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

Author Topic: Gary Mack and the about face !  (Read 10474 times)

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #110 on: July 24, 2018, 03:44:17 AM »
Sorry, but their earliest recollections are the most accurate.



Sorry but you've been trumped, these are the earliest recollections of what happened and all these eyewitnesses with the freshest memories all describe the wound as seen in the Autopsy photos and the Zapruder film, you know the same wound as confirmed in the Autopsy Report.



You can't argue with science, the back of Kennedy's head shows only an entrance wound and NO exit wound.





JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #110 on: July 24, 2018, 03:44:17 AM »


Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #111 on: July 24, 2018, 03:53:08 AM »
So what is your excuse for what Police Chief Jesse Curry said? This is from my "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions" series .

Quote on

Agent Hill finally convinced her [Jackie Kennedy] to let go of the President. Apparently she didnít want anyone to see that the BACK of the Presidentís head was PARTIALLY BLOWN OFF. He [Agent Hill] gave her his coat which she used to carefully wrap the Presidentís head and neck as five or six Secret Service men lifted him toward the stretcher. His body was limp like a dead manís, they struggled to get him on the stretcher. (Jesse Curry, JFK Assassination File, p. 32) (Emphasis mine)

Quote off



Curry wasn't an eyewitness, so what?, you're all just interpreting what Clint Hill said, stop trying to play mind reader.

Clint Hill couldn't be more clear about where he meant.





JohnM






Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #112 on: July 24, 2018, 03:55:16 AM »
The current autopsy photographs do NOT match one eyewitness' account of the wounds that they saw on November 22, 1963. Live with it.





 BS:






JohnM

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #112 on: July 24, 2018, 03:55:16 AM »


Offline Brian Walker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #113 on: July 24, 2018, 04:03:18 AM »
I think what it says is that JFK's head was not glued down to the gurney.

They said he was lying on his back and they saw the entire wound.They said he was never turned.

I believe that John has admitted that Oswald might have done it so I don't guy why he argues stuff like this.  IF you believe Oswald might have done it than you believe that the Doctors could have been wrong,.

« Last Edit: July 24, 2018, 04:08:05 AM by Brian Walker »

Offline Brian Walker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #114 on: July 24, 2018, 04:06:22 AM »
        Yeah. It's kind of ridiculous to believe that someone could be wheeled into a Trauma Room with a hole in the Back of their head the size of an orange and somehow the entire emergency staff missed it.

Those doctors agree that under the circumstances it was understandable that they were wrong.


Tell us why you assume that ER doctors can look at a wound on a head in that condition and be reliable about where the wound was.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #114 on: July 24, 2018, 04:06:22 AM »


Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3857
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #115 on: July 24, 2018, 04:47:08 PM »
They said he was lying on his back and they saw the entire wound.They said he was never turned.

I believe that John has admitted that Oswald might have done it so I don't guy why he argues stuff like this.  IF you believe Oswald might have done it than you believe that the Doctors could have been wrong,.

Because it strains credibility that 20+ experienced ER professionals all mistook the top of the head for the back of the head.

Online Royell Storing

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 865
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #116 on: July 24, 2018, 05:13:43 PM »
Those doctors agree that under the circumstances it was understandable that they were wrong.


Tell us why you assume that ER doctors can look at a wound on a head in that condition and be reliable about where the wound was.


            The same way I would assume that if Several Dr's viewed a broken leg they would Not place a cast on the patients arm.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #116 on: July 24, 2018, 05:13:43 PM »


Online Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1602
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #117 on: July 24, 2018, 08:02:51 PM »
Are you for real?  The people who described his wounds did take a look at JFK at Parkland.

Crenshaw LOL

And show us where I said people didn't [attempt to] look at wounds. By the way, who could see any actual wound except for the autopsy X Ray location (including wedge piece) despite the body never having been turned over in the OR?
« Last Edit: July 24, 2018, 08:18:01 PM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Bill Brown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 873
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #118 on: July 24, 2018, 08:11:53 PM »
In interviews with author Gerald Posner, the Parkland doctors were nearly unanimous in their agreement with the autopsy findings at Bethesda Naval Hospital.

Dr. Carrico points out, "We did [originally] say there was a parietal-occipital wound . . . and I think we were mistaken. The reason I say that is that the President was lying on his back and shoulders, and you could see the hole, with scalp and brain tissue hanging back down his head, and it covered most of the occipital [rear] portion of his head. We saw a large hole on the right side of his head. I don't believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken."

Dr. Adolph Giesecke agrees. "I guess I have to say I was wrong in my Warren Commission testimony on the wound and in some of my pronouncements since then. I just never got that good of a look at it. . . . The truth is there was a massive head wound, with brain tissue and blood around it. And with that type of wound you could not get accurate information unless you feel around inside the hole and look into it in detail, and I certainly didn't do that, nor did I see anyone else do that."

Dr. Paul Peters, portrayed in JFK by I. D. Brickman (see photo above), also concedes his initial impression was inaccurate: ". . . I now believe the head wound is more forward than I first placed it. More to the side than the rear." Dr. Pepper Jenkins states, "The autopsy photo, with the rear of the head intact and a protrusion in the parietal [side] region, is the way I remember it. I never did say occipital."

"I don't think any of us got a good look at the head wound," says Dr. Malcolm Perry. "I did not look at it that closely. . . . But like everyone else, I saw it back there. It was in the occipital/parietal area. The occipital and parietal bone join each other, so we are only talking a centimeter or so in difference. And you must remember the President had a lot of hair, and it was bloody and matted, and it was difficult to tell where the wound started or finished."

Dr. Charles Baxter concurs: "He had such a bushy head of hair, and blood and all in it, you couldn't tell what was the wound versus dried blood or dangling tissue. I have been misquoted enough on this, some saying I claimed the whole back of his head was blown away. That's just wrong. I never even saw the back of his head. The wound was on the right side, not the back."

Dr. Ronald Jones confirms his colleagues' observations, adding he did not even realize for several minutes that there was a head wound. He finally noticed there was a "large side wound, with blood and tissue that extended toward the rear, from what you could tell of the mess that was there."

http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100parkland.html

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #118 on: July 24, 2018, 08:11:53 PM »


Offline Brian Walker

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #119 on: July 24, 2018, 10:09:54 PM »
Because it strains credibility that 20+ experienced ER professionals all mistook the top of the head for the back of the head.

Some of those doctors have said it was understandable considering the circumstances.  John Mytton has shown that the doctors were all over the place on where the wound was.  So they can be wrong obviously.


John could you show me a diagram of where the wound was that would jive with what the doctors said. Don't forget JFK was on his back. I have asked CTs for this many times.  You and the others don't want to do that.. You just want to play defense lawyer. You want it so you can just point out any doctor who didn't  say the wound was exactly where the WC said it was and act like you win. It doesn't matter to you that the Doctors disagree and are all over the place. As long as they say it wasn't exactly where the SC said it was that is good enough for you and your client.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2018, 10:26:04 PM by Brian Walker »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Gary Mack and the about face !
« Reply #119 on: July 24, 2018, 10:09:54 PM »