JFK Assassination Forum

Jerrol Custer, an x-ray technician at the autopsy, provided clear evidence that there was an effort to produce altered autopsy skull x-rays. Custer informed the ARRB that the morning after the assassination, he was called into the radiology suite by Dr. Ebersole, the autopsy radiologist, and was told to tape some metallic fragments to skull bones. These, explained Custer, were then to be taken to a private room and x-rayed with the same machine, at the same distance, that he used the night before during the autopsy. Custer added that Ebersole said these x-rays would be used to make a bust of JFK:

I was told by Dr. Ebersole that they were to be taken to make measurements, to make a bust of President Kennedy. . . . He gave me three or four different metal fragments, varying in size. And he asked me to tape them to the bone. . . .

Obviously, taping bullet fragments to skull bones and then x-raying the bones had nothing to do with making a bust of JFK. The only skull x-rays that would be used to help create a bust of a gunshot victim would be x-rays taken before the murder, before the skull was damaged, and there would be no conceivable reason to tape metal fragments to skull bones to make a bust.

Ultimately, the plotters opted not to use these x-rays because they realized the skull x-rays could be altered via darkroom techniques that would be extremely hard to detect at the time. Dr. Mantik was able to duplicate how the x-rays were altered.

BTW, Ebersole told the HSCA that one of the skull fragments that arrived late at the autopsy was “a large fragment of the occipital bone." This confirms the numerous accounts that JFK had a large wound in the back of his head.

I discuss these facts in chapter 11 of A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy.

Brennan was not an acceptable witness and what I posted is more than adequate proof of that
He had no actual fear of coming forward, and gave pertinent personal information on TV at the scene.

MC--

That is correct, Euins even waffled on the race of the shooter, let alone an actual ID.

Robert Jackson, photographer, also saw a sniper-rifle in TSBD6.

My point is someone fired a rifle in the direction of the JFK limo 11/22, from the TSBD6 sniper window. LHO was seen by no one anywhere in the TSBD or on the street during when shots were fired. He was invisible. Except possibly to Brennan.

LHO's rifle was found nearby. It is good guess LHO was involved in the JFKA, and he is my best guess as the TSBD6 sniper. My take is LHO was not acting alone, due to strikes on JFK and JBC in too-rapid a sequence.

Litwin's point is that Brennan is an acceptable witness. I agree, but only to the extent that Brennan saw someone in the TSBD6 window.

Side note: It is remarkable the number of JFKA witnesses, like Brennan, who expressed fear of coming forward. There was a witness to a man running from the TSBD carrying a Winchester, in the immediate aftermath of the JFKA. That became the basis of the "Sawyer memo," and the radio description of LHO that went out over DPD radio, of the 5'10" 165 lb suspect. But that witness disappeared.

Was Sawyer, a DPD Inspector (senior officer) just a nut? Did a witness actually tell him that?

I don't know.

Of course, you're not going to join in a discussion like a grown man. Keep on trolling.

Says the KGB-approved King of the Trolls.

Dear danny BOY o'meara,

Who said they were?

-- Tom

 
That's the best response you can muster?
Really?
What a waste of time.
Note how many of the witnesses you tried to cobble together to prop up your "z124" nonsense, actually support a first shot at z222/z223. Weird that, isn't it?

How can you still be peddling the debunked Scearce/Roselle study whilst ignoring the mountain of evidence Speer lays out destroying the notion of such an early shot?
Why do you prefer one over the other?
Is it just a troll thing?