JFK's Throat Wound Was an Entrance Wound: Refuting the Shored-Wound Theory

[John Mytton]

There are two fatal problems with this shored-wound theory:

-- One, the throat wound was not behind the collar band. Even if one assumes the front shirt slits were made by an exiting bullet, those slits were clearly below the collar band, as proved by the evidence photo of the slits (see Figure 8 in “JFK’s Clothing Proves the Single-Bullet Theory Is Impossible,” https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MAgWA0frOLVeWY6ok9nzdrgpRN4Wv1AL/view).

 





JohnM

[Michael T. Griffith]

I documented in a previous reply that Boswell told journalist Richard Levine in an extensive interview in November 1966 that at the time of the autopsy the pathologists had already been told "what had been done by the physicians in Dallas," in addition to the "probable extent of the injuries" ("Pathologist Who Made Examination Defends Commission's Version," Baltimore Sun, November 25, 1966, p. 3; see also Harold Weisberg, Post Mortem, Skyhorse Publishing, 2007, reprint of 1975 edition, p. 37; and Weisberg, Never Again, Skyhorse Publishing, 2007, reprint of 1995 edition, p. 217).

I should add that Boswell also revealed the additional crucial information that Humes's phone conversations with the Dallas doctors the next day, 11/23/1963, "confirmed what was already a certainty to the pathologists -- that there was a bullet wound in the President's neck at the point of the tracheotomy incision" (Ibid., p. 4; see also Weisberg, Post Mortem, p. 37).

The official lie that emerged soon after the autopsy was that the autopsy doctors had no idea there was a throat wound until the day after the autopsy. Historian William Manchester was the first to expose this falsehood in his 1967 book The Death of a President, but his discovery was ignored by the major news outlets. Even most WC critics failed to take advantage of Manchester's discovery because they viewed Manchester as a tool of the Establishment, as a sort of "court historian," and thus didn't bother to read his book.

Dr. John Ebersole, the autopsy radiologist, was the next person to expose the official tale when he was interviewed by the HSCA in March 1978, as I also documented in a previous reply. Among other key disclosures, Ebersole informed the HSCA that Humes spoke with the Dallas doctors by no later 10:30 during the autopsy. This was at least half an hour before the end of the exam phase of the autopsy, and at least two hours before the end of the consultation phase of the autopsy.

Ebersole also revealed that "further probing" determined that "the distance traveled by this missile [the back-wound bullet] was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger." This is one of several disclosures that confirm what we learned with the release of the transcript of the WC's 1/27/1964 executive session, namely, that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound and that, not surprisingly, the back wound had no exit point. Mind you, this was late January 1964, and the transcript shows that Rankin was referring to documents from the autopsy.

As I also documented in a previous reply, military aide Richard Lipsey witnessed the consultation phase of the autopsy and reported to the HSCA that the pathologists were certain the back wound had no exit point. Crucially, Lipsey added that the doctors concluded that the rear-headshot bullet had exited the throat. This is a revealing datum because we know from the 1/27/1964 WC executive session transcript that one of the first drafts of the autopsy report said a fragment from the headshot exited the throat, that the throat wound was the exit point for a headshot fragment. This is also further proof that the pathologists knew about the throat wound during the autopsy.