JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Gerry Down on March 21, 2022, 01:17:12 AM
-
Dr. David Mantik has discovered that a "T" shape was scratched into the original left lateral x-ray of JFKs skull. However when this x-ray is viewed at NARA, there is no evidence of scratching around this letter "T". This is because the one at NARA is a copy of the original and therefore there would be no evidence of scratching on the copy, but only the original. In other words, the x-ray at NARA is a copy of the original, with the original no where in sight.
This is problematic because the HSCA said all these x-rays were originals.
Dr. Mantik talks about this at 1 hour in on this video:
-
I knew about this. There is so much tampered with evidence by the government in this case there will be thousands of threads if each instance is written about separately here.
There are thousands of claimed tampering of evidence. Most of those don't hold up though. This appears to be scientific proof that at least one x-ray is indeed a copy with the original no where in sight.
The interesting thing here is if you locate the real left lateral x-ray, there could be other stuff located there too - like lost autopsy photos and more of the skull x-rays. Dr Ebersole said there were 5 or 6 skull x-rays taken at the autopsy yet there are only 3 at NARA.
-
So out of curiosity what incidences of tampering are not legit to you? Maybe list a few off the top of your head.
What about the 3mm object that shows up on the skull X ray after not being observed during autopsy?
All the autopsy stuff looks legit except for the issue that is the subject of this thread.
-
Dr. David Mantik has discovered that a "T" shape was scratched into the original left lateral x-ray of JFKs skull. However when this x-ray is viewed at NARA, there is no evidence of scratching around this letter "T". This is because the one at NARA is a copy of the original and therefore there would be no evidence of scratching on the copy, but only the original. In other words, the x-ray at NARA is a copy of the original, with the original no where in sight.
This is problematic because the HSCA said all these x-rays were originals.
Dr. Mantik talks about this at 1 hour in on this video:
Mantik is a joke. He is not a radiologist. He's a Radiation Oncologist. He's still carrying on about a 6.5mm metal object that he thinks is seen in the rear of the skull in the AP X-ray. If you really want to get educated on the autopsy X-rays , I recommend reading Chapters 18 and 18b of Pat Speer's online book.
https://www.patspeer.com/chapter18x-rayspecs
https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-18b-more-fun-with-x-rays
-
There was no 6.5 mm object on the outer table of the skull. The "6.5 mm" object seen in the AP X-ray is the 7 X 2 mm fragment removed by Humes.
Really? That's all the 6.5mm object is? But no doctor I've heard of in the case says this.
-
Really? That's all the 6.5mm object is? But no doctor I've heard of in the case says this.
From the ARRB deposition of Dr. James Humes:
HUMES: Two small irregularly-shaped fragments of metal are recovered. They measure 7 by 2 and 3 by 1. Well, that large one that you saw in that first AP view of the skull could be the 7-by-2 millimeter one that we handed over to the FBI.
(https://i.imgur.com/0LPwnVe.png)
-
BTW, consider CE388, Rydberg's drawing of the Pathologists' interpretation of the x-rays. In that drawing, the only large fragment depicted is shown residing behind the right eye. That can't be the 7x2mm fragment, which the x-rays show to be resting against the inside of the frontal bone above (and arguably ahead of) the right eye. Curiously, the only large fragment that corresponds to the location of the fragment in the Rydberg diagram is the 6.5mm opacity seen in the AP x-ray. Not sure exactly how to interpret this in the larger scheme of things, but it is something that should bear on the discussion and I rarely, if ever, see brought up.
(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pages/WH_Vol16_0504b.jpg)
Actually, it is the 7x2mm fragment in the Rydberg drawing. That fragment was just above and somewhat behind the President’s eye. The fragment seen imbedded in the frontal skull in the lateral view is much too high. It was never removed. The yellow arrow points to the 7 x 2 mm fragment.
(https://i.imgur.com/brLwpvw.png)
-
There are thousands of claimed tampering of evidence. Most of those don't hold up though.
Thousands? C'mon... dozens lets say. So that must mean a few tampering of evidence claims do hold up. Any at all equals a frame-up.
-
Actually, it is the 7x2mm fragment in the Rydberg drawing. That fragment was just above and somewhat behind the President’s eye. The fragment seen imbedded in the frontal skull in the lateral view is much too high. It was never removed. The yellow arrow points to the 7 x 2 mm fragment.
(https://i.imgur.com/brLwpvw.png)
The 7x2mm fragment is the one with the red arrow. You can clearly see it in the modify AP view. The only opacity in the AP view that would line up with the "fragment" pointed to by the yellow arrow would be the 6.5mm thing. Joe Durnavich showed it best when he aligned the AP and lateral views some years ago. It looks like this:
(https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/reading/orient.gif)
There's more here:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/reading/reading.htm (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/reading/reading.htm)
And his whole presentation starts here:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/ (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/)
-
The 7x2mm fragment is the one with the red arrow. You can clearly see it in the modify AP view. The only opacity in the AP view that would line up with the "fragment" pointed to by the yellow arrow would be the 6.5mm thing.
Exactly. That's just what I said. The "6.5" mm thing is the 7 X 2mm fragment removed by Humes. That fragment was just above and behind the right eye.
Mr. SPECTER - When you refer to this fragment, and you are pointing there, are you referring to the fragment depicted right above the President's right eye?
Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; above and somewhat behind the President's eye.
============
Joe Durnavich showed it best when he aligned the AP and lateral views some years ago. It looks like this:
(https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/reading/orient.gif)
There's more here:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/reading/reading.htm (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/reading/reading.htm)
And his whole presentation starts here:
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/ (https://www.jfk-assassination.net/xray/)
Joe Durnavich has the skull being tilted about 30 degree upward. Jerrol Custer said that it was tilted by as much as that.
-
Exactly. That's just what I said. The "6.5" mm thing is the 7 X 2mm fragment removed by Humes. That fragment was just above and behind the right eye.
Mr. SPECTER - When you refer to this fragment, and you are pointing there, are you referring to the fragment depicted right above the President's right eye?
Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; above and somewhat behind the President's eye.
============
Joe Durnavich has the skull being tilted about 30 degree upward. Jerrol Custer said that it was tilted by as much as that.
Durnavich demonstrates why he puts the angle where he does, and shows how different features line up with each other at the rotational angle he uses. What Custer may have said means nothing if you can't show how an alignment based on his statements works.
-
Durnavich demonstrates why he puts the angle where he does, and shows how different features line up with each other at the rotational angle he uses. What Custer may have said means nothing if you can't show how an alignment based on his statements works.
My point was that Durnavich and Custer are in agreement.
-
My point was that Durnavich and Custer are in agreement.
I'm a little confused here. Are you saying that the 7x2mm fragment is the 6.5mm fragment?
-
I'm a little confused here. Are you saying that the 7x2mm fragment is the 6.5mm fragment?
Yes.