cannot Account for the Injuries,” The Third Decade, March 1993, pp. 10-11, 14, http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/R Disk/Riley Joe/Item 04.pdf)Dr. Riley phrased it this way in his article “What Struck John”:
In the HSCA trajectory, the bullet path is restricted to the outer (cortical) surface, almost tangent to the brain. Yet there is a cavitation wound along the length of the brain, deep and parallel to the cortical surface. . . . The cavitation wound corresponds exactly to a trajectory predicted from the observations of the autopsy prosectors [i.e., the EOP entry site’s trajectory].
The exit wound is not and cannot be located where the HSCA Forensics Panel places it. Similarly, the autopsy photographs show intact cerebral cortex at where government panels have claimed there was a "high" entrance wound. (https://kenrahn.com/Marsh/Autopsy/riley.html))Dr. Riley also noted that the EOP entry site described in the autopsy report cannot account of for all the fragments and the damage to the cerebral cortex (i.e., the outer layer of brain tissue/the cerebrum’s outer layer):
The fragments distributed in and the damage to the cerebral cortex cannot be due to the shot described by Humes et al.; the wounds are discontinuous. (https://kenrahn.com/Marsh/Autopsy/riley.html)Here is one of Dr. Riley’s diagrams of the subcortical damage from his article “The Head Wounds of John Kennedy: One Bullet Cannot Account for the Injuries”:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f3TWcg1KIC_lyQNEJoCpxrsB5zf-ozZQ/view?usp=sharingCuriously, but not surprisingly, the HSCA FPP gave only a brief, superficial description of the subcortical damage, a description that, incredibly, gave the reader no idea that the damage was subcortical, i.e., that it was well below the cortical damage (7 HSCA 129). On the other hand, the autopsy doctors said nothing about the cortical damage, just as they said nothing about the high fragment trail.
Why these glaring omissions? Because the HSCA FPP and the autopsy doctors were only willing to acknowledge one bullet strike to the head and thus only one entry site. To make matters worse, the HSCA FPP refused to deal with evidence that contradicted the now-debunked cowlick entry site, and the autopsy doctors refused to deal with evidence that contradicted the EOP entry site.
Some might be curious to know what leading WC apologists have said about the two clearly separate cortical and subcortical wound paths in the brain. The answer: Nothing. Not one word. Vincent Bugliosi said nothing about them in his error-riddled tome
Reclaiming History. Similarly, Gerald Posner says nothing about them in his mistitled propaganda book
Case Closed.
