Interesting video of Dr Jenkins who was at the autopsy of JFK.

[Tim Nickerson]

I stand corrected. I misread your post. My bad.

Now you've got me utterly confused.

Here you say;

you still have the 21 members of the HSCA's photographic analysis panel. That panel confirmed the authenticity of the X-Rays and the photos.

but earlier you said;

I never said that the HSCA photographic experts verified that the X-Rays were of Kennedy.

Could you please explain how you can confirm the authenticity of the X-Rays without verifying that the X-Rays were of Kennedy?

Earlier in this thread you said the X-Rays had "been authenticated six ways from Sunday."

It now turns out that you apparently were merely talking about Ebersole and Custer and the recollections of Humes and Boswell. So, you've two men, who actually conducted the most questionable autopsy in history, and who are never going to say anything but what you would expect from them and two men that actually took the X-Rays and even one of those (and I still haven't checked Ebersol) had some doubts about some of the X-Rays.

Oh well, at least now we know what you mean by "six ways from Sunday"

The HSCA Photographic analysis panel and the HSCA medical panel were two separate panels. The HSCA Photographic analysis panel confirmed the authenticity of the autopsy photos and X-Rays. The HSCA medical panel confirmed that the X-Rays were of Kennedy.

[Martin Weidmann]

That you can look at those images and pretend you don't see the massive deformation in the top of JFK's head is cowardly.
You present yourself on this forum as someone with no agenda who just looks at the evidence but you've exposed yourself as another tinfoil nobody who lacks the courage to reveal his flaky beliefs and snipes from the sidelines to boost his fragile ego.
You're denial of JFK's head wound in the images I posted is cowardly and hypocritical.
More importantly, you've outed yourself as such in front of the whole forum.

That you can look at those images and pretend you don't see the massive deformation in the top of JFK's head is cowardly.

When did I ever pretend that? Of course I see what's going on in those two frames, I just can't interpret what I am seeing exactly. You previously claimed you could actually see a "massive crater in the top of JFK's head". I don't see that. I'm sorry if you don't like that.

But talking about pretending not to see something. What about the bulging of the back of the head? Do you see that? And if not, how do you explain the pieces of skull that blew onto the trunk of the limo and into the street?

You present yourself on this forum as someone with no agenda who just looks at the evidence

And that's exactly what I did. Just like the prayerman images or those who allegedly show a shooter behind the fence, I simply do not see what you think or want to you see in two blurry pictures of the headshot.

but you've exposed yourself as another tinfoil nobody who lacks the courage to reveal his flaky beliefs and snipes from the sidelines to boost his fragile ego.

You're denial of JFK's head wound in the images I posted is cowardly and hypocritical.
More importantly, you've outed yourself as such in front of the whole forum. 

Wow, this entire hissy fit simply because somebody does not see what you want him to see in a blurry image? Do you really feel so entitled that you can not understand that not everybody shares these - shall we say - awesome powers of observation that you seem to think you have?

Actually, with this kind of BS, it's you who is exposing himself as an arrogant prick who gets extremely vindictive when somebody disagrees with him or, as in this case, simply doesn't see what you want him to see. You are making a complete fool of yourself. Perhaps you should try to get that aggression of yours under control.... Just a suggestion!

[Martin Weidmann]

The HSCA Photographic analysis panel and the HSCA medical panel were two separate panels. The HSCA Photographic analysis panel confirmed the authenticity of the autopsy photos and X-Rays. The HSCA medical panel confirmed that the X-Rays were of Kennedy.

That doesn't really answer my question, does it now?

Only X-Rays that were of Kennedy could possibly be authentic, right? And X-Rays that were not of Kennedy could never be authentic, right?

So let me rephrase my question... 

Could you please explain how the HSCA Photographic analysis panel can confirm the authenticity of the X-Rays without verifying themselves that the X-Rays were of Kennedy? Or did they simply conclude they were authentic, based on the confirmation of the HSCA medical panel that the X-Rays were of Kennedy? Or vice versa?

[Dan O'meara]

That you can look at those images and pretend you don't see the massive deformation in the top of JFK's head is cowardly.

When did I ever pretend that? Of course I see what's going on in those two frames, I just can't interpret what I am seeing exactly. You previously claimed you could actually see a "massive crater in the top of JFK's head". I don't see that. I'm sorry if you don't like that.

But talking about pretending not to see something. What about the bulging of the back of the head? Do you see that? And if not, how do you explain the pieces of skull that blew onto the trunk of the limo and into the street?

You present yourself on this forum as someone with no agenda who just looks at the evidence

And that's exactly what I did. Just like the prayerman images or those who allegedly show a shooter behind the fence, I simply do not see what you think or want to you see in two blurry pictures of the headshot.

but you've exposed yourself as another tinfoil nobody who lacks the courage to reveal his flaky beliefs and snipes from the sidelines to boost his fragile ego.

You're denial of JFK's head wound in the images I posted is cowardly and hypocritical.
More importantly, you've outed yourself as such in front of the whole forum. 

Wow, this entire hissy fit simply because somebody does not see what you want him to see in a blurry image? Do you really feel so entitled that you can not understand that not everybody shares these - shall we say - awesome powers of observation that you seem to think you have?

Actually, with this kind of BS, it's you who is exposing himself as an arrogant prick who gets extremely vindictive when somebody disagrees with him or, as in this case, simply doesn't see what you want him to see. You are making a complete fool of yourself. Perhaps you should try to get that aggression of yours under control.... Just a suggestion!

"I just can't interpret what I am seeing exactly."

Yet another spineless contribution.
You don't see the massive crater in the top of JFK's head because the image is too blurry but you can see JFK's head bulging at the back?
More hypocrisy from the gutless wonder.

[Tim Nickerson]

That doesn't really answer my question, does it now?

Only X-Rays that were of Kennedy could possibly be authentic, right? And X-Rays that were not of Kennedy could never be authentic, right?

So let me rephrase my question... 

Could you please explain how the HSCA Photographic analysis panel can confirm the authenticity of the X-Rays without verifying themselves that the X-Rays were of Kennedy? Or did they simply conclude they were authentic, based on the confirmation of the HSCA medical panel that the X-Rays were of Kennedy? Or vice versa?

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0118b.htm

Begin reading at near the bottom of the page, at (551). 13 pages.

[Martin Weidmann]

"I just can't interpret what I am seeing exactly."

Yet another spineless contribution.
You don't see the massive crater in the top of JFK's head because the image is too blurry but you can see JFK's head bulging at the back?
More hypocrisy from the gutless wonder.

What a nice sympathetic guy you are.... 

And still no explanation about how two pieces of skull could have ended up on the trunk of the limo and behind the car. And then you call me a gutless wonder..... Go figure!

[Martin Weidmann]

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0118b.htm

Begin reading at near the bottom of the page, at (551). 13 pages.

I'll leave that until the weekend.

[John Mytton]

"I just can't interpret what I am seeing exactly."

Yet another spineless contribution.
You don't see the massive crater in the top of JFK's head because the image is too blurry but you can see JFK's head bulging at the back?
More hypocrisy from the gutless wonder.

Yeah, the selected visual interpretation when it suits their particular agenda is the epitome of gutless, especially when someone uses this disgusting tactic just to win an argument which they never even comprehended in the first place.

Anyway, I made this Gif of Z312-Z315 from an extremely high definition early generation copy and the wound area and resulting bone flap is clearly seen. Besides a bullet hole, the rear of his head was totally absent of any other wound.



Because creating Gif's comprimises image quality, here's the images that I took from my original, so a little bit further down the food chain but still a ton better most of what's available on the internet.





JohnM