Two of the biggest things the autopsy doctors had to cover up were (1) that they had determined for an absolute fact, through prolonged and careful probing, that the back wound had no exit point; and (2) that they were aware of the throat wound before and during the autopsy. This is why the Sibert and O'Neill report on the autopsy, which revealed the back wound had no exit point, was not published with the Warren Commission (WC) volumes but was sealed (and keep in mind that it was supposed to stay sealed for 75 years -- it was released in the 1990s when the ARRB released it).

The Back Wound Had No Exit Point

To his great credit, Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, one of the three autopsy pathologists, admitted to the ARRB that although they were initially unable to probe the back wound because the muscles had closed the path, they were able to probe the wound after they opened the chest, and that they then saw that the bullet "had not pierced through the lung cavity" but had caused bleeding "just outside the pleura," i.e., just outside the lining of the chest cavity:

We probed this hole . . . with all sorts of probes and everything, and it was such a small hole, basically, and the muscles were so big and strong and had closed the hole and you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it.

But when we opened the chest and we got at -- the lung extends up under the clavicle and high just beneath the neck here, and the bullet had not pierced through into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura [chest cavity lining]. (ARRB interview: Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, 2/26/96, pp. 75-76)

When Boswell said "opened the chest," he was referring to the fact that they removed the chest organs in order to be able to probe the back wound and to see where the probe was going.

We know this from the testimony of Dr. Robert Karnei. Dr. Karnei was a resident surgeon at Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1963 and witnessed the autopsy. In his 8/27/77 HSCA interview, Dr. Karnei told the HSCA that he saw "the chest cavity opened and watched the removal of the organs," and that after this he saw Finck "working with a probe and arranging for photographs" (HSCA interview: Dr. Robert Karnei, 8/27/77, p. 6). This is one of many references from the autopsy witnesses to the fact that photos were taken of the probing, but no such photos made it into the official record and have disappeared.

In a 1991 recorded interview, Dr. Karnei said the autopsy doctors positioned the body in multiple ways to facilitate the probing of the back wound, and that “the men” who saw the probing commented that they could see the end of the finger and then the end of the probe “from inside the empty chest”:

A: They did have the body--trying to sit it up and trying to get that probe to go. . . .
Q: Why didn't they turn the body over?
A: Well, they did. They tried every which way to go ahead, and try to move it around. . . .
Q: But this was after the Y incision?
A: Yes. The men described being able to see the end of the finger and the probe from inside the empty chest.
(Livingstone interview transcript, p. 10)

James Jenkins confirmed this crucial fact in his HSCA interview nearly 20 years earlier and in his 1979 filmed interview. Jenkins, a medical technician who assisted Dr. Boswell during the autopsy, stated in his HSCA interview that Dr. James Humes, the chief autopsy pathologist, found that the bullet tract had not "penetrated into the chest" and that Humes had been able to "reach the end of the wound." Jenkins specified that the back wound "was very shallow" and that "it didn't enter the peritoneal cavity [the chest cavity]. He noted that there was quite a “controversy” because the doctors “couldn’t prove the bullet came into the chest cavity” even though they probed the back wound “extensively” (HSCA interview: James Jenkins, 8/29/77, pp. 5, 7, 10-11, 13).

Jenkins added that at around the time of the probing "they repeatedly took x-rays of the area” (p. 8 ). For obvious reasons, those x-rays never made it into the official collection of the autopsy materials and have disappeared.

In his 1979 filmed interview, Jenkins explained that he could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity:

Commander Humes put his finger in it, and, you know, said that ... he could probe the bottom of it with his finger. . . . I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura. You could actually see where it was making an indentation. . . . It was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity.

Dr. John Ebersole, the radiologist at the autopsy, stated in his testimony to the HSCA’s medical panel that the autopsy doctors determined the back wound had no exit point:

Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger, inasmuch as a complete bullet of any size could not be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other areas. An inspection revealed there was no point of exit. ("Testimony of John H. Ebersole," HSCA, 3/11/78, p. 57)

FBI agent James Sibert confirmed this in his ARRB interview, and added that the autopsy doctors -- "Finck, in particular" -- said during the autopsy, after probing the wound, that the back wound had no exit point, and that the pathologists also said they could feel the end of the back wound:

Q: Can you tell me, was the phone call made to Mr. Killion before or after the body was unloaded from the casket?

A: Oh, that was after the body was removed; it was on the autopsy table, and the autopsy was in progress. Because the reason I made that call was that the pathologists said, "There’s no exit to this back wound,” and probed it with rubber glove and a chrome probe. . . .

When they raised him up, then they found this back wound. And that’s when they started probing with the rubber glove and the finger, and also with the chrome probe.

And that’s just before, of course, I made this call, because they were at a loss to explain what had happened to this bullet. They couldn’t find any bullet.

And they said, "There's no exit.” Finck, in particular, said, "There's no exit.” And they said that you could feel it with the end of the finger. I mean, the depth of this wound. (ARRB interview: James Sibert, 9/11/97, pp. 59, 111)

FBI agent Francis O'Neill told the ARRB the same thing:

There was not the slightest doubt, not a scintilla of doubt whatsoever, that this is what occurred. . . .

Because I was closer to the President’s body than I am to you, and you’re only about a foot and a half away or two feet away. And viewing them with the surgical probe and with their fingers, there was absolutely no point of exit and they couldn’t go any further. And that presented a problem, one heck of a problem. . . .

Q: You previously made reference to attempts to probe that wound. Did you ever see any kind of metal object used to probe that wound?

A: Yes. They used a metal probe, in addition to their fingers. . . . In the back, they probed it to a point where they could not probe any further. In other words, it did not go any further. (ARRB interview: Francis O'Neill, 9/12/97, pp. 30-31)

Let's read what Sibert and O'Neill said about this in their 11/26/63 report on the autopsy:

During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders. . . . This opening was probed by Dr. Humes with the finger. . . . Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.[/i] ("Autopsy of Body of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy," 11/26/1963, p. 4)

As many here know, we have known for years that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound. One draft said the back wound had no exit point and said nothing about the throat wound, while the other draft said a fragment from the head shot exited the throat. In both drafts, the back wound had no exit point. This was first revealed with the release of the transcript of the 1/27/64 WC executive session.

The Autopsy Doctors Knew About the Throat Wound Before the Autopsy, and Humes Talked with Perry by No Later Than 10:30 During the Autopsy

It has become clear that the autopsy doctors were aware of the throat wound before and that Humes talked with Dr. Perry well before the autopsy ended. But, after Oswald was killed, everything changed and along came the lie that Humes had no idea there was a throat wound until the morning after the autopsy, that Humes did not talk with Perry until the morning after the autopsy, and that only then did Humes "realize" the back-wound bullet "must" have exited the throat, hence the phrase "presumably of exit" to describe the throat wound in the final draft of the autopsy report.

Historian William Manchester, in his famous book The Death of a President, based on dozens of interviews with autopsy personnel and with others at the autopsy or in the hospital, acknowledged that the autopsy doctors heard about Dr. Malcolm Perry's comments about the throat wound that Perry made in the Parkland press conference several hours before the autopsy:

They had heard reports of Mac Perry’s medical briefing for the press, and to their dismay they had discovered that all evidence of what was being called an entrance wound in the throat had been removed by Perry’s tracheotomy. . . ." [Manchester, The Death of a President, pp. 432-433)

Yes, of course the autopsy doctors heard about the throat wound before the autopsy. Perry's comments at the Parkland press conference were all over the news that afternoon and evening.

I should add that on 11/24/1966, Richard Levine of the Baltimore Sun conducted an extensive interview with Dr. J. Thornton Boswell. In Levine's article on the interview published the next day, he noted that, before the autopsy, the autopsy doctors were made aware of JFK's wounds and what the Dallas doctors had done:

The pathologists had already been told the probable extent of the injuries and what had been done by the physicians in Dallas ("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; Never Again, Skyhorse Publishing, 2007, reprint of 1995 edition, p. 217).

One of the many historic disclosures from the ARRB materials is Dr. Ebersole's statement to the HSCA FPP that by around 10:00 or 10:30, Humes knew about the throat wound from communications with Dallas. Ebersole said he recalled that "by ten or ten thirty . . . communication had been established with Dallas and it was learned" that "there had been a wound . . . in the lower neck" ("Testimony of John H. Ebersole," HSCA, 3/11/1978, pp. 4-5.)

Journalist Martin Steadman and two other journalists spoke with Dr. Perry about a week after the assassination. Steadman knew that Perry had identified the throat wound as an entrance wound at the 11/22 press conference. Steadman wrote that Dr. Perry said he thought the throat wound was an entrance wound because the hole was small, circular, and clean (not ragged). Perry added that he had treated hundreds of patients with gunshot wounds and knew the difference between an exit wound and entrance wound. [/quote

Most exit wounds are ragged because most exit wounds are not caused by FMJ military ammo which is designed not to deform when passing through soft tissue. Perry can be forgiven for his erroneous initial first impression. He later acknowledged it could have been either an entrance or an exit.

Quote

Steadman reported that Dr. Perry then told him that during the night of the assassination, he got several phone calls from the doctors at Bethesda. He said they were very upset about his statement that the neck wound was an entry wound. Steadman also reported that Perry said that the autopsy doctors asked him if he or another Parkland doctor had turned over the body to see the wound in Kennedy’s back. Perry said they had not. They then argued that he could not therefore be certain about the throat wound, that there was no evidence of a shot from the front, and that he should stop saying the throat wound was an entrance wound.

Exactly what I wrote earlier. Perry was unaware of the entrance wound in the back. If he had been, he might not have been so quick to assume the frontal wound was an entrance.

Crucially, Parkland supervisory nurse Audrey Bell confirmed in her 1997 ARRB interview that Dr. Perry told her that he received several calls on the night of the assassination from Bethesda Naval Hospital pressuring him to change his story about the throat wound:

Saturday morning, when I got over there, Dr. Perry came up to the office. I said, "You look awful. Did you get any sleep last night?"

He said, "Well, not too much, between the calls from Bethesda that came in during the night." ["Bethesda" refers to Bethesda Naval Hospital, where the autopsy was performed.]

I said, "What about?"

He said, "Oh, whether that was an entrance wound or an exit wound in the throat."

He said, "They were wanting me to change my mind." (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/medical_interviews/audio/ARRB_Bell.htm)

Nurse Bell told the HSCA the same thing in 1977 (http://www.stickam.com/member/viewMedia.do?mId=184850325&mediaowner=true).

Dan is ignoring that those two are exactly where they are supposed to be according to testimony after leaving the steps...

There's no point getting bogged down with everything that is wrong with this post but this last observation needs addressing.
Apparently it's me, ands not Brian, who is ignoring the WC testimony of Shelley and Lovelady.
Let's start with the fact that BOTH MEN testify that they didn't leave the steps for at least three minutes!!
How can they be on the extension seconds after the shooting??
I would really like to hear what Brian is going to make up off the top of his head to account for this.

BOTH MEN testify that, after three minutes, Gloria comes up to the steps, tells them about the shooting after which both of them make their way across the Elm Street extension to the "little, old island" (both men use exactly the same phrase to describe the concrete spur separating the Elm Streets), where they stopped "for a minute".

So, the image of the two men walking down the extension is taken 20 - 25 seconds after the shooting.
In this short span of time, according to Brian, Gloria has made her way back to the TSBD steps, told everyone about the shooting, both men have made their way across to the little old island, hung around there for a while, then made it half way down the extension before being caught on film.
Let's do him a favour and ignore the three minutes it takes Gloria to reach the steps and the time spent on the little, old island.
Even if we ignore all the testimony that Brian seems so willing to do, is it still physically possible for the two men to be so far down the extension, after the sequence of events described, in such a short span of time?
Let's be ultra kind to Brian and make it like some mad kind of tag race  being run at top speed:
1] Gloria sprints full tilt and makes it back to the steps within 15 seconds
2] She spits out a rapid-fire account of the shooting in 5 seconds
3] Shelley and Lovelady sprint across to the little old island - 3 seconds.
4] They stay there for 5 seconds
5] They then sprint to their positions on the Elm Street extension - another 3 seconds.

They still don't make it in time.
Even if we follow Brian's lead and ignore nearly every statement they made in their WC testimonies, Shelley and Lovelady still don't make it.

The reason for this is obvious - it's not Shelley and Lovelady on the Elm Street extension.
In reality, what happens is this
Shelley and Lovelady are on the steps at the time of the shooting.
Immediately after the shots Shelley runs out to the concrete spur where he encounters a distraught Gloria Calvery running the other way.
Both return to the front steps where Gloria tells everyone there about the shooting after which both Shelley and Lovelady make their way into the building through the front door.

Gloria reaches the steps in a matter seconds - not 3 minutes.
Both men do not then go across to the little, old island.
Both men do not wander along the extension.
Both men do not hang around the railroad yards.
Both men do not enter the building through the west door.
These are all lies told to hide their actual movements after the shooting.

Both men immediately enter the building and make their way towards the back of the first floor where they are seen by Vickie Adams about 60 seconds after the shooting.
Seconds later Baker and Truly arrive at the elevators where Baker notices two white men just hanging around. Clearly this is Shelley and Lovelady.



The image above shows the moment Gloria has reached the steps and is telling everyone about the shooting.
The man in front of her is Billy Lovelady.
Shelley, wearing his baggy black suit, is near the bottom of the steps after returning from the concrete spur.

Two of the biggest things the autopsy doctors had to cover up were (1) that they had determined for an absolute fact, through prolonged and careful probing, that the back wound had no exit point; and (2) that they were aware of the throat wound before and during the autopsy. This is why the Sibert and O'Neill report on the autopsy, which revealed the back wound had no exit point, was not published with the Warren Commission (WC) volumes but was sealed (and keep in mind that it was supposed to stay sealed for 75 years -- it was not released until the 1990s when the ARRB released it).

The Back Wound Had No Exit Point

To his great credit, Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, one of the three autopsy pathologists, admitted to the ARRB that although they were initially unable to probe the back wound because the muscles had closed the path, they were able to probe the wound after they opened the chest, and that they then saw that the bullet "had not pierced through the lung cavity" but had caused bleeding "just outside the pleura," i.e., just outside the lining of the chest cavity:

We probed this hole . . . with all sorts of probes and everything, and it was such a small hole, basically, and the muscles were so big and strong and had closed the hole and you couldn't get a finger or a probe through it.

But when we opened the chest and we got at -- the lung extends up under the clavicle and high just beneath the neck here, and the bullet had not pierced through into the lung cavity but had caused hemorrhage just outside the pleura [chest cavity lining]. (ARRB interview: Dr. J. Thornton Boswell, 2/26/96, pp. 75-76)

When Boswell said "opened the chest," he was referring to the fact that they removed the chest organs in order to be able to probe the back wound and to see where the probe was going.

We know this from the testimony of Dr. Robert Karnei. Dr. Karnei was a resident surgeon at Bethesda Naval Hospital in 1963 and witnessed the autopsy. In his 8/27/77 HSCA interview, Dr. Karnei told the HSCA that he saw "the chest cavity opened and watched the removal of the organs," and that after this he saw Finck "working with a probe and arranging for photographs" (HSCA interview: Dr. Robert Karnei, 8/27/77, p. 6). This is one of many references from the autopsy witnesses to the fact that photos were taken of the probing, but no such photos made it into the official record and have disappeared.

In a 1991 recorded interview, Dr. Karnei said the autopsy doctors positioned the body in multiple ways to facilitate the probing of the back wound, and that “the men” who saw the probing commented that they could see the end of the finger and then the end of the probe “from inside the empty chest”:

A: They did have the body--trying to sit it up and trying to get that probe to go. . . .
Q: Why didn't they turn the body over?
A: Well, they did. They tried every which way to go ahead, and try to move it around. . . .
Q: But this was after the Y incision?
A: Yes. The men described being able to see the end of the finger and the probe from inside the empty chest.
(Livingstone interview transcript, p. 10)

James Jenkins confirmed this crucial fact in his HSCA interview nearly 20 years earlier and in his 1979 filmed interview. Jenkins, a medical technician who assisted Dr. Boswell during the autopsy, stated in his HSCA interview that Dr. James Humes, the chief autopsy pathologist, found that the bullet tract had not "penetrated into the chest" and that Humes had been able to "reach the end of the wound." Jenkins specified that the back wound "was very shallow" and that "it didn't enter the peritoneal cavity [the chest cavity]. He noted that there was quite a “controversy” because the doctors “couldn’t prove the bullet came into the chest cavity” even though they probed the back wound “extensively” (HSCA interview: James Jenkins, 8/29/77, pp. 5, 7, 10-11, 13).

Jenkins added that at around the time of the probing "they repeatedly took x-rays of the area” (p. 8 ). For obvious reasons, those x-rays never made it into the official collection of the autopsy materials and have disappeared.

In his 1979 filmed interview, Jenkins explained that he could see the end of the probe pushing up against the lining of the chest cavity:

Commander Humes put his finger in it, and, you know, said that ... he could probe the bottom of it with his finger. . . . I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura. You could actually see where it was making an indentation. . . . It was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity.

Dr. John Ebersole, the radiologist at the autopsy, stated in his testimony to the HSCA’s medical panel that the autopsy doctors determined the back wound had no exit point:

Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger, inasmuch as a complete bullet of any size could not be located in the brain area and likewise no bullet could be located in the back or any other areas. An inspection revealed there was no point of exit. ("Testimony of John H. Ebersole," HSCA, 3/11/78, p. 57)

FBI agent James Sibert confirmed this in his ARRB interview, and added that the autopsy doctors -- "Finck, in particular" -- said during the autopsy, after probing the wound, that the back wound had no exit point, and that the pathologists also said they could feel the end of the back wound:

Q: Can you tell me, was the phone call made to Mr. Killion before or after the body was unloaded from the casket?

A: Oh, that was after the body was removed; it was on the autopsy table, and the autopsy was in progress. Because the reason I made that call was that the pathologists said, "There’s no exit to this back wound,” and probed it with rubber glove and a chrome probe. . . .

When they raised him up, then they found this back wound. And that’s when they started probing with the rubber glove and the finger, and also with the chrome probe.

And that’s just before, of course, I made this call, because they were at a loss to explain what had happened to this bullet. They couldn’t find any bullet.

And they said, "There's no exit.” Finck, in particular, said, "There's no exit.” And they said that you could feel it with the end of the finger. I mean, the depth of this wound. (ARRB interview: James Sibert, 9/11/97, pp. 59, 111)

FBI agent Francis O'Neill told the ARRB the same thing:

There was not the slightest doubt, not a scintilla of doubt whatsoever, that this is what occurred. . . .

Because I was closer to the President’s body than I am to you, and you’re only about a foot and a half away or two feet away. And viewing them with the surgical probe and with their fingers, there was absolutely no point of exit and they couldn’t go any further. And that presented a problem, one heck of a problem. . . .

Q: You previously made reference to attempts to probe that wound. Did you ever see any kind of metal object used to probe that wound?

A: Yes. They used a metal probe, in addition to their fingers. . . . In the back, they probed it to a point where they could not probe any further. In other words, it did not go any further. (ARRB interview: Francis O'Neill, 9/12/97, pp. 30-31)

Let's read what Sibert and O'Neill said about this in their 11/26/63 report on the autopsy:

During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. Humes located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders. . . . This opening was probed by Dr. Humes with the finger. . . . Further probing determined that the distance traveled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as the end of the opening could be felt with the finger.[/i] ("Autopsy of Body of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy," 11/26/1963, p. 4)

As many here know, we have known for years that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound. One draft said the back wound had no exit point and said nothing about the throat wound, while the other draft said a fragment from the head shot exited the throat. In both drafts, the back wound had no exit point. This was first revealed with the release of the transcript of the 1/27/64 WC executive session.

The Autopsy Doctors Knew About the Throat Wound Before the Autopsy, and Humes Talked with Perry by No Later Than 10:30 During the Autopsy

It has become clear that the autopsy doctors were aware of the throat wound before and that Humes talked with Dr. Perry well before the autopsy ended. But, after Oswald was killed, everything changed and along came the lie that Humes had no idea there was a throat wound until the morning after the autopsy, that Humes did not talk with Perry until the morning after the autopsy, and that only then did Humes "realize" the back-wound bullet "must" have exited the throat, hence the phrase "presumably of exit" to describe the throat wound in the final draft of the autopsy report.

Historian William Manchester, in his famous book The Death of a President, based on dozens of interviews with autopsy personnel and with others at the autopsy or in the hospital, acknowledged that the autopsy doctors heard about Dr. Malcolm Perry's comments about the throat wound that Perry made in the Parkland press conference several hours before the autopsy:

They had heard reports of Mac Perry’s medical briefing for the press, and to their dismay they had discovered that all evidence of what was being called an entrance wound in the throat had been removed by Perry’s tracheotomy. . . ." [Manchester, The Death of a President, pp. 432-433)

Yes, of course the autopsy doctors heard about the throat wound before the autopsy. Perry's comments at the Parkland press conference were all over the news that afternoon and evening.

I should add that on 11/24/1966, Richard Levine of the Baltimore Sun conducted an extensive interview with Dr. J. Thornton Boswell. In Levine's article on the interview published the next day, he noted that, before the autopsy, the autopsy doctors were made aware of JFK's wounds and what the Dallas doctors had done:

The pathologists had already been told the probable extent of the injuries and what had been done by the physicians in Dallas ("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; Never Again, Skyhorse Publishing, 2007, reprint of 1995 edition, p. 217).

One of the many historic disclosures from the ARRB materials is Dr. Ebersole's statement to the HSCA FPP that by around 10:00 or 10:30, Humes knew about the throat wound from communications with Dallas. Ebersole said he recalled that "by ten or ten thirty . . . communication had been established with Dallas and it was learned" that "there had been a wound . . . in the lower neck" ("Testimony of John H. Ebersole," HSCA, 3/11/1978, pp. 4-5.)

Journalist Martin Steadman and two other journalists spoke with Dr. Perry about a week after the assassination. Steadman knew that Perry had identified the throat wound as an entrance wound at the 11/22 press conference. Steadman wrote that Dr. Perry said he thought the throat wound was an entrance wound because the hole was small, circular, and clean (not ragged). Perry added that he had treated hundreds of patients with gunshot wounds and knew the difference between an exit wound and entrance wound.

Steadman reported that Dr. Perry then told him that during the night of the assassination, he got several phone calls from the doctors at Bethesda. He said they were very upset about his statement that the neck wound was an entry wound. Steadman also reported that Perry said that the autopsy doctors asked him if he or another Parkland doctor had turned over the body to see the wound in Kennedy’s back. Perry said they had not. They then argued that he could not therefore be certain about the throat wound, that there was no evidence of a shot from the front, and that he should stop saying the throat wound was an entrance wound.

Moreover, Steadman said that Dr. Perry told him that when he insisted he could only say what he believed to be true, one or more of the autopsy doctors told him he would be brought before a medical board if he continued to insist on his story. Perry said they even threatened that he would lose his medical license. I quote from Steadman's article:

But [Dr. Malcolm Perry] told us that throughout that night, he received a series of phone calls to his home from irate doctors at the Bethesda Naval Hospital, where an autopsy was being conducted, and the doctors there were becoming increasingly frustrated with his belief that it was an entrance wound.  He said they asked him if the doctors in Dallas had turned the President over and examined the wounds to his back; he said they had not. They told him he could not be certain of his conclusion if he had not examined the wounds in the President’s back. They said Bethesda had the President’s body and Dallas did not. They told Dr. Perry he must not continue to say he cut across what he believed to be an entrance wound when there was no evidence of shots fired from the front.  When he said again he could only say what he believed to be true, one or more of the autopsy doctors told him they would take him before a Medical Board if he continued to insist on what they were certain was otherwise. They threatened his license to practice medicine, Dr. Perry said....(https://web.archive.org/web/20241006184009/http://evesmag.com/jfkassassination.htm; http://evesmag.com/jfkassassination.htm; https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-ordeal-of-malcolm-perry)

Crucially, Parkland supervisory nurse Audrey Bell confirmed in her 1997 ARRB interview that Dr. Perry told her that he received several calls on the night of the assassination from Bethesda Naval Hospital pressuring him to change his story about the throat wound:

Saturday morning, when I got over there, Dr. Perry came up to the office. I said, "You look awful. Did you get any sleep last night?"

He said, "Well, not too much, between the calls from Bethesda that came in during the night." ["Bethesda" refers to Bethesda Naval Hospital, where the autopsy was performed.]

I said, "What about?"

He said, "Oh, whether that was an entrance wound or an exit wound in the throat."

He said, "They were wanting me to change my mind." (https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/arrb/medical_interviews/audio/ARRB_Bell.htm)

Nurse Bell told the HSCA the same thing in 1977 (http://www.stickam.com/member/viewMedia.do?mId=184850325&mediaowner=true).