Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Autopsy proves SBT impossible  (Read 14286 times)

Online Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #20 on: April 10, 2018, 12:14:14 PM »
It's not explainable using that image.

Take a look at the following:



Tim, perhaps you would mark on the photo above, the line you believe the bullet took.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #20 on: April 10, 2018, 12:14:14 PM »


Online Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #21 on: April 10, 2018, 12:45:08 PM »

Where do you get the idea from, that the bullet "travelled just above the top of the right lung"?

Bernd, I was bouncing Tim's own post back at him.

"They had an entrance wound in the posterior at the base of the neck. The X-Rays revealed no bullet inside the body.  After removing the breastplate they found a contusion on the apex of the upper lobe of the right lung. It was obvious to them that the bullet had gone over the top of that lung. They came to realize that the bullet had to have exited from the front of the neck. Humes' phone call to Dr. Perry confirmed it for them."

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 784
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #22 on: April 10, 2018, 02:13:09 PM »
Bernd, I was bouncing Tim's own post back at him.

"They had an entrance wound in the posterior at the base of the neck. The X-Rays revealed no bullet inside the body.  After removing the breastplate they found a contusion on the apex of the upper lobe of the right lung. It was obvious to them that the bullet had gone over the top of that lung. They came to realize that the bullet had to have exited from the front of the neck. Humes' phone call to Dr. Perry confirmed it for them."

 Are we not supposed to be confused by the terms contusion on the apex of the lung and over the top of the lung

Online Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 575
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #23 on: April 10, 2018, 02:40:11 PM »
Are we not supposed to be confused by the terms contusion on the apex of the lung and over the top of the lung

Was the contusion on the apex of the lung supposedly caused by the bullet?

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 784
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2018, 04:16:13 PM »
Was the contusion on the apex of the lung supposedly caused by the bullet?

 Seemingly the apex of the lung is part of the lung. Therefore to say that, and then at the same time claim it went above the lung is some kind of problem

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #24 on: April 10, 2018, 04:16:13 PM »


Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #25 on: April 10, 2018, 07:53:19 PM »
Mr. SPECTER - Have you had any additional, special training or experience in missile wounds?
Colonel FINCK - For the past 3 years I was Chief of the Wound Ballistics Pathology Branch of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and in that capacity I reviewed personally all the cases forwarded to us by the Armed Forces, and some civilian cases from the United States and our forces overseas. The number of these cases amounts to approximately 400 cases. I was called as a consultant in the field of missile wounds for this particular case, and also last year in February 1963, the Surgeon General of the Army sent me to Vietnam for a wound ballistics mission, I had to testify in a murder trial involving a 30/30 rifle in the first week of March this year, and I came back yesterday after one week in Panama where I had to testify. I was sent to Panama by the Secretary of the Army regarding the fatalities of the events of 9-10 in January of 1964.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you been certified by the American Board of Pathology, Doctor Finck?
Colonel FINCK - I was certified in pathology anatomy by the American Board of Pathology in 1956, and by the same American Board of Pathology in the field of forensic pathology in 1961.
...............................
Mr. SPECTER - Did you have occasion to participate in the autopsy of the late President Kennedy?
Colonel FINCK - Yes; I did.
Mr. SPECTER - And are you one of the three coauthors of the autopsy report which has been previously marked and introduced into evidence here?
Colonel FINCK - Yes, I am.


            Guess you forgot to mention that Humes called in Finck to assist him. By the time Finck arrived at the Official JFK Autopsy, it was already well under way. Humes had already had his way with JFK's body/wounds by the time Finck got to the autopsy.

Offline Matt Grantham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 784
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #26 on: April 10, 2018, 08:23:00 PM »
 I was looking for more information on this and came upon someone mentioning a couple of independent investigators of the Bethesda autopsy but lost the link somehow Anybody know who they might be?

 Is there anything beyond a quote  in regard to bruising of the upper part of the right lung that supports the notion that they tracked the wound from the front side of the throat backwards?

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3221
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2018, 11:44:59 PM »
Well its been pretty polite up to this point , but I am going to object to this There is the logical fallacy of begging the question, and in my opinion it is particularly prevalent among those who official stories of some sort behind them

Yep, it's the favorite debate technique of the LNers.  Along with shifting the burden of proof.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #27 on: April 10, 2018, 11:44:59 PM »


Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 871
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #28 on: April 11, 2018, 05:04:06 AM »
Seemingly the apex of the lung is part of the lung. Therefore to say that, and then at the same time claim it went above the lung is some kind of problem

Matt, why is that a problem? The apex of the lung was bruised by the shockwave of the bullet as it passed above it.

Offline Gary Craig

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 408
  • The human mind is our fundamental resource. JFK
Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #29 on: April 11, 2018, 06:37:30 AM »
Matt, why is that a problem? The apex of the lung was bruised by the shockwave of the bullet as it passed above it.

"The apex of the lung was bruised by the shockwave of the bullet as it passed above it."

How does a bullet creating a shockwave that bruises the top of JFK's lung, as it passes over top of it, exit

the front of his throat through a clean punched out hole roughly the same diameter as the alleged bullet?

Doctors who saw the wound pre-tracheotomy said it was an entrance wound. Their reasoning: The shock

wave from a rifle bullet would have created more damage and left a much larger exit wound in the front of

JFK's throat.


http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=622&relPageId=5

ARRB MD 41 - White House Transcript of Dallas Press Conference

-snip-

Q. Where was the entrance wound?

Dr.Perry: There was an entrance wound in the neck, in regards the one on the
head, I cannot say.


Q. Which way was the bullet coming on the neck wound? At him?

Dr.Perry: It appeared to be coming at him.

-snip-

Q. Doctor, describe the entrance wound. You think from the front in the throat?

Dr.Perry: The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat; yes,
that is correct.


-snip-

----------------------

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/31st_Issue/vs_wounds.html

Mr. Specter. What would be the considerations which, in your mind, would make it, as you characterized it, unlikely?

Dr. Baxter. It would be unlikely because the damage that the bullet would create would be--first its speed would create
a shock wave which would damage a larger number of tissues, as in its path, it would tend to strike, or usually would strike,
tissues of greater density than this particular missile did and would then begin to tumble and would create larger jagged--the
further it went, the more jagged would be the damage that it created; so that ordinarily there would have been a rather large
wound of exit. (VI, H-42)

"Mr. Specter had even more severe problems with Dr. Ronald Coy Jones of Parkland Hospital, whom he asked about the neck wounds:"

Mr. Specter. In this report, Dr. Jones, you state the following, "Previously described severe skull and brain injury was noted
as well as a small hole in the anterior midline of the neck thought to be a bullet entrance wound." What led you to the thought
that it was a bullet entrance wound, sir?

Dr. Jones. The hole was very small and relatively clean cut, as you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting
from a patient. If this were an exit wound, you would think that it exited at a very low velocity to produce no more damage than
this had done, and if this were a missile of high velocity, you would expect more of an explosive type of exit wound, with more
tissue destruction than this appeared to have on superficial examination. (VI, H-55)

"Even Mr. Specter could not find in this account much opportunity for turning this neck wound into an exit wound. So, in good prosecutor
-like fashion, he prodded for the thin slant of Commission daylight in Dr. Jones's otherwise dark view of the Commission's suggestions:"


Mr. Specter. Would it be consistent, then, with an exit wound, but of low velocity, as you put it?

Dr. Jones. Yes, of very low velocity to the point that you might think that this bullet barely made it through the soft tissues and
just enough to drop out of the skin on the opposite side. (VI, H-55)
« Last Edit: April 11, 2018, 07:12:37 AM by Gary Craig »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Autopsy proves SBT impossible
« Reply #29 on: April 11, 2018, 06:37:30 AM »