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.     

[John Corbett]

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.   

What the hell difference does it make when the autopsy team figured out there had been an exit wound in the throat. They eventually got there. I suspect it was a gradual process. At first they were confused because they had an entrance wound with no apparent exit and no bullet in the body. That fostered the preposterous hypothesis that the bullet had only gone a few inches into the back and then somehow worked its way out. It is completely absurd to think that a bullet would only penetrate a short distance into soft tissue, but they apparently were groping for an answer early on in the process. As they continued to examine the body, they discovered further tissue damage, the contusion of the pleura, the perforation of the strap muscles, and the damage to the rings of the trachea, there must have been a moment when the thought hit them that, "Holy crap, this leads us right to the tracheostomy incision". That discovery would naturally lead them to at least consider the possibility that the exit wound had been used to perform the tracheostomy. Naturally, they would want to confirm that with the ER team at Parkland. There were several phone calls from Bethesda to Dr. Perry that night and the next morning. Who knows during which conversation Perry confirmed to Humes that the tracheostomy had been performed over the exit wound. Again, what the hell difference does it make when that confirmation was given. The Bethesda team arrived at the correct answer.

It defies credulity that both the back wound and throat wound were entrance wounds in which a bullet penetrated only a short distance into soft tissue so that it could work its way out or be dug out of JFK's body. Only really silly people would believe such a thing was remotely possible. 

[Michael T. Griffith]

What the hell difference does it make when the autopsy team figured out there had been an exit wound in the throat. They eventually got there. I suspect it was a gradual process. At first they were confused because they had an entrance wound with no apparent exit and no bullet in the body. That fostered the preposterous hypothesis that the bullet had only gone a few inches into the back and then somehow worked its way out. It is completely absurd to think that a bullet would only penetrate a short distance into soft tissue, but they apparently were groping for an answer early on in the process. As they continued to examine the body, they discovered further tissue damage, the contusion of the pleura, the perforation of the strap muscles, and the damage to the rings of the trachea, there must have been a moment when the thought hit them that, "Holy crap, this leads us right to the tracheostomy incision". That discovery would naturally lead them to at least consider the possibility that the exit wound had been used to perform the tracheostomy. Naturally, they would want to confirm that with the ER team at Parkland. There were several phone calls from Bethesda to Dr. Perry that night and the next morning. Who knows during which conversation Perry confirmed to Humes that the tracheostomy had been performed over the exit wound. Again, what the hell difference does it make when that confirmation was given. The Bethesda team arrived at the correct answer.

It defies credulity that both the back wound and throat wound were entrance wounds in which a bullet penetrated only a short distance into soft tissue so that it could work its way out or be dug out of JFK's body. Only really silly people would believe such a thing was remotely possible.

And the John Corbett Comedy Show continues. As usual, you ignore all contrary facts and repeat talking points that those facts refuted years ago.

[John Corbett]

And the John Corbett Comedy Show continues. As usual, you ignore all contrary facts and repeat talking points that those facts refuted years ago.

You don't present facts. You present opinions and factoids, the products of your FUBAR analysis.