Limo cleaning and skull fragments

[Matt Grantham]

 I believe Mark requested that we try not too have quite so many tangents away from the the given topic I must admit it has become confusing for me as well So I am taking up some of the discussion on the Dan Rather thread here


THREE pieces of skull found by none other than ASAIC FLOYD BORING during the "official" Secret Service limousine inspection late on 11/22/63(CD 80. p.3), four hours before the FBI did the same- this is seperate from the finding made by Kinney on the C-130 will en route to
Andrews AFB

 Then we seem to have Young finding three more skull fragments and another bullet near the time of the autopsy Having a tough time finding exactly when Did the FBI investigation occur during the fl;ight We seem to have a manifesto of who was on board, but I do not have time to track it down at the moment

[Mike Orr]

Type in " Notes on JFK's Skull Fragments " and read what Jackie Kennedy , SAIS Gerald A. Behn , Roy Kellerman , Clint Hill, Samuel A Kinney and others have to say about JFK Skull Fragments .

  Jackie- And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull (sort of wedge shaped like that), and I remember it was flesh colored (with little ridges at the top.

Behn & Kellerman - Skull found in rear seat.

Clint Hill- Back of skull in rear seat.

Sam Kinney - Limo was in the C-130 transport plane during flight back to Washington . Sam Kinney finds a skull fragment under the jump seat where Connally had been seated and he also found a bullet fragment in the front seat between the drivers and passenger seat . He remarked that the bullet fragment looked like it hit the windshield frame above the windshield. " SA Kinney put on a radio patch to Presidential Physician Admiral Burkley to inform him that he had discovered the skull fragment. 

In an interview with Vince Palamara ("The Third Alternative-Survivor's Guilt:  The Secret Service and The JFK Murder" , pp 8-9 , 28, 55-56, 78-80, 81-82, 110-111 ) Sam told me twice that he saw the back of JFK's head come off immediately when the fatal shot struck the President's head. Kinney added: " It was a big piece-half his head was gone." When I pressed him on this point and asked him if he was sure of the skulls piece's orientation, he said " I don't know what else it could have been but the back of his head.
The Harper fragment" (found by Billy Harper 11-23-63) Dr. Jack Harper's nephew William "Billy ' Harper a medical student interviews with the HSCA (RIF#180-10093-10429 ) {see also pp.261-262 of "Killing Kennedy" by H.E.L.} " Dr. Harper said the consensus of the Doctors who view the skull fragment was that it was part of the Occipital region... Dr. .A.B. Cairns...said the piece of skull fragment came from an area approximately two and a half to three inches above the spine area. He said it had the markings of a piece of skull fragment from the lower occipital area , specifically: suture and inner markings where blood vessels run around the base of the skull."

[Zeon Wasinsky]

One wonders, given the magnitude of this crime, that they would want to know EXACTLY what type bullet, define EXACTLY the entry hole. and would thus would have taken the time to actually shave the hair and reconstruct the skull with as many pieces as were found, rather than just a photo of a hand holding some presumably piece of skull in place by gripping the hair.

Stlll NOT Clear that it is piece of skull separated and held in place or the hand is just gripping some hair. There is no clear single bullet hole visible, in this only ONE photo taken, which causes even more doubt, was to why they could not have shown such hole after removing all hair using some chemical, and then reconstruct just the bare skull. Hence, they get the Ida Dox "enhanced drawing" to make the hole "appear".

[Matt Grantham]

Mike Orr Thanks for the helpful links and information
 The usual contradictions seem to appear In regard to the Kinney fragment is the story that it goes to Burkley and the FBI and then find its way to the autopsy Where are these fragments today?

 As for Jackie supposedly holding a piece of JFK's skull at Parkland I have certainly heard that story tens of times on various YouTube clips but can find nothing about it on any on line searches

[Royell Storing]

One wonders, given the magnitude of this crime, that they would want to know EXACTLY what type bullet, define EXACTLY the entry hole. and would thus would have taken the time to actually shave the hair and reconstruct the skull with as many pieces as were found, rather than just a photo of a hand holding some presumably piece of skull in place by gripping the hair.

Stlll NOT Clear that it is piece of skull separated and held in place or the hand is just gripping some hair. There is no clear single bullet hole visible, in this only ONE photo taken, which causes even more doubt, was to why they could not have shown such hole after removing all hair using some chemical, and then reconstruct just the bare skull. Hence, they get the Ida Dox "enhanced drawing" to make the hole "appear".

         Have Never heard an explanation as to the purpose of the autopsy photo described above.  That photo Hides/Conceals far more than it Reveals.


         

[Mike Orr]

Thomas Robinson---Gawlers Funeral Home - Fox Autopsy Photographs --- After completing his four drawings of Head wounds and describing these wounds, ARRB staff showed Mr. Robinson a set of what is alleged to be the Fox autopsy photographs to see whether they were consistent with what he remembered seeing in the morgue at Bethesda. His comments follow, related to various Fox Photos: - Back of head (corresponds to B&W#s 15 & 16: Robinson said " You see , this is the flap of skin, the blow-out in the right temple that I told you about, and which I drew in my drawing." When asked by the ARRB where the hole in the back of the head was in relation to this photograph, Robinson responded by placing his fingers in a circle just above the white spot in the hairline in the photograph, and said" The hole is right here, where I said it was in my drawing, but it just doesn't show up in this photo."
      -Top of Head/Superior view of cranium ( corresponds to B&W #s 7-10): Robinson frowned, and said that the damage in this photograph was "what the Doctors did," and explained that they cut this scalp open and reflected it back in order to remove bullet fragments ( the fragments he had observed in a glass vial). ARRB staff members asked Robinson whether there was damage to the top of the head when he arrived at the morgue and before the brain was removed; he replied by saying that this area was "all broken" but that it was not open like the wound in the back of the head.

www.aarclibrary.org/public/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/pdf/md180pdf

[Mike Orr]

John Stringer : was the autopsy photographer. David Lifton interviewed Stringer, in part, as follows: Lifton: " When you lifted him out, was the main damage to the skull on the top or in the back ?" Stringer, "In the back." Lifton: In the back?...High in the back or lower in the back?" Stringer: " In the occipital part, in the back there, up above the neck." Lifton: " In other words, the main part of his head that was blasted away was in the occipital part of the skull?" Stringer: Yes. In the back part. " Lifton: "The back portion. Okay. In other words, there was no 5 inch hole in the top of the skull?" Stringer: Oh , some of it was blown off--yes, I mean, toward, out of the top in the back, yes." Lifton: "Top in the back. But the top in the front was pretty intact?" Stringer: "Yes , sure. " Lifton:" The top front was intact?" Right." Lifton unsatisfied with precisely what Stringer may have meant by the 'back of the head' asked , as he had asked McHugh, if by "back of the head" Stringer meant the portion of the head that rests on the rear portion of a bathtub during bathing. Stringer replied, Yes."--as had McHugh.

[Matt Grantham]

 Good stuff I suppose with so much evidence for the large wound in the back of JFK's skull kind of makes my question about the official accounts apparently showing fragments blowing off part of the top of the skull kind of irrelevant I guess I am just surprised how little explanation it is given