JFK Assassination Forum

Did "they" say it was Oswald's wallet....

  As a matter of fact one cop did;
https://jfk.boards.net/post/4553

"First on the scene recovered Oswald's wallet there too."
" K H Croy Sgt. Kenneth Croy DPD Reservve #86"(?)

Garbage. They would have said that.

That's bizarre logic.  Did "they" say it was Oswald's wallet and they were involved in a conspiracy to plant evidence?  It is truly comedy gold that CTers who otherwise reject all evidence linking Oswald to the crime insist that his wallet was left at the Tippit murder scene and that the same investigators who are involved in framing him suppress this highly incriminating piece of evidence.  It's mind blowing.

You have made the statement that the skull x-rays were altered. [SNIP]

I see you're getting angrier and angrier about being pressed to stop ducking and dodging and about being asked to give genuine, credible answers to the straightforward, fact-based questions I've repeatedly posed to you.

Since you so badly mangled the formatting of your reply, I will quote segments of your reply myself and then respond to them. But first, a few points:

-- So your bottom-line answer is "Aw, shucks, it doesn't really matter if the bullet hit near the EOP or 4 inches higher in the cowlick because everyone agrees the bullet came from behind!"

IOW, you don't have the education or the objectivity to acknowledge that a difference of 4 inches for the impact point on the 6-inch-high area of the back of the head makes a huge difference in determining the trajectory back to the shot's origin.

You see, crime scene investigators do this thing called trajectory analysis to determine where a shot or shots originated. So, umm, yeah, a difference of 4 inches for a wound's location on the 6-inch-high area of the back of head is a very big deal.

That's why the WC's experts could only make the EOP site's trajectory "work" by assuming JFK's head was tilted well over 50 degrees forward when the bullet hit, whereas the HSCA's experts didn't have to make such an absurd assumption about the forward tilt of the head but instead had to fiddle with the exit wound and ignore what their consultant radiologists told them about the high fragment trail's spatial relationship to the cowlick site.

-- I notice you punted on the point that it's wildly implausible that three pathologists could mistake a wound 1 cm above the EOP for a wound 10 cm higher when they had the EOP and the lambda as reference points. That's one reason the autopsy doctors so fiercely rejected the suggestion that they committed such an unbelievable blunder.

-- I see you once again declined to explain why the low fragment trail described in the autopsy report does not appear on the extant skull x-rays. Find me any other case where three pathologists described a fragment trail in a skull that did not appear in the x-rays of that skull.

Of course, the problem is that your only option is to argue that the autopsy doctors somehow, someway mistook the downward-ranging high fragment trail that is at least 2 inches above the EOP and that goes nowhere near the back of the head for an upward-ranging fragment trail that started 1 cm above the EOP and went upward to the bone under the right eyebrow. Sure, happens all the time!

And now I'll answer your arguments:

What would be the point of altering the x-rays? Why would somebody want to deliberately misrepresent where the bullet entered the skull?

Are you really unable to think of a reason that someone would have wanted to alter the x-rays and/or to misrepresent where the bullet entered? Really? No clue? Why have criminals in zillions of other cases altered evidence, concealed evidence, and misrepresented evidence? Think really hard.

I notice you are still declining to explain the hard scientific evidence from the OD measurements that the skull x-rays have been altered. Dr. Mantik has even demonstrated how the alterations were done.

There appears to be a difference of opinion between the autopsy team and the FPP as to where the bullet actually entered JFK's skull. Does it really matter?

One, uh, yes, it matters a great deal, as I've explained above, and as should be obvious to anyone with a basic education and ordinary reasoning skills.

Two, we're not just talking about a "difference of opinion" between the autopsy doctors and the FPP, although that alone is remarkable. We're talking about a "difference of opinion" between the autopsy doctors, HSCA wound ballistics consultant Dr. Larry Sturdivan, the autopsy photographer, two federal agents at the autopsy, neuroanatomist Dr. Joseph Riley, Dr. David Mantik, Dr. Michael Chesser, Dr. Gary Aguilar vs. the FPP, the Clark Panel, and the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel. 

There is ample forensic evidence that Oswald was the one who fired that shot from the rifle he purchased the previous March from Klein's.

Nonsense. The forensic evidence in the JFK case powerfully argues against Oswald as the shooter because the ammo he used could not have caused the bullet fragmentation we see on the skull x-rays.

Do you understand that the skull x-rays show a "snow storm" of dozens of tiny fragments in the right-frontal region? Do you know that much? Do you understand that the skull x-rays show at least two fragments on the rear outer table of the skull? Yes? Do you know this?

Even Dr. Sturdivan has acknowledged there is no way that an FMJ bullet would leave two fragments on the rear outer table of the skull when penetrating the rear of the skull. And let's read, yet again, what Dr. DiMaio said about how FMJ bullets behave when they hit bone and about the fact that if they leave any fragments at all, they will be few in number, and that if x-rays show numerous tiny fragments, this rules out FMJ ammo:

An x-ray of an individual shot with a full metal-jacketed rifle bullet . . . usually fails to reveal any bullet fragments at all even if the bullet has perforated bone such as the skull or spine.If any fragments are seen, they are very sparse in number. . . .(Gunshot Wounds, p. 166)

In x-rays of through-and-through gunshot wounds, the presence of small fragments of metal along the wound track virtually rules out full metal-jacketed ammunition.. . . In rare instances involving full metal-jacketed centerfire rifle bullets, a few small, dust-like fragments of lead may be seen on x-ray if the bullet perforates bone. One of the most characteristic x-rays and one that will indicate the type of weapon and ammunition used is that seen from centerfire rifles firing hunting ammunition. In such a case, one will see a 'lead snowstorm'. . . . Such a picture rules out full metal-jacketed rifle ammunition or a shotgun slug. (Gunshot Wounds, p. 318)

Are we clear now? When are you going to stop ducking this fact?

There is zero forensic or medical evidence of any other shot from any other location striking JFK.

And the Earth's flat, right? You're in no position to be making such absolutist statements. You've done minimal reading on the JFK case.

Now, if there's no such evidence of a shot from the front, surely you will be able to easily explain the evidence presented for a frontal shot in these articles:

Dr. Michael Chesser, “A Review of the JFK Cranial x-Rays and Photographs,” Assassination of JFK website, 2015, http://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/

Dr. Michael Chesser, “The Application of Forensic Principles for the Analysis of the Autopsy Skull X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Review of the Brain Photographs,” 2017, Kennedys and King website, https://kennedysandking.com/images/pdf/michael-chesser-houston-2017.pdf

"The Head Shot from the Front"
https://drive.google.com/file/d/19GwhnIVGHlrffoyM_T242fF_J9v4QeQl/view

Just to remind you, Dr. Chesser is a board-certified neurologist who has examined the autopsy skull x-rays and photos at the National Archives and who has also examined JFK's pre-mortem x-rays at the Kennedy Library in Boston.

A radiation oncologist isn't an expert in reading x-rays either. They too will consult with a radiologist to read the x-rays.

You really shouldn't try to bluff your way through a debate. A radiation oncologist reads x-rays for a living; reading x-rays is a crucial part of his job. And, BTW, Dr. Mantik is also licensed in radiology.

A forensic pathologist does have a lot more experience reading x-rays of gunshot victims than a radiation oncologist.

Not in the case of Dr. Mantik, who, as part of his JFK research, has examined numerous x-rays from other gunshot cases. Furthermore, Dr. Mantik has the advantage of being an expert in optical-density (OD) measurement, especially since he is also a physicist and is licensed in radiology. Radiation oncologists use OD analysis as part of their job. No forensic pathologist receives instruction in OD measurement as part of his training.

I've explained this to you before but I'll type a little slower this time in hopes you can follow along this time. I have not seen the medical evidence myself and even if I had, I am totally unqualified to analyze it. That's why I leave it to the people who are qualified.

How long are you going to hide behind this dodge? You only "leave it to the people who are qualified" if their findings don't contradict what you want to believe.

For several replies you emphasized, with all caps, that you accepted the "UNANIMOUS" conclusions of the FPP. But, uh oh, when I proved that the FPP determined that the EOP site is impossible if the brain photos are authentic, you resumed your ducking and dodging.

When I proved that the FPP documented that the back-wound bullet hit at an upward angle and that the wound tunneled upward, and that the only way Baden could "explain" this was to assume JFK was leaning nearly 60 degrees forward when the bullet hit, you went running for cover and dropped the issue. 

All the qualified people that I am aware of who have seen the medical evidence have agreed that JFK was shot in the back of the head.

Then you're not very aware. Here is a partial list of the medical experts who've examined the evidence and concluded JFK was also hit in the front of the head: Dr. Cyril Wecht, Dr. Gary Aguilar, Dr. Robert Livingston, Dr. David Mantik, Dr. Greg Henkelmann, Dr. Michael Chesser, Dr. Doug Ubelaker, Dr. Doug DeSalles, and Dr. Art Snyder.

The crime scene forensic evidence tells us unequivocally that he was shot in the back of the head by LHO.

Just stop. You don't know what you're talking about. You're in no position to be making such statements. You don't even know what your own side says you're supposed to believe.

The ammo that hit JFK's head behaved like high-velocity frangible ammo, and nothing like FMJ ammo. The bullet fragments allegedly recovered from the limo don't look like any of the bullet fragments from the WC's head-shot wound ballistics tests--just compare CE 858 and CE 859 with CE 567. One of the bullet shells found in the sixth-floor window, CE 543, was too dented to have fired a bullet during the shooting. The SBT has been debunked every which way, but you guys simply ignore all the refuting evidence. Every halfway realistic "Oswald" rifle test has failed to duplicate Oswald's alleged shooting feat, even though the tests' conditions were easier[i/] than those Oswald would have faced.

MG: I ask you yet again: Were the FPP members wrong when they insisted that the brain photos absolutely prove that no bullet could have entered the EOP site? Were all the members of the FPP, the Clark Panel, and the Rockefeller Commission's medical panel wrong for saying the only fragment trail on the skull x-rays is the high fragment trail? What happened to the low fragment trail described in the autopsy report? How could the brain photos show JFK's brain when the skull x-rays show  2/3 of the right brain to be missing, and when this amount of missing brain in the x-rays has been confirmed by multiple OD measurements of the x-rays done by a board-certified radiation oncologist and a board-certified neurologist?

JC: I don't give a *&^& who was right and who was wrong as to precisely where the bullet entered JFK's skull. These anomalies don't change the fact that all these experts agree JFK was shot in the back of the head.

LOL! So never mind that the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain missing but that the alleged autopsy brain photos show "less than 1-2 ounces" of brain tissue missing?!

Never mind that two independent sets of OD measurements prove that the 6.5 mm object is a ghosted image covering some smaller genuine bullet fragments on the rear outer table of the skull?

Never mind that OD measurements of the strange white patch on the lateral skull x-rays prove the patch is physically impossible unless JFK had a severely abnormal skull that was six or seven times thicker than a normal male skull?

Never mind that the high fragment trail is not near either of the proposed rear head entry sites and cannot be associated with the 7 x 2 mm fragment in the right orbit, not to mention that the autopsy doctors said nothing about that trail in the autopsy report? (Let me help you out: The high fragment trail was caused by a high-velocity frangible bullet that hit JFK near the right temple. See the above articles on evidence of a frontal head shot.)

No. That is a viable third option.

If you're a juvenile, yes.

So tell us what all these opinions you've cited means as far as determining who shot JFK.

"Is our children learning?"

One, they're not "opinions." OD measurements are not "opinions." The well-known, scientifically documented behavior of FMJ bullets is not "opinion."

Two, when every single medical expert, on both sides, who has examined the skull x-rays has said there's only one fragment trail on the x-rays and that it's the high fragment trail, any rational, credible person would view that as much more than just "opinion."

Three, when every single medical expert, on both sides, who has examined the autopsy brain photos has noted no damage to the cerebellum and the right occipital lobe that would have had to occur if a bullet hit the EOP site, that goes well beyond mere "opinion."

Four, when all but one of the medical experts, on both sides, who've examined the skull x-rays and have commented on the amount of missing brain seen in the x-rays have said the x-rays show a large portion of the right brain to be missing, and when the one exception described an amount of mission brain that clearly seems to exceed "less than 1-2 ounces," that goes well beyond mere "opinion."

Five, you don't have to be a medical expert but just need to have a basic education and basic reasoning skills to figure out that the brain photos cannot be authentic because the skull x-rays show 2/3 of the right brain missing and because we know that bits of JFK's brain were blown or fell onto 16 surfaces, in addition to the "large chunk of brain" that Jackie brought to the Parkland ER and handed to Dr. Jenkins.

Yes, if there is a disagreement as to where the bullet entered the back of JFK's head, they both can't be right. Congratulations on figuring that one out, Columbo. Where would we be without you?

If you don't mind acting like a juvenile in front of everyone, I don't mind seeing you continue to make such inane, immature comments.

So somebody made a  mistake about how much brain was blown away. Fascinating. Now tell us who you think shot JFK.

Umm, who "made a mistake" about how much brain was blown away? Dr. Baden? Dr. Hodges? Dr. Fitzpatrick? Dr. Humes? Dr. Mantik, who confirmed his observation with multiple OD measurements? Dr. Chesser, who also used OD measurements to confirm his reading of the x-rays? Dr. Aguilar? Dr. Lattimer? Who are you talking about?

Were all the witnesses who saw brain matter on 16 different surfaces right after the shooting, or who were actually hit by brain matter during shooting, "mistaken"? This would be Patrolman Bobby Hargis, Patrolman B. J. Martin, Patrolman H. B. McClain, Jack McNairy, Secret Service agent Sam Kinney, Dr. Robert Grossman (Parkland Hospital), Jackie Kennedy, Dr. Marion T. Jenkins (Parkland Hospital), Secret Service agent William Greer, and Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman, among others. Was Dr. Jenkins "mistaken" when he said Jackie brought a "large chunk of brain" into the ER and handed it to him? How about the people who had brain matter splattered on their clothes during the shooting--were they all "mistaken"?

And were the several witnesses who saw JFK's head wounds and who said that 1/4 to 1/2 of his brain was gone "mistaken" too? This would include Tom Robinson, one of the morticians who helped to reassemble JFK's skull after the autopsy, who said about 1/3 of JFK's brain was missing, consistent with the OD measurements of the skull x-rays that show that 60% of the right brain is missing. FBI agents Francis O'Neill and James Sibert and assistant autopsy photographer Floyd Riebe likewise said a substantial portion of the brain was gone--they put the amount of missing tissue as constituting about half of the brain.

This is literally the ULTIMATE in same old, same old. Jeremy Gunn has "no doubt" Oswald would have been acquitted. Has he ever been in a courtroom? No lawyer who has would ever say this. A trial is total crap shoot of pretrial motions in limine to keep out evidence or testimony, actual evidentiary objections and rulings, dueling experts, jury instructions and, of course, jury make-up. There is a "high likelihood" Oswald would have been convicted, but there is NO WAY anyone who has any trial experience could say there is "no doubt" he would've been acquitted. The stuff MTG lists has essentially NO BEARING AT ALL on Oswald's guilt - can you clucks really not see this??? Literally EVERYTHING that MTG lists could actually be a "big problem" for the prosecution without affecting in the slightest a verdict of guilty. The jury has doubts about the Backyard Photos and the paper bag - so effing what?

I may have mentioned before a misdemeanor DUI trial I had early in my career. A tiny little woman admitted she had drank a pitcher of beer. She stumbled and almost fell leaving the restaurant. She dropped her keys when the valet handed them to her. She dropped her purse. She ran over a curb. She was observed weaving in traffic. She failed the field sobriety tests. The defense lawyer, who was essentially dead in the water, went the "Oswald defense" route: "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, have you ever dropped your keys ... ever lost your footing ... ever run over a curb? Of course, you have. We all have." The rather simple answer: "Ever do all of those things in the space of ten minutes when you weren't drunk on your ass?" Guilty! Oswald's guilt or non-guilt would be determined on the basis of the case as a whole, not on the basis of what the jury thought about the Backyard Photos or the paper bag.

If you want to play Oswald defense counsel, put together a narrative a jury might believe that raises legitimate doubt about the really critical evidence. Conspiracy dolts like MTG always lose sight of the fact that the prosecution gets it shot, too. There are prosecution witnesses and experts, as well as prosecution objections to defense evidence, witnesses and experts. The type of stuff MTG relies on here is the sort of stuff a prosecutor deals with every day. The Backyard Photos - do you SERIOUSLY think there would be doubt about those by the time all the dust had settled? Do you SERIOUSLY think the jury would believe Oswald said nothing to Frazier about curtain rods and that the bag Frazier and Randle observed, and the way it was being carried, contained a cheese sandwich and an apple? Neither of these things is of any great relevance to the prosecution's case, but what MTG says is just silly.

FWIW, I remember interacting with the author of this book, which relies heavily on Voice Stress Analysis to show Oswald's GUILT: https://www.amazon.com/Malcontent-Harvey-Oswalds-Confession-Conduct/dp/1733029214. At the Ed Forum, Jimbo immediately chimed in with the "O'Toole" stuff. Here are the author's responses:

Jim, I am aware of that article.  However, there is no teeth to it.  My book "Malcontent" proved that O'Toole's analysis was fraudulent, although any intentionality by O'Toole is known only to him.  The PSE has two modes...modes 1 and 2.  Mode 1 is for male voices, mode 2 is for female voices.  The gentleman who did my CVSA for Oswald works for the man who created the CVSA.  Moreover, that person worked with O'Toole back in the 70's.  When he was shown O'Toole's chart of "I didn't shoot anybody, no sir" from "The Assassination Tapes," he immediately recognized what O'Toole did.  He saw on the chart where O'Toole changed the speed from mode 1 to mode 2, thus skewing the results.  The old PSE machines do not work.  My investigation revealed no surplus parts, and the PSEs in existence are missing paper, stylus', etc.  The closest thing to duplicating O'Toole's charts is to run them on the CVSA in mode 2.  "Malcontent" has the O'Toole chart and the CVSA mode 2 chart that are almost identical to each other, proving that O'Toole used the wrong mode when analyzing Oswald's statement.  Moreover, O'Toole only took a 3-day PSE orientation course, then went around doing his analysis.  I used a law enforcement veteran who created the questions to be asked sex offenders for CVSA examination.  They were also checked by the creator of the CVSA, who is one of three Master CVSA examiners in the world, one of which is deceased.  They all agreed O'Toole changed the speed of the PSE during his analysis.  This type of deception is exactly why the CVSA mode cannot be changed during examination.  ALL of my documentation accrued during my investigation was published in "Malcontent".  O'Toole did not publish his other Oswald charts nor any of the documentation from those alleged to have confirmed his results.  It stands to reason that if the O'Toole Oswald chart is wrong, the others are wrong too, as "Malcontent" proved the unreliability and erroneous nature of his analysis.

Your post is misleading and disrespectful.  First, if you were to read my book, you would note that I do not accuse O'Toole of anything.  I specifically state that O'Toole's analysis could have been the result of incompetence (because he only took a three-day PSE orientation course) or that he just plain made mistakes (because he is human).  The fact that he is passed away is moot as many researchers have now passed, and their research is still subject to peer review whether living or not.  O'Toole passed away in 2001 and I did not start the research for this book until early 2018.  I tried to contact his wife and family members many times with negative results.  I contacted Dektor and asked for any other material or documentation they may still have from O'Toole; they stated they had none.  All of this documentation is in my book.  Nobody in the JFK case has ever taken the initiative and conducted a CVSA on Oswald or anyone else related to this case.  Most have taken O'Toole at his word and the analysis in "The Assassination Tapes" as final without educating themselves first.  My book merely shows that O'Toole's analysis, and thus his conclusions, are flawed.  I had several world-renowned experts check my CVSA results who verified and agreed with my results.  That documentation is also in my book.  So it's not the result of "low-hanging fruit" but meticulous, detailed and documented research.  If my conclusions fly in the face of "hundreds of intrepid researchers," then it is what it is.  That speaks more of their research, not mine.

So, if we can't rely on clocks and thus time stamps, how can LNs say with any kind of certainty that Tippit was shot at around 1:14:30?

Even more so, as there is evidence that Tippit's ambulance arrived at the hospital at 1:15. This time is given for the time of D.O.A. and also confirmed by police officer Davenport who followed the ambulance.

Btw, Tippit's murder wasn't a federal crime, yet the F.B.I. pestered hospital employees for days about the time of D.O.A.. Why would the F.B.I. even be interested in that, when they could simply have accepted the time on the death certificate?

MW: Even more so, as there is evidence that Tippit's ambulance arrived at the hospital at 1:15. This time is given for the time of D.O.A. and also confirmed by police officer Davenport who followed the ambulance.

As you are well aware, two members of the Methodist staff on hand for Tippit's arrival have said that the clocks in Methodist ER were unreliable. Dr Mollenhoff said, any discrepancy was due to issues with Methodist's time system.


MW: Btw, Tippit's murder wasn't a federal crime, yet the F.B.I. pestered hospital employees for days about the time of D.O.A.. Why would the F.B.I. even be interested in that, when they could simply have accepted the time on the death certificate?

At the time it occurred, JFK's murder was also not a federal crime. So why was the FBI investigating it?