JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Robin Unger on January 16, 2021, 12:21:30 PM
-
This is the only version of this image i have seen which actually shows the "Bone Flap"
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Bone_Flap.jpg)
-
This is the version from Lancer which is in my Autopsy Gallery.
it doesn't show the "Bone Flap"
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/BE5_HI.jpg)
-
This is the version from Lancer which is in my Autopsy Gallery.
it doesn't show the "Bone Flap"
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/BE5_HI.jpg)
I'm pretty sure I can see the bottom of the BF in the bottom picture.
It seems to be just a slightly cropped version of the pic above it.
I don't think I'm familiar with that top pic which seems to show inside JFK's head.
-
Yes the Lancer version just shows the
'bottom edge" of the flap
-
Jack_White_35mm_slide.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Jack_White_35mm_slide.jpg)
-
This is the version from Lancer which is in my Autopsy Gallery.
it doesn't show the "Bone Flap"
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/BE5_HI.jpg)
This image is far more tightly cropped than the others.
Are you a CTer by any chance?
-
Yes the Lancer version just shows the
'bottom edge" of the flap
If I was conspiratorially minded I would suggest the Lancer version (the only version I've ever seen of this pic) has been deliberately cropped to hide the catastrophic nature of JFK's head injury.
-
Quote:
This image is far more tightly cropped than the others.
Are you a CTer by any chance?
I am a Researcher, i go where ever the evidence takes me.
I refuse to take sides.
-
Jack_White_35mm_slide.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Jack_White_35mm_slide.jpg)
It's been said elsewhere Robin but I must compliment you on the standard of graphics you've been posting of late.
Really fantastic.
That said, the BF is obvious. The front of the dark shadow above JFK's ear ends in a straight line which seems to correspond with the edge of the BF.
The 'crown' of JFK's head appears to be completely missing (ie: blown clean off - Harper fragment?)
Can't really make out what the light area at the top/front of JFK's head represents.
-
Jack_White_35mm_slide.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Jack_White_35mm_slide.jpg)
One final observation:
The bottom pic appears to show a massive defect coming out of the back of JFK's head.
Just a couple of inches above his shirt collar at the back, sticking straight out of the back of his head.
-
JFK Lancer
For research purposes only.
President Kennedy's Autopsy was carried out at Bethesda Naval Hospital on November 22-23, 1963. The official autopsy photographs have never been published and are under seal at the National Archives.
On November 23, 1963, James K. Fox, photographer with the Intelligence Division of the US Secret Service, was given the autopsy film holders by JFK's personal physician, Admiral George Burkley, and told to develop them. On three occassions, he supervised their processing. According to Fox, Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman said to make himself copies as they would be history someday. He made three sets of black and white autopsy photo prints at the Secret Service lab. On November 27, 1963, additional official copies were made at the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC).
In 1981, those pictures were sold to JFK researcher Mark Crouch. During this time copies of the photos were given to several JFK researchers. Fox died in 1987. Writer David Lifton published the Fox set in "Best Evidence" (1988 Carrol & Graf Reprint). Later the photos were published in other books. Crouch retired from research in 1993 and sold his JFK assassination collection, including negatives made from the photos, to researcher Walt Brown who continues to make them available to researchers.
In 1992, the official autopsy photos were specifically exempted from the JFK Records Act and will not be released. ARRB Senior Staffer Doug Horne stated that after viewing digital copies of the original photos, he noted the Fox unofficial photos are cropped differently and are degraded as compared to the originals in the National Archives but are basically the same. Some photos taken at the autopsy missing and are not now a part of the official collection. Horne's further, specific comments on the photos are available here. (1998 JFK Lancer Conference)
The color photos were obtained by JFK researcher and amateur photographer Robert Groden who served as an upaid consultant to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Groden photographed the color autopsy photos without permission. Groden was paid by "The Globe" tabloid at their 1991 printing of those photos and has also published them in his books.
The photos on our website are the "Lifton" copies named as he included them in his book, "Best Evidence". The X-rays are exhibits from the HSCA hearings and were obtained by JFK Lancer from the National Archives.
-
How could a bullet exiting the back/rear of JFK's head cause a bone/skin flap to emerge on the side of the head? What would cause this flap to blow out or expand from the side? There is no blowout on the side if the blowout is in the back.
And with no side blowout then no skin and bone could blowout as well. I don't see how but I am totally ignorant about forensics science and how the skull/brain reacts to a gunshot.
-
How could a bullet exiting the back/rear of JFK's head cause a bone/skin flap to emerge on the side of the head? What would cause this flap to blow out or expand from the side? There is no blowout on the side if the blowout is in the back.
And with no side blowout then no skin and bone could blowout as well. I don't see how but I am totally ignorant about forensics science and how the skull/brain reacts to a gunshot.
What I find confusing is that so many witnesses appear to describe JFK's head wound as a blowout at the back of his head when the reality is far more catastrophic.
It appears that almost all of the top part of the right side of his skull has been blown off.
-
What I find confusing is that so many witnesses appear to describe JFK's head wound as a blowout at the back of his head when the reality is far more catastrophic.
It appears that almost all of the top part of the right side of his skull has been blown off.
Yes i agree :)
-
What I find confusing is that so many witnesses appear to describe JFK's head wound as a blowout at the back of his head when the reality is far more catastrophic.
It appears that almost all of the top part of the right side of his skull has been blown off.
Yes. And the back of the head looks intact. So we have two observations that support one another.
We all recognize that eyewitnesses can be wrong but this shockingly wrong? Including the Parkland doctors? Several of the ER doctors said they saw no skin/bone flap; and others never mentioned seeing it in their accounts. How did they miss it?
The Moorman photo and the Nix film both support, in my considered opinion, what we see in the Zapruder film. And the autopsy photos and x-rays support that.
So we can consider the eyewitness accounts in a rushed/excited environment or the physical evidence and the deliberate autopsy examination. I choose the latter.
-
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/head5.jpg)
-
Yes. And the back of the head looks intact. So we have two observations that support one another.
We all recognize that eyewitnesses can be wrong but this shockingly wrong? Including the Parkland doctors? Several of the ER doctors said they saw no skin/bone flap; and others never mentioned seeing it in their accounts. How did they miss it?
The Moorman photo and the Nix film both support, in my considered opinion, what we see in the Zapruder film. And the autopsy photos and x-rays support that.
So we can consider the eyewitness accounts in a rushed/excited environment or the physical evidence and the deliberate autopsy examination. I choose the latter.
It's hard to disagree Steve but I find it difficult to accept so many witnesses could be so specifically mistaken.
His head was such a mess but hardly any describe the top right side of his skull missing which it so clearly was.
-
What I find confusing is that so many witnesses appear to describe JFK's head wound as a blowout at the back of his head when the reality is far more catastrophic.
It appears that almost all of the top part of the right side of his skull has been blown off.
Hi Dan, If we could know the truth, I believe that what we see is the result of a very special projectile. The CIA had invented deadly projectiles that literally "exploded" on impact. The projectiles had been invented to be used against the leaders of "enemy nations" ( Cuba) .....
-
Jack_White_35mm_slide.
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Jack_White_35mm_slide.jpg)
Thanks for posting all your pictures and great information! I am a researcher too - just trying to dig out the truth and make sense of it. If I see evidence contrary to my theory, I have no problem changing my theory! I will admit sometimes my imaginations gets fairly vivid with possible scenarios!
It looks like the bottom image is a blow up of Zapruder Z316? Z315 also shows start of deformation process above the top of head and Z316 is a completion of it or extended outward! It appears to me that seeing more in Z316 than Z315 suggests an outward push coming from lower front and the possibility of a 2nd shot from front. With your better pictures, I can also now understand the vertical line on Z337 in front of his ear with all skin hanging including bone material still attached to it.
The whole front you see in all the images must include a good portion of face skin ripped off and hanging down? Maybe the first bullet sheared the scalp? When the head moves back and to the left with the 2nd shot, the entire hanging portion of skin/bone flips back so as to make the skin come back into position. In Z321/Z322 the head appears "shorter" in Zapruder frames. But what kind of shot can rip/tear skin off like that other than a glancing blow? Then, when the brakes are applied and the head rotates forward, the skin flap flies into a new position and pieces drop out at Z334/Z335 into his lap. That damage could also be from a Z315 penetration!
The more I look at it, the more I think there were multiple shots - almost simultaneously. That however is like having nuclear clock timing! If he gets hit initially at Z313 and then another comes in from say the gutter drain (down and front)......(Z315/Z316), that is only 1/8 of a second later and would be freaky perfect timing on a moving object! It passes almost through the existing open wound/fractured skull and comes out more to the top LHS of his head! It is the only theory I can come up with so far. A Z315/16or17 shot also matches what you see on the Moorman polaroid.
On an aside note, I had watched a documentary a few years ago claiming a gutter drain shot. The passage way is big enough for someone to stand in they claimed! That does make sense as drainage gets bigger as you get closer to its drain port by a river. That could match a second shot position! (Z315 and Z316 in progression).
The purple rectangular image you see in your post #15 would be the second shot entering an already fractured skull and exiting out in the green portion. To me, both anomalies in the cracks are a bit unusual artifacts. If that image is real, that is a very plausible explanation IMO. That entrance anomaly (purple rectangle) does look like a second shot! I have seen skull shots on game animals with "normal bullets" and you only see the penetration hole, no skull cracking in direct hits. Bullets generally lodge in the animal's head and doesn't have enough power to go through the thick skull and out the other side! Here the skull opened up, which then allows another bullet enough momentum to pass through to the other side and out! An hypothesis! I found a big game animal skull like that with only a small entrance hole on the prairie this last fall (no cracks) - obviously a hunter left it or landowner put it down and left the animal there years ago. In the case of JFK, I would expect the bullet should be laying there somewhere in the grass and could still be found (Z316).
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/head5.jpg)
-
Here is a photo illustration showing two different photos aligned and combined. It will give you an idea of what that area of the head looked like with the skin down and then reflected. PS - if you're on a slow connection, it may take a while to load:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Gj6op6Miask/XdfqNLPD_tI/AAAAAAAAFco/Jr-scSZf3lYN40rzcrRg-ePNBwbDkn1wQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/JFK-Back-of-Head-Animated.gif)
-
Here is a photo illustration showing two different photos aligned and combined. It will give you an idea of what that area of the head looked like with the skin down and then reflected. PS - if you're on a slow connection, it may take a while to load:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Gj6op6Miask/XdfqNLPD_tI/AAAAAAAAFco/Jr-scSZf3lYN40rzcrRg-ePNBwbDkn1wQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/JFK-Back-of-Head-Animated.gif)
If that is an exit wound....then the entry would of course be on the front of the head, which is what doctors at Parkland said about the throat wound. BUT...... The throat wound was only about the size of a 22 caliber bullet ( less than 1/4 inch) If this is an exit wound then it was probably not made by the same caliber bullet that caused the throat wound. ie There were two guns being fired from the front of the Limo.
-
Here is a photo illustration showing two different photos aligned and combined. It will give you an idea of what that area of the head looked like with the skin down and then reflected. PS - if you're on a slow connection, it may take a while to load:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Gj6op6Miask/XdfqNLPD_tI/AAAAAAAAFco/Jr-scSZf3lYN40rzcrRg-ePNBwbDkn1wQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/JFK-Back-of-Head-Animated.gif)
The graphic shows a potential exit (or entry) wound in the skull but where is the matching wound in the scalp?
-
Here is a photo illustration showing two different photos aligned and combined. It will give you an idea of what that area of the head looked like with the skin down and then reflected. PS - if you're on a slow connection, it may take a while to load:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Gj6op6Miask/XdfqNLPD_tI/AAAAAAAAFco/Jr-scSZf3lYN40rzcrRg-ePNBwbDkn1wQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/JFK-Back-of-Head-Animated.gif)
The NORMAL procedure in an autopsy is to slice across the top of the scalp from ear to ear
then retract the front portion of the scalp over the face, and the back portion of scalp back over the head towards the neck.
That is NOt what your image shows ?
(https://image.slidesharecdn.com/procedureofautopsy-160221113903/95/procedure-of-autopsy-35-638.jpg?cb=1456054775)
-
As is often the case in this area of research - the closer you look the weirder it gets.
I'm having trouble reconciling the following images:
(https://i.postimg.cc/c4gpfwcN/Screenshot-20.png) (https://postimages.org/)
In this image, at the point where the bottom of the bone flap meets the head, there seems to be a distinct line running across the scalp above which it seems possible to look into JFK's head. It is a very distinct line.
Then there is this image:
(https://i.postimg.cc/QVG0Q9XX/Screenshot-18.png) (https://postimages.org/)
It seems to show a very similar view of JFK's head but the distinct line in the scalp is gone. The gloved hand appears to be pulling at the scalp but this portion of scalp is missing in the first pic.
Then there is this graphic:
(https://i.postimg.cc/L4YqgQG4/JFKAutopsy-Morph.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
Here we see a mass of scalp hanging down towards the back of JFK's head but this mass of scalp is missing in the first pic. In the second pic it makes sense that the gloved hand is pulling this mass of scalp forward but why is it completely missing from the first pic?
-
ARRB Testimony of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, 26 Feb. 1996
Q. So you're saying that on the fourth view, which are the photographs that are in your hand right now, the scalp has been pulled back and folded back over the top of the head in a way different from the way that they appeared in the third view, the superior view of the head?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that fair?
A. In the previous one, it was permitted just to drop. In this one, it's pulled forward up over the forehead, toward the forehead.
Q. Who, if you recall, pulled up the scalp for the photograph to be taken?
A. There are about three of us involved here, because there are two right hands on that centimeter scale. I think that I probably was pulling the scalp up.
Q. Okay. Could we turn to the sixth view, which is described as "wound of entrance in right posterior occipital region"? That corresponds to black and white photos Nos. 15 and 16, and color photos Nos. 42 and 43. Do these photographs appear to you, Dr. Boswell, to be accurate representations of photographs taken during the autopsy of President Kennedy?
A. Yes.
Q. In that photograph, is the scalp of President Kennedy being pulled forward?
A. Yes.
Q. For what purpose was it being pulled forward?
A. In order to take the photograph, because if it wasn't pulled forward, this would just--the scalp would come down and cover the wound of entrance here. And this was necessary to demonstrate the wound here.
-
ARRB Testimony of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, 26 Feb. 1996
Q. So you're saying that on the fourth view, which are the photographs that are in your hand right now, the scalp has been pulled back and folded back over the top of the head in a way different from the way that they appeared in the third view, the superior view of the head?
A. Yes.
Q. Is that fair?
A. In the previous one, it was permitted just to drop. In this one, it's pulled forward up over the forehead, toward the forehead.
Q. Who, if you recall, pulled up the scalp for the photograph to be taken?
A. There are about three of us involved here, because there are two right hands on that centimeter scale. I think that I probably was pulling the scalp up.
It's not really addressing the issue. The scalp hanging down in the third graphic I posted is being pulled forward in the second pic.
However, in the first pic, all this mass of scalp is gone as if it's been cut away.
Maybe it has been cut away!
-
In the back of the head photo his hair is short, in the one where his scalp is hanging down his hair is very long
I assume that they cut the hair to identify the entrance wound in the scalp.
-
This is the version from Lancer which is in my Autopsy Gallery.
it doesn't show the "Bone Flap"
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/BE5_HI.jpg)
I was trying to read what is printed on that 30 cm ruler but without success. It would be the key detail in determining if the photos are genuine or not. I believe that this photos are NOT from JFK autopsy because of the ruler and other details. Who ever published this photos was most probably searching through autopsy photos files to find most suitable to JFK wounds.
If anybody finds interesting, try to read what is printed on the ruler.
-
In the back of the head photo his hair is short, in the one where his scalp is hanging down his hair is very long
I assume that they cut the hair to identify the entrance wound in the scalp.
That would make sense.
This would tell us the pic you originally posted was the last pic taken in terms of chronology.
-
I was trying to read what is printed on that 30 cm ruler but without success. It would be the key detail in determining if the photos are genuine or not. I believe that this photos are NOT from JFK autopsy because of the ruler and other details. Who ever published this photos was most probably searching through autopsy photos files to find most suitable to JFK wounds.
If anybody finds interesting, try to read what is printed on the ruler.
"Who ever published this photos was most probably searching through autopsy photos files to find most suitable to JFK wounds."
The title of this thread concerns a very specific aspect of JFK's head injury - the "Bone Flap".
The BF has been shown to be clearly present in the Z-film and is part of the utterly catastrophic nature of this injury.
The notion that someone had a look through autopsy photos and found a white male of the appropriate age and build with a similar catastrophic head injury, a part of which was this very distinctive Bone Flap, is so ridiculous it pains me to have to waste my time pointing it out.
The photo is fake because you can't make out what's on the ruler??
Really?
The next time you shave I recommend Occam's Razor.
-
"Who ever published this photos was most probably searching through autopsy photos files to find most suitable to JFK wounds."
The title of this thread concerns a very specific aspect of JFK's head injury - the "Bone Flap".
The BF has been shown to be clearly present in the Z-film and is part of the utterly catastrophic nature of this injury.
The notion that someone had a look through autopsy photos and found a white male of the appropriate age and build with a similar catastrophic head injury, a part of which was this very distinctive Bone Flap, is so ridiculous it pains me to have to waste my time pointing it out.
The photo is fake because you can't make out what's on the ruler??
Really?
The next time you shave I recommend Occam's Razor.
The only thing that might be ridiculous is that as a "Hero Member" you did not realize that there are huge number of evidences and "evidences" that are disputed for six decades. But lets be constructive, do you even know who and when published autopsy photos?
-
The only thing that might be ridiculous is that as a "Hero Member" you did not realize that there are huge number of evidences and "evidences" that are disputed for six decades. But lets be constructive, do you even know who and when published autopsy photos?
You're quite right Patrick,
I was completely unaware there was evidence that whoever "published this photos was most probably searching through autopsy photos files to find most suitable to JFK wounds."
Can you point me to that evidence please.
On the other hand, if this is something you've just completely made up based on zero evidence, could you clarify that.
Thanks.
-
History of the Autopsy photo's
Credit: JFK Lancer
For research purposes only.
President Kennedy's Autopsy was carried out at Bethesda Naval Hospital on November 22-23, 1963. The official autopsy photographs have never been published and are under seal at the National Archives.
On November 23, 1963, James K. Fox, photographer with the Intelligence Division of the US Secret Service, was given the autopsy film holders by JFK's personal physician, Admiral George Burkley, and told to develop them. On three occassions, he supervised their processing. According to Fox, Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman said to make himself copies as they would be history someday. He made three sets of black and white autopsy photo prints at the Secret Service lab. On November 27, 1963, additional official copies were made at the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC).
In 1981, those pictures were sold to JFK researcher Mark Crouch. During this time copies of the photos were given to several JFK researchers. Fox died in 1987. Writer David Lifton published the Fox set in "Best Evidence" (1988 Carrol & Graf Reprint). Later the photos were published in other books. Crouch retired from research in 1993 and sold his JFK assassination collection, including negatives made from the photos, to researcher Walt Brown who continues to make them available to researchers.
In 1992, the official autopsy photos were specifically exempted from the JFK Records Act and will not be released. ARRB Senior Staffer Doug Horne stated that after viewing digital copies of the original photos, he noted the Fox unofficial photos are cropped differently and are degraded as compared to the originals in the National Archives but are basically the same. Some photos taken at the autopsy missing and are not now a part of the official collection. Horne's further, specific comments on the photos are available here. (1998 JFK Lancer Conference)
The color photos were obtained by JFK researcher and amateur photographer Robert Groden who served as an upaid consultant to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Groden photographed the color autopsy photos without permission. Groden was paid by "The Globe" tabloid at their 1991 printing of those photos and has also published them in his books.
The photos below on our website are the "Lifton" copies named as he included them in his book, "Best Evidence". The X-rays are exhibits from the HSCA hearings and were obtained by JFK Lancer from the National Archives.
-
You're quite right Patrick,
I was completely unaware there was evidence that whoever "published this photos was most probably searching through autopsy photos files to find most suitable to JFK wounds."
Can you point me to that evidence please.
On the other hand, if this is something you've just completely made up based on zero evidence, could you clarify that.
Thanks.
No, I cannot provide you with the evidence same as you cannot provide evidences for your claims. After all, I wrote "most probably" and as you can see from Robin respond we are constantly reading said, heard, told, made copies, copies, copies... Is there a single, solid proof that this are genuine autopsy photos? No.
What I wrote is based on numerous discussions, inconsistent testimonies, lack of solid proofs and details seen on the photos. For example, the ruler seen on the photos is MOST PROBABLY a white plastic promo ruler popular during 60s, 70s, 80s. Do you expect to see a plastic promo ruler at Bathesda Naval Hospital? No. Do you expect to see Centimetres only ruler in US? No. Same with latex gloves which were introduced bit after the November 1963.
-
No, I cannot provide you with the evidence same as you cannot provide evidences for your claims.
What claims?
-
What claims?
That these are genuine autopsy photos.
-
That these are genuine autopsy photos.
I've not made that claim anywhere.
You've just completely made that up.
Just like you made up that silly story about someone searching through autopsy photos until they found of a white male, the same build and hairstyle, with the same type of catastrophic head injury, with a 'bone flap' hanging down from the right side etc.
Just take a second to think about how silly that story is. And what's this about latex gloves:
"... latex gloves which were introduced bit after the November 1963."
Really?
"The first recorded use of latex gloves was in 1883 by William Stewart Halsted at Johns Hopkins hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, United States. To protect his nurse's hands he asked the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company if they could make a rubber glove that could cope with being dipped in carbolic acid. The nurse soon became so adept with using the gloves that others, began following her example and using them too.
It wasn't until 1884 that the gloves are recorded as being used on a daily basis for medical procedures at Johns Hopkins hospital. The hospital has documentation by surgeons at the time complaining about how difficult it is to get the gloves fully onto their hands!"
[https://www.cascadehealthcaresolutions.com/History_of_Latex_Gloves_a/338.htm#:~:text=The%20first%20recorded%20use%20of,being%20dipped%20in%20carbolic%20acid.]
-
History of the Autopsy photo's
Credit: JFK Lancer
For research purposes only.
President Kennedy's Autopsy was carried out at Bethesda Naval Hospital on November 22-23, 1963. The official autopsy photographs have never been published and are under seal at the National Archives.
On November 23, 1963, James K. Fox, photographer with the Intelligence Division of the US Secret Service, was given the autopsy film holders by JFK's personal physician, Admiral George Burkley, and told to develop them. On three occassions, he supervised their processing. According to Fox, Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman said to make himself copies as they would be history someday. He made three sets of black and white autopsy photo prints at the Secret Service lab. On November 27, 1963, additional official copies were made at the National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC).
In 1981, those pictures were sold to JFK researcher Mark Crouch. During this time copies of the photos were given to several JFK researchers. Fox died in 1987. Writer David Lifton published the Fox set in "Best Evidence" (1988 Carrol & Graf Reprint). Later the photos were published in other books. Crouch retired from research in 1993 and sold his JFK assassination collection, including negatives made from the photos, to researcher Walt Brown who continues to make them available to researchers.
In 1992, the official autopsy photos were specifically exempted from the JFK Records Act and will not be released. ARRB Senior Staffer Doug Horne stated that after viewing digital copies of the original photos, he noted the Fox unofficial photos are cropped differently and are degraded as compared to the originals in the National Archives but are basically the same. Some photos taken at the autopsy missing and are not now a part of the official collection. Horne's further, specific comments on the photos are available here. (1998 JFK Lancer Conference)
The color photos were obtained by JFK researcher and amateur photographer Robert Groden who served as an upaid consultant to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Groden photographed the color autopsy photos without permission. Groden was paid by "The Globe" tabloid at their 1991 printing of those photos and has also published them in his books.
The photos below on our website are the "Lifton" copies named as he included them in his book, "Best Evidence". The X-rays are exhibits from the HSCA hearings and were obtained by JFK Lancer from the National Archives.
The forensic pathologist Peter Cummings examined the autopsy photos, x-rays and clothing stored at the National Archives for the Nova show "Cold Case" and said the "sharpness" in the originals are "much better" than the publicly available ones.
Cummings: "It was a real honor. It's something that I grew up with. As a boy, seeing the Zapruder film was one of the things that really fueled my interest in doing forensics. This was John F. Kennedy, and I was handling his clothing. Even though I went there for a very specific reason, and a scientific reason, certainly that moment wasn't lost on me.
The photographs themselves are crystal clear. The sharpness is amazing. You can get a lot of detail from them. Much better than anything you can find that's publicly available."
He also said: "Based on this fracture pattern in this skull, I think we can definitively say, "No. There was no shot from the side or from the front..."
Link here: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/cold-case-jfk/
-
I don't think we have any photograph or set of photographs that acccurately depict the body as it lay on the autopsy table at Bethesda. This might be by design or it might be because that night the federal government staffed the autopsy of the president with the most incompetent people available. People who didn't know what to photograph or how to photograph it. In picture after picture we ache to see something vital which is just outside the range of the photo. I get the feeling that the actual photos show conditions which would refute the autopsy and WC findings. I could take better photos with my $10 camera in 1963 than these jokes.
-
I've not made that claim anywhere.
You've just completely made that up.
Just like you made up that silly story about someone searching through autopsy photos until they found of a white male, the same build and hairstyle, with the same type of catastrophic head injury, with a 'bone flap' hanging down from the right side etc.
Just take a second to think about how silly that story is. And what's this about latex gloves:
"... latex gloves which were introduced bit after the November 1963."
Really?
"The first recorded use of latex gloves was in 1883 by William Stewart Halsted at Johns Hopkins hospital in Baltimore, Maryland, United States. To protect his nurse's hands he asked the Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company if they could make a rubber glove that could cope with being dipped in carbolic acid. The nurse soon became so adept with using the gloves that others, began following her example and using them too.
It wasn't until 1884 that the gloves are recorded as being used on a daily basis for medical procedures at Johns Hopkins hospital. The hospital has documentation by surgeons at the time complaining about how difficult it is to get the gloves fully onto their hands!"
[https://www.cascadehealthcaresolutions.com/History_of_Latex_Gloves_a/338.htm#:~:text=The%20first%20recorded%20use%20of,being%20dipped%20in%20carbolic%20acid.]
First latex medcal gloves were introduced in 1964. Go back and search better.
How many autopsies were done at Bathesda? Do we have any other photos from the same place and why not?
-
The bullet(s) created a wound with a hinge, like on a screen door. When the door is closed there is nothing to see from the outside but when the door swings open you can see inside. Jackie said she was trying to hold his head on … I think she was trying to keep the hinge closed to stymie the flow of blood and brain matter. This probably explains why so many at Parkland did not see any wound at all because the flap closed so perfectly. Note the wound as seen in Z-316 (flap open) and compare it to the “stare of death” photo (flap closed). However this explanation does nothing to explain the many other inconsistencies in the photos and the contradictions between many eyewitnesses (Clint Hill said the back of the head was blown out and a piece of the skull was lying on the car seat) and the photos.
-
The bullet(s) created a wound with a hinge, like on a screen door. When the door is closed there is nothing to see from the outside but when the door swings open you can see inside. Jackie said she was trying to hold his head on … I think she was trying to keep the hinge closed to stymie the flow of blood and brain matter. This probably explains why so many at Parkland did not see any wound at all because the flap closed so perfectly. Note the wound as seen in Z-316 (flap open) and compare it to the “stare of death” photo (flap closed). However this explanation does nothing to explain the many other inconsistencies in the photos and the contradictions between many eyewitnesses (Clint Hill said the back of the head was blown out and a piece of the skull was lying on the car seat) and the photos.
Warren Commission Suppressed Jackie's
Testimony On JFK's Head Wound
Court Reporter's Tape Shows
Additional Description Withheld
Dallas, TX -- August 5, 2001 -- JFK Lancer, an historical research firm reports that the Court Reporter's tape shows Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony before the Warren Commission had additional descriptions which were withheld.
Mrs. Kennedy testified in a short private session held at her home in Washington, D.C., with Chief Justice Earl Warren, Commission General Council J. Lee Rankin, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and a court reporter in attendance. Testimony of witnesses before the Warren Commission was made public in the fall of 1964. Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony was also released containing her description of her husbands wounds which read :
"And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything."
But a second section in which she described the wounds she saw carried only the notation: (Reference to Wounds Deleted).
Although very few Americans actually read those transcripts, historians and researchers who did read them were outraged, and waged a legal battle to have the omitted testimony released. In the early 1970s, a court decision required the United States Government to disclose to the public the contents of the still classified section of Mrs. Kennedy's 1964 Warren Commission testimony. Her previously withheld statement read:
" I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on."
Releasing this previously withheld section gave researchers what was assumed to be Mrs. Kennedy's complete description of the President's head wounds. Researchers took for granted that the hand-typed transcript page released by the National Archives from the official records of the Warren Commission ended the matter.
However, new analysis reveals that the original court tape actually reads:
"... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."
http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/jbkwc.html (http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/jbkwc.html)
-
Quote:
"... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."
In this description Jackie may be refering to the "Bone flap"
-
Quote:
"... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."
In this description Jackie may be refering to the "Bone flap"
(https://i.postimg.cc/tJGftK4J/autopsy-groden.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
I find this view of the BF quite difficult to reconcile with other views of it. Perhaps because JFK is lying on his back and the BF is more in a "closed" position.
-
" I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on."
I assume her "from the front" quote meant there was no wound visible from the front. But she adds " . . . there must have been." Why would she say that unless she thought he was shot from the front? I don't know.
-
There's the 'Mytton Gif' which shows the 'bone flap' almost back in situ and not hanging down by the side. The damage shown agrees well with Robin's graphic of the damage to JFK's skull. It appears the BF has been pushed back into position:
(https://i.postimg.cc/SxK2VSdv/JFKAutopsy-Morph.gif) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Head7.jpg)
We also have these images of the BF in different positions:
(https://i.postimg.cc/tJGftK4J/autopsy-groden.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
(https://i.postimg.cc/59wFSY1W/Bone-Flap-3.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
It would be interesting to get some kind of chronology of these photos.
One aspect of the case that I feel needs explaining is that so many people seem to report a blowout at the back of JFK's head when, in fact, almost all of the top right portion of JFK's skull has been blown out, from front to back.
-
(https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/albums/userpics/10001/Head7.jpg)
We also have these images of the BF in different positions:
(https://i.postimg.cc/tJGftK4J/autopsy-groden.jpg) (https://postimages.org/)
It would be interesting to get some kind of chronology of these photos.
One aspect of the case that I feel needs explaining is that so many people seem to report a blowout at the back of JFK's head when, in fact, almost all of the top right portion of JFK's skull has been blown out, from front to back.
There are certainly huge discrepancies between skull diagram and the picture below with an eye opened president. Where exactly is the BF? It should be within about 1" or so of the eye socket opening. It begs you to question whether that was a surgical cut which Gary Unger raises as to "normal" protocol of a standard autopsy which would not result in that cut. There also appears to be no blood on the face and a lack of frontal blowout. If that is a surgical cut, then that is not a BF from the assassination. Correctly you are drawing conclusion as to the importance of sequence of events. Was the BF shown surgical in nature! It does appear to have a sharp corner to match the cut line.
A skull cracking front shot originating from grassy knoll would give a rear blowout and would suggest a plausible explanation as to why Jacqueline wasn't blinded by material pushed forward from a posterior entrance hole. She never lost vision even in the cloud formed at Z313 and was first shocked almost a full second later with her reaction. There also appears to be a "mass" in front of the BF which is moving forward on the Zapruder film and is definitely not an intact face as shown on morgue slab picture. This also coincides with crowd movement going forward to grassy knoll and not back towards TSBD as further visual evidence of possible shot origin.