Recent Posts91
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Vanishing Low Fragment Trail: An Unsolvable Problem for WC Apologists
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 01:30:07 AM »This is a clownish, discrediting, and revealing dodge.
No one denies that the autopsy report says there was a fragment trail that ran upward from the EOP to the right eyebrow. No one denies that the autopsy report says nothing about a fragment trail near the top of the head, 15 cm (5.9 inches) above the EOP. No one denies that the autopsy doctors said the entry wound was near the middle of the occipital bone but that the cowlick entry site is in the parietal bone, 1 cm above the lambda. And no one denies that the extant autopsy skull x-rays show no fragment trail from the EOP to the right eyebrow. No one. As in no one.
So how do you explain these facts? Answer: You duck them with another frivolous dodge.
I'd be more interested in how you explain the discrepancy. You're the one trying to make the case for a conspiracy. You need to provide that evidence for that.
Quote
As any honest observer can see, I am actually not "playing forensic pathologist" at all. I am simply pointing out what numerous experts on both sides have discussed on this key issue. If you would ever bother to read the transcripts of Finck, Boswell, and Humes's exchanges with the FPP during their HSCA testimony, you would see that the absence of a fragment trail and wound pattern from the EOP to the right eye was a major, intense point of disagreement and controversy, a dispute that became so severe that at one point Finck actually questioned how the skull x-rays had been authenticated.
You have identified a disagreement between the autopsy team and the FPP. Now tell us what you think it means and why.
Quote
I notice you said nothing about Dr. Chesser's comments on the problems that the high fragment trail and the autopsy report's entry site location pose for the lone-gunman theory. FYI, Dr. Chesser is a board-certified neurologist who has not only examined the autopsy materials at the National Archives but has also examined JFK's pre-mortem x-rays at the Kennedy Library in Boston.
Goody. Now explain what this anomaly proves. That's a step I never see the CTs take. They think it suffices just to identify an anomaly as if that proves anything. If you want to prove something, you need to resolve the conflict. Simply identifying it doesn't prove squat.
