Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories V: Five for Fighting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok, just read it, it says I'm right about everything.

JFK told his biographer to make him a 1000-word-a-minute reader. *

You'd be outdoing JFK by several powers of ten.

Lifton's book is 747 pages.

Good luck convincing anyone you 'just read it' between my post and yours... there's 11 minutes between those two posts. That's roughly 68 pages a minute, or more than a page per second. Your reading comprehension must be minimal.

Hank
______________
* Score another one for Elizabeth Loftus:
So what about John F. Kennedy and his 1,200 words per minute? Kennedy biographer Richard Reeves looked into this. The 1,200 number comes from an off-the-cuff guess made to Time magazine's White House reporter. The reporter called the Evelyn Wood school where Kennedy had taken his speed reading class, but found that he had no score, as he'd never completed the class and actually been timed. But in what the reporter figured was a bit a PR posturing, the school told him that Kennedy "probably" read 700-800 words per minute. Carver's educated guess is that Kennedy likely read 500-600 words per minute, but may have been able to skim as fast as 1,000. So take the Kennedy claims with a grain of salt.
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4229
 
Last edited:
Maybe you can fill me in. Did the autopsy findings of Kennedy's back wound come out by 11/29/1963?

Hole in back = Entry wound.

Hole in throat = Exit wound.

Supporting evidence:

Lack of bullet in JFK's body x-rays (they x-rayed him from head to toe).

Fiber evidence from JFK's jacket.

Fiber evidence from JFK's shirt.

Fiber evidence from JFK's necktie.

Wound consistent with size and performance of 6.5x52mm round.
 
I do not see why I should assume "RN" means "Registered Nurse", but you should also know that I wouldn't post on these boards with you all if I was always sober.

Let me get this straight. You are arguing the medical evidence and have no clue what an "RN" is. Can you explain this?

I can.
 
Ok, just read it, it says I'm right about everything.

Weird. Lifton says JFK was shot from the front. There goes your EOP.

Say hi to Badgeman.

Plus...if you had actually read Lifton you'd know he believes the body was surgically altered to support a shot from behind, which undermines all of the crap you've been posting about the autopsy since - as far as Lifton was concerned - it was all a fraud anyway.

For the grown-ups:

Lifton is a cautionary tale about getting sucked into the CT world. He was an engineering student at UCLA when he attended a speech by scam artist Mark Lane. He dropped out of school, and spent the rest of his life "investigating" the assassination. This is a solid profile:

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-11-20/magazine/tm-206_1_david-lifton

Bottom line, don't be like Dave.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I understand just fine. You have been saying, for what seems like an eternity, that you believe in the existence of another wound in JFK's skull.
I get that.
Now all you have to do is do the maths. Show what kind of gun fired the bullet, show where you think it was fired from, then show the evidence for the existence of bullet, gun and shooter.
Now, an unkind person might comment that you won't do this becuase you can't. You have no additional bullet, no witnesses for a shooter, no plausible location for said gunman, not even an attempt at the identity, motives or fate of said gunman, nothing.
I am not that unkind person. I will assume you have this evidence, and just haven't got round to presenting it yet.
I think now would be a good time. I cannot recall anyone losing a debate as badly as you are. You have literally been wrong about everything, and shown to be so over and over again. You need to remedy this.
The unkind would again predict that you will dodge, deflect and distract, but I have faith. I believe you will rise to this challenge.
Don't make me a disappointed Yak. That would be cruel.

Do you have to solve a mystery to prove that there is one? It looks like one of the biggest mysteries in the assassination right now is what happened to the projectile that created the EOP wound.

Or are you referring to the large head wound being created by a separate, tangential shot? Well, why are there trace amounts of metal (presumably bullet lead) on the OUTER SURFACE of the harper fragment right next to the external beveling?

One-zero to the unkind.
Dodge, deflect, distract. How disappointingly predictable.
You now want to add an assumed missing bullet to the missing wound, presumably fired from a missing gun by a gunman who is also missing, from a location you refuse to speculate on.
What's also missing are your calculations as to the probable whereabouts of this elusive sniper. And any evidence at all to support any of the other parts of this second shooter theory.
Oh, and any sign that you have any intention of providing this evidence.

Well, I tried. I'm just going to sit back for a while and watch you continue to lose in such a spectacular fashion. Most entertaining!
:popcorn1
 
Weird. Lifton says JFK was shot from the front. There goes your EOP. Say hi to Badgeman.

And only the front! That's so the back could remain 'unmarked', ready for the conspirators to frame Oswald by putting entry holes there. Of course, Lifton is silent about things like wounds on living people looking nothing like cutting into dead ones, what kind of ammo the conspirators used that could kill, remain in one piece, but not penetrate a body fully (regardless of whether the bullet hit soft tissue like a neck or hard bone like a skull), and where the conspirators were shooting from. All points that need answers, but none are forthcoming from Lifton.

He also apparently never asked himself "Why would the conspirators do it this way?"

According to Lifton, they had Oswald's weapon, and shells, fragments, and a nearly whole bullet to plant (he doesn't deal with how they got the rifle anywhere in his 747 page book, it's apparently just a given in his world), so they could frame Oswald. But if they had Oswald's weapon, why not just shoot JFK from the Depository and leave the weapon behind, thereby framing Oswald in a much easier fashion than having to leave the weapon and shells behind in the Depository AND altering the body and ensuring the real shooters are unseen and planting fragments in the limo and a nearly whole bullet at Parkland.*


Plus...if you had actually read Lifton you'd know he believes the body was surgically altered to support a shot from behind, which undermines all of the crap you've been posting about the autopsy since - as far as Lifton was concerned - it was all a fraud anyway.

And apparently they altered Connally's wounds too! Remember, his wounds point to being shot from behind as well.


For the grown-ups:

Lifton is a cautionary tale about getting sucked into the CT world. He was an engineering student at UCLA when he attended a speech by scam artist Mark Lane. He dropped out of school, and spent the rest of his life "investigating" the assassination. This is a solid profile:

http://articles.latimes.com/1988-11-20/magazine/tm-206_1_david-lifton

I've also said the best thing the publisher did with that book was insist David re-write it to make it in the first person, telling us what he thought and when. It's an eerie look into how a person's mind goes from "The evidence doesn't fit any conspiracy theory" to "The conspiracy is even bigger than I thought!"

Lifton was not a medical person, of course, and trying to wedge the square evidence of shots from behind from Oswald's weapon into his round theory of shooters in the front and medical alterations to JFK's body to frame Oswald meant he had to ignore a whole slew of problems with his theory.

He's gotten to the point where he is now saying the Parkland doctors were the ones who were originally part of the plot, oblivious to the fact that many of their observations were what he relied on 50 years ago to determine there was a conspiracy in the first place.


Bottom line, don't be like Dave.

Too late!

Sadly, too many CTs are so wedded to their favorite conspiracy theory, it appears no amount of evidence will sway them. Look at some of the more frequent CTs who have posted here: Robert Prey, Bob Harris, and now MicahJava.

Hank
_____________________

* MicahJava has argued that the bullet recovered in Parkland was NOT CE399. Which means the conspirators planted the wrong bullet, then had to swap it out for the 'right one' (one traceable to Oswald's weapon). But somehow, MicahJava doesn't see this as a problem, as everything Lifton wrote proves MJ right, somehow.
 
Last edited:
JFK told his biographer to make him a 1000-word-a-minute reader. *

You'd be outdoing JFK by several powers of ten.

Lifton's book is 747 pages.

Good luck convincing anyone you 'just read it' between my post and yours... there's 11 minutes between those two posts. That's roughly 68 pages a minute, or more than a page per second. Your reading comprehension must be minimal.

Hank
______________
* Score another one for Elizabeth Loftus:
So what about John F. Kennedy and his 1,200 words per minute? Kennedy biographer Richard Reeves looked into this. The 1,200 number comes from an off-the-cuff guess made to Time magazine's White House reporter. The reporter called the Evelyn Wood school where Kennedy had taken his speed reading class, but found that he had no score, as he'd never completed the class and actually been timed. But in what the reporter figured was a bit a PR posturing, the school told him that Kennedy "probably" read 700-800 words per minute. Carver's educated guess is that Kennedy likely read 500-600 words per minute, but may have been able to skim as fast as 1,000. So take the Kennedy claims with a grain of salt.
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4229

Okay, so how did Barnum know about the back wound only a week after?
 
He was at the autopsy, wasn't he?

What was his role there?

How long did he stay?

Hank

He had contact with Burkley shortly after or later during the autopsy. Burkley informed him and his other guys that Kennedy had a bullet wound in his "lower neck", and one "near his throat". This was recorded in his diary a week after.
 
He had contact with Burkley shortly after or later during the autopsy. Burkley informed him and his other guys that Kennedy had a bullet wound in his "lower neck", and one "near his throat". This was recorded in his diary a week after.

After a week he got the details of a conversation wrong?

Hardly surprising.
 
He had contact with Burkley shortly after or later during the autopsy. Burkley informed him and his other guys that Kennedy had a bullet wound in his "lower neck", and one "near his throat". This was recorded in his diary a week after.

Well, which is it? "During", "shortly after", or "later"? Could you be more imprecise?

And this is conspiracy evidence exactly why?

How late was Barnum at Bethesda?

Did he leave at midnight when the autopsy concluded, or was he there later, until after the morticians finished up?

Here's the entry as you posted it: "We then proceeded to take the casket into the hospital in an orderly fashion. [Dr. Burkley, said, regarding the shots that hit JFK that] "The first striking him in the lower neck and coming out near the throat".

Who added the parenthetical phrase, MicahJava, and where's the evidence that THAT?

Hank
 
Last edited:
After a week he got the details of a conversation wrong?

Hardly surprising.

MicahJava will ignore this, no doubt, but Barnum also said this after a week about the head shot, 'The second shot striking him above and to the rear of the right ear, this shot not coming out…", according to David Lifton in BEST EVIDENCE. So we know he got that wrong.

And of course, MicahJava also referred to Barnum's account as 'garbled' and said there was a certain amount of 'incoherence' in it.

Right here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11931291&postcount=962

So he admits Barnum's statement was garbled and incoherent in places, and can be wrong. But not here. Not here.

Because here he needs Barnum to be right. That's his whole case in a nutshell.

Hank
 
Last edited:
After a week he got the details of a conversation wrong?

Hardly surprising.

OMG, are you seriously saying that Barnum fabricated the "lower neck" bullet wound information out of thin air, and by pure coincidence it happened to coincide with the fact that Kennedy had a bullet wound in his back (at that time, often refereed to as the "upper neck")?
 
OMG, are you seriously saying that Barnum fabricated the "lower neck" bullet wound information out of thin air, and by pure coincidence it happened to coincide with the fact that Kennedy had a bullet wound in his back (at that time, often refereed to as the "upper neck")?

No, I am not suggesting he fabricated anything.
I'm suggesting that after a week, he got remembered things askew, because I know that is what humans do. After a few days, people writing statements get details confused and wrong, but that does not mean they fabricate anything. Something towards the upper back, leading to the throat, may be remembered as lower neck rather than upper back. It is an honest recollection, but it is limited by human ability.
Did you not understand that in my statement, or is this an attempt at a strawman?
 
No, I am not suggesting he fabricated anything.
I'm suggesting that after a week, he got remembered things askew, because I know that is what humans do. After a few days, people writing statements get details confused and wrong, but that does not mean they fabricate anything. Something towards the upper back, leading to the throat, may be remembered as lower neck rather than upper back. It is an honest recollection, but it is limited by human ability.
Did you not understand that in my statement, or is this an attempt at a strawman?

The back wound was not public knowledge on 11/29/1963. So you have few options for explaining the Barnum diary, dated 11/29/1963. It looks like Barnum's story is correct and the doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, and not the day after.
 
The back wound was not public knowledge on 11/29/1963. So you have few options for explaining the Barnum diary, dated 11/29/1963. It looks like Barnum's story is correct and the doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, and not the day after.

And none of those options point to a conspiracy, or another head shot, or a different interpretation of the wounds.
Any way you cut it, allowing for the obvious explanation being "somebody misremembered details", it remains remarkably mundane: At some point in the autopsy process, the doctors spoke to Parkland, learned the cuts to the throat required for an attempt to save JFK's life obscured an exit wound, they re-examined the evidence, and realised the back wound exited the throat.

What, if any, pertinent point are you trying to make, that could possibly have an impact on your "theory"?
 
The back wound was not public knowledge on 11/29/1963.

What part of "he was at Bethesda during the autopsy" did you not understand?


So you have few options for explaining the Barnum diary, dated 11/29/1963. It looks like Barnum's story is correct and the doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, and not the day after.

What, by the way, was he doing there in the first place? Can you tell us?

When did he arrive, when did he leave?

Hank
 
Last edited:
And none of those options point to a conspiracy, or another head shot, or a different interpretation of the wounds.
Any way you cut it, allowing for the obvious explanation being "somebody misremembered details", it remains remarkably mundane: At some point in the autopsy process, the doctors spoke to Parkland, learned the cuts to the throat required for an attempt to save JFK's life obscured an exit wound, they re-examined the evidence, and realised the back wound exited the throat.

What, if any, pertinent point are you trying to make, that could possibly have an impact on your "theory"?

His argument has been the doctors knew during the autopsy about the tracheostomy being over a bullet wound, but for some reason (he hasn't said what) lied about that and moved it to the next morning.

Humes (who made the call) testified it was Saturday morning. Dr. Perry (who received the call) remembered it as Friday, but admitted it could be later. Humes said it was one call. Perry said there were two.

Upon this, his entire conspirary hinges.

But Humes initially didn't pin down a time. He just said 'early Saturday morning'.

Dr. Humes testimony:

Commander HUMES - Yes, sir; I did. I had the impression from seeing the wound that it represented a surgical tracheotomy wound, a wound frequently made by surgeons when people are in respiratory distress to give them a free airway.
To ascertain that point, I called on the telephone Dr. Malcolm Perry and discussed with him the situation of the President's neck when he first examined the President, and asked him had he in fact done a tracheotomy which was somewhat redundant because I was somewhat certain he had.
He said, yes; he had done a tracheotomy and that as the point to perform his tracheotomy he used a wound which he had interpreted as a missile wound in the low neck, as the point through which to make the tracheotomy incision.
Mr. SPECTER - When did you have that conversation with him, Dr. Humes?
Commander HUMES - I had that conversation early on Saturday morning, sir.
Mr. SPECTER - On Saturday morning, November 23d?
Commander HUMES - That is correct, sir.
...
Mr. SPECTER - In response to Mr. Dulles' question a moment ago, Doctor Humes, you commented that they did not turn him over at Parkland. Will you state for the record what the source of your information is on that?
Commander HUMES - Yes. This is a result of a personal telephone conversation between myself and Dr. Malcolm Perry early in the morning of Saturday, November 23.
Mr. SPECTER - At that time did Doctor Perry tell you specifically, Doctor Humes, that the Parkland doctors had not Observed the wound in the President's back?
Commander HUMES - He told me that the President was on his back from the time he was brought into the hospital until the time he left it, and that at no time was he turned from his back by the doctors.
Mr. SPECTER - And at the time of your conversation with Doctor Perry did you tell Doctor Perry anything of your observations or conclusions?
Commander HUMES - No, sir; I did not.


Dr. Perry's testimony:
Mr. SPECTER - When did that conversation occur?
Dr. PERRY - My knowledge as to the exact accuracy of it is obviously in doubt. I was under the initial impression that I talked to him on Friday, but I understand it was on Saturday. I didn't recall exactly when.
Mr. SPECTER - Do you have an independent recollection at this moment as to whether it was on Friday or Saturday?
Dr. PERRY - No, sir; I have thought about it again and the events surrounding that weekend were very kaleidoscopic, and I talked with Dr. Humes on two occasions, separated by a very short interval of, I think it was, 30 minutes or an hour or so, it could have been a little longer.
Mr. SPECTER - What was the medium of your conversation?
Dr. PERRY - Over the telephone.
Mr. SPECTER - Did he identify himself to you as Dr. Humes of Bethesda?
Dr. PERRY - He did.


Of course, there's a simple explanation for this that MicahJava never considered.

They both could be right.

There's an hour difference between Washington and Dallas. When it is 1:00 AM in Washington, it is midnight in Dallas.

So Humes could have made the phone call at a few minutes before 1:00 AM Washington time on 11/23/63 (AKA 'early Saturday morning') and Perry would have received that call late Friday night Dallas time (like 11:55 PM on 11/22/63).

Humes said the autopsy concluded about 11pm Washington time on the 22nd:
Commander HUMES - The examination was concluded approximately at 11 o'clock on the night of November 22.

So there's about two hours for Humes to think about all this stuff and then call Perry almost two hours after the autopsy concluded.

Perry himself said he wasn't sure of exactly when the phone call came from Humes. Bear in mind he was on shift on 12:30PM (early afternoon) at Parkland on 11/22/63. He wasn't a resident (another word MicahJava won't understand, like RN), so he likely wasn't still on duty at midnight. More than likely he was asleep at home when Humes called.

MicahJava, while focusing on the discrepancy that Perry recalled two phone calls to Humes one, and the difference in recollection between Saturday morning and Friday night, ignores that Dr. Perry confirmed the substance of the call as Humes recalled it, and the purpose of the phone call was to talk about the trache wound Dr. Humes saw:

Mr. SPECTER - Would you state as specifically as you can recollect the conversation that you first had with him?
Dr. PERRY - He advised me that he could not discuss with me the findings of necropsy, that he had a few questions he would like to clarify. The initial phone call was in relation to my doing a tracheotomy. Since I had made the incision directly through the wound in the neck, it made it difficult for them to ascertain the exact nature of this wound. Of course, that did not occur to me at the time. I did what appeared to me to be medically expedient. And when I informed him that there was a wound there and I suspected an underlying wound of the trachea and even perhaps of the great vessels he advised me that he thought this action was correct and he said he could not relate to me any of the other findings.
Mr. SPECTER - Would you relate to me in lay language what necropsy is?
Dr. PERRY - Autopsy, postmortem examination.


MicahJava likes to pretend all this occurred during the autopsy, but it clearly occurred afterward.

And according to Dr. Perry, this is the first time Dr. Humes learned of a bullet wound in the throat.

Note: Edited to add much more detail.

Hank
 
Last edited:
His argument has been the doctors knew during the autopsy about the tracheostomy being over a bullet wound, but for some reason (he hasn't said what) lied about that and moved it to the next morning.

Humes (who made the call) testified it was Saturday morning. Dr. Perry (who received the call) remembered it as about midnight. Humes said it was one call. Perry said there were two.

Upon this, his entire conspirary hinges.

Hank

If it were about midnight, it would be the next morning...
But you are quite right: Misremembering is the obvious answer before conspiracy.
They were asked some time afterwards, and as anybody who has to log time-sensitive information in legal documents (e.g. Anybody in industry filling in a log book or permit to work) would tell you, if you don't note times as calls come in, you very quickly lose track of time and estimates or best guesses of when procedure A happened, will vary wildly, even after a few hours.
When you are concentrating on something other than time, it is very difficult to pin point how long you have been pootling about with your paper work, or tasks.
 
What part of "he was at Bethesda during the autopsy" did you not understand?


Yeah, Barnum was at Bethesda hospital, but he wasn't at the autopsy.

How do you think he heard about the back wound? It's almost as if his story about Burkley is totally credible and true.
 
If it were about midnight, it would be the next morning...
But you are quite right: Misremembering is the obvious answer before conspiracy.
They were asked some time afterwards, and as anybody who has to log time-sensitive information in legal documents (e.g. Anybody in industry filling in a log book or permit to work) would tell you, if you don't note times as calls come in, you very quickly lose track of time and estimates or best guesses of when procedure A happened, will vary wildly, even after a few hours.
When you are concentrating on something other than time, it is very difficult to pin point how long you have been pootling about with your paper work, or tasks.

Humes, Boswell, and Finck have been clear that by "Saturday morning", they mean the first contact with Dr. Perry happened at around 10:30 AM 11/23/1963, not midnight when they still had the body. Big difference.
 
Last edited:
Humes, Boswell, and Finck have been clear that by "Saturday morning", they mean the first contact with Dr. Perry happened at around 10:30 AM 11/23/1963, not midnight when they still had the body. Big difference.

I'm sorry, when did they say that? Humes made the call. Not Boswell or Finck. Anything Boswell or Finck say is just hearsay. At no point did Humes or Perry say anyone was on the line but Humes and Perry.

I just searched his Warren Commission testimony, his HSCA testimony, and his ARRB deposition for "10:30" and I didn't find it anywhere. In his ARRB testimony, approximately a third of a century later, he remembered it as 8 or 9 in the morning:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/humesa.htm

Q. When is the first time you had a conversation with anyone outside of people in the autopsy room regarding the nature of the President's wounds?
A. The next morning when I called Malcolm Perry.
Q. Approximately--
A. I'm pretty sure that's who I spoke to. I know it is.
Q. Approximately what time did you speak to Dr. Perry?
A. I think 8 or 9 o'clock on Saturday morning.


But so what?

There was certainly plenty of time for his recollection to fail on that point by that time.

That deposition was given Tuesday, February 13, 1996. The assassination was 11/22/63.

There are 11,770 days that occurred between those two events. That's 11770 days when Humes got up, went to work, interacted with his colleagues at work, came home, went to dinner, interacted with his wife, his kids, went to parties, saw his kids grow up and graduate school, watched plenty of television, fell asleep each night, and generally lived his life and didn't think much about what time he called Dr. Perry on Saturday morning on the 23rd of November, 1963.

There is a discrepancy of about 8 hours in there. Out of the 282,480 or so (11,770 x 24) hours that Humes lived his life between the event and the recollection of the event to the ARRB.

That means Humes was very precise. He was off by 8 / 282,480 = .00283%. Not three percent. Not three-tenths of one percent. Not even three-hundredths of one percent. He was off by less than three-thousandths of one percent.

Pretty accurate for a third of a century later.

You should pray for such accuracy in even one of your posts.

Hank
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Barnum was at Bethesda hospital, but he wasn't at the autopsy.

No kidding.


How do you think he heard about the back wound? It's almost as if his story about Burkley is totally credible and true.

Except for the parts you already conceded he got wrong, when you said his statement was 'garbled' in parts, and there was some 'incoherence' in it.

Right here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11931291&postcount=962

But now "his story about Burkley is totally credible"?

How about you put both feet on the same side of the fence for once? Choose one.

When did Barnum LEAVE? What was he doing there? Tell us (even approximately) what time he would have left that night, and what was his reason for coming and going. Do you know?

Hank
 
Last edited:
No, I am not suggesting he fabricated anything.
I'm suggesting that after a week, he got remembered things askew, because I know that is what humans do. After a few days, people writing statements get details confused and wrong, but that does not mean they fabricate anything. Something towards the upper back, leading to the throat, may be remembered as lower neck rather than upper back. It is an honest recollection, but it is limited by human ability.
Did you not understand that in my statement, or is this an attempt at a strawman?

He needs to give the appearance of a debate, hence the strawman.

Hank
 
The back wound was not public knowledge on 11/29/1963. So you have few options for explaining the Barnum diary, dated 11/29/1963. It looks like Barnum's story is correct and the doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, and not the day after.

You need to pin down the time of the phone call. Good luck with that. It's 54 years after the fact, and I doubt the phone company keeps records going back that long.

Also, a reminder. Humes testified the autopsy ended about 11pm, so a phone call a few minutes after midnight Washington time would suffice to make it both 'after the autopsy' and 'early Saturday morning'. You don't need a whole day to transpire to get to the next day. Just an hour or so.

And when did Barnum leave Bethesda? Do you know?

Hank
 
Last edited:
Hey!

Dave


giphy.gif
 
The back wound was not public knowledge on 11/29/1963. So you have few options for explaining the Barnum diary, dated 11/29/1963. It looks like Barnum's story is correct and the doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, and not the day after.

Who cares?

You just confirmed that you now believe that the shots all came from the front, and that the body was altered before the autopsy.

...or are you going to actually read Lifton now?
 
I see, since George Barnum was a pallbearer, you want to say that he heard something in the early morning hours of 11/23/1963 during the preparation of the funeral. And you also want to leave wiggle room that Dr. Humes actually called Dr. Perry around Dawn?

No. While being interviewed by the HSCA, Dr. Humes clarified that he meant 10:30 AM - 12:00 PM, 6-8 hours after completing the examination of the body. That was a private conversation and the fact that a bullet hole existed in the back was not public knowledge, only some people at Bethesda outside of the autopsy witnesses might have heard about it like with Barnum's story about Burkley discussing the wounds with him and his dudes around midnight. Do you want to say that this happened much later after Dawn?

edit: it would also be interesting to know exactly when Burkley finally left Bethesda or went to sleep.
 
Last edited:
I see, since George Barnum was a pallbearer, you want to say that he heard something in the early morning hours of 11/23/1963 during the preparation of the funeral. And you also want to leave wiggle room that Dr. Humes actually called Dr. Perry around Dawn?

Another strawman by you.

Either you have no argument (and you know you have no argument) or you have a severe reading comprehension deficit. Hence the strawman / erroneous interpretation. Choose one.

At what point did I suggest Barnum heard anything about 'dawn'?


No. While being interviewed by the HSCA...

Refresh my memory. How many years after the assassination did this interview of Humes take place? Why are you relying on his recollection again? Oh, that's right. You have no evidence.


Dr. Humes clarified that he meant 10:30 AM - 12:00 PM, 6-8 hours after completing the examination of the body

One of us can't do math. Humes said the autopsy concluded about 11pm. That would be 11.5 - 13 hours later.

And even assuming he said that, he's now on the record as saying "early in the morning", 8-9, and 10:30-noon (according to you).

That hardly instills confidence that he remembered the details and the times correctly.

But that's not the issue. Where does he say 10:30 - noon? I'm still not seeing that in his testimony.

I did quote where he said "early on Saturday morning" and 1:00 A.M. is early on Saturday morning. And if it was about 12:45 AM or so "early on Saturday morning" to Humes (Washington time), that would resolve the conflict with Perry remembering it as Friday that he received the call (it would be 11:45 PM Friday night in Dallas).


That was a private conversation and the fact that a bullet hole existed in the back was not public knowledge, only some people at Bethesda might have heard about it like with Barnum's story about Burkley discussing the wounds with him and his dudes around midnight. Do you want to say that this happened much later after Dawn?

Still a strawman. You do this a LOT. You must not be able to rebut my actual argument.

So you've got a problem. According to your own arguments pushed earlier, Perry got at least the first call on Friday. That means no later than 1:00 AM on Saturday morning Washington time. This was YOUR argument. Don't you remember?

The throat wound was most likely discovered shortly after midnight via telephone to Dr. Perry, so that technically would be November 23.

The back wound was discovered much earlier. When did Barnum leave Bethesda again? You never said. Was he there between 8pm on Friday and until at least 2pm on Saturday morning? If so, he could have heard from Burkley after the Humes' phone call to Perry.

Hank
 
Last edited:
You need to pin down the time of the phone call. Good luck with that. It's 54 years after the fact, and I doubt the phone company keeps records going back that long.

Also, a reminder. Humes testified the autopsy ended about 11pm, so a phone call a few minutes after midnight Washington time would suffice to make it both 'after the autopsy' and 'early Saturday morning'. You don't need a whole day to transpire to get to the next day. Just an hour or so.

And when did Barnum leave Bethesda? Do you know?

Hank

We know from testimony that the autopsy went a little longer after the Gawler's funeral home guys arrived. According to their own contemporary documents, they arrived at 11:30 PM. FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil have testified that they left the autopsy shortly after the funeral home guys arrived because they assumed nothing more of value would be found. So we have a window of time that explains why the FBI agents didn't know there was a throat wound.
 
Another strawman by you.

Either you have no argument (and you know you have no argument) or you have a severe reading comprehension deficit. Hence the strawman / erroneous interpretation. Choose one.

At what point did I suggest Barnum heard anything about 'dawn'?

Google says that Dawn starts at 6:30 AM, so I meant some time before dawn.

Refresh my memory. How many years after the assassination did this interview of Humes take place? Why are you relying on his recollection again? Oh, that's right. You have no evidence.

Oh my God, you're starting to agree with me (in your own way).

One of us can't do math. Humes said the autopsy concluded about 11pm. That would be 11.5 - 13 hours later.

Those were Dr. Humes' words, not mine.

And even assuming he said that, he's now on the record as saying "early in the morning", 8-9, and 10:30-noon (according to you).

That hardly instills confidence that he remembered the details and the times correctly.

But that's not the issue. Where does he say 10:30 - noon? I'm still not seeing that in his testimony.

I did quote where he said "early on Saturday morning" and 1:00 A.M. is early on Saturday morning. And if it was about 12:45 AM or so "early on Saturday morning" to Humes (Washington time), that would resolve the conflict with Perry remembering it as Friday that he received the call (it would be 11:45 PM Friday night in Dallas).

"8-9" comes from his ARRB deposition, 10:30-12 comes from his HSCA interview with Humes & Boswell together.

Dr. HUMES. Having completed the examination and remaining to assist the morticians in the preparation of the body, we did not leave the autopsy room until 5:30 or 6 in the morning. It was clearly obvious that a committee could not write the report. I had another commitment for that morning, a little later, a religious commitment with one of my children. And so I went home and took care of that, slept far several hours until about 6 in the evening of the day after, and then sat down and wrote the report that's sitting before you now myself, my own version of it. without any input other than the discussions that we thought that we had had, Dr. Boswell, Dr. Finck and myself. I then returned that morning and looked at what I had written--now wait, I'm a day ahead of myself---Saturday morning we discussed--

Dr. BOSWELL. Saturday morning we got together and we called Dallas.

Dr. HUMES. We called Dallas. See, we were at a loss because we hadn't appreciated the exit wound in the neck, we had been-- I have to go back a little bit. I think for your edification. There were four times as many people in the room most of the time as there are in this room at this moment, including the physician to the President, the Surgeon General of the Navy, the Commanding Officer of the Naval Medical Center, the Commanding Officer of the Naval Medical School, the Army, Navy, and Air Force aides to the President of the United States at one time or another, the Secret Service, the FBI and countless nondescript people who were unknown to me. Mistake No. 1. So, there was considerable confusion. So we went home. I took care of this obligation that I had. To refresh my mind, we met together around noon on Saturday, 11 in the morning, perhaps 10:30, something like that and---

Dr. BADEN. Now this is the day after?

Dr. HUMES. The day after, within 6 or 8 hours of having completed the examination, assisting Waller's and so forth for the preparation of the President's remains. We got together and discussed our problem. We said we've got to talk to the people in Dallas We should have talked to them the night before, but there was no way we could get out of the room. You'd have to understand that situation, that hysterical situation that existed. How we kept our wits about us as well as we did is amazing to me. I don't know how we managed as poorly or as well as we did under the circumstances. So I called Dr. Perry. Took me a little while to reach him. We had a very nice conversation on the phone in which he described a missile wound, what he interpreted as a missile wound, in the midline of the neck through which he had created a very quick emergency, as you can see from the photographs, tracheotomy incision effect destroying its value to us and obscuring it very gorgeously for us. Well, of course, the minute he said that to me, lights went on, and we said ah, we have some place for our missile to have gone. And then, of course, I asked him, much to my amazement, had he or any other physician in attendance upon the President, examined the back of the patient, his neck, or his shoulder. They said no, the patient had never been moved from his back while they were administering to him. So, the confusion that existed from some of his comments and the comments of other standby people in the emergency room in Dallas had been in the news media and elsewhere, so that added to the confusion. So, following that, and that discussion, and we having a meeting of minds as to generally what was necessary to be accomplished, and being informed by the various people in anthority that our gross report should be delivered to the White House physician no later than Sunday evening, the next day, 24 hours later, or not quite 24 hours later. Not having slept for about 48 hours, I went home and rested from noon until 8 or 10 that evening, Saturday evening, and then I sat down in front of other notes on which I had made minor comments, handwritten notes. I wrote the report which is present here. Now we also have here--and since it's in the record I want to comment about it some comments that I destroyed, some notes related to this, by burning in the fireplace of my home, and that is true. However, nothing that was destroyed is not present in this write-up. Now, why did I do that? It's interesting, and I've not spoken of this in public. Not too long here of this, I had had the experience of serving as an escort officer for some foreign physicians from foreign navies, who were being entertained and given a course of instruction in the United States. We had 20 or 30 of these chaps, and they used to come through every year or two, and I often was escort officer for them. They spent 5 weeks in Washington or 5 weeks in the field, then we went various places. We went to submarine bases and Marine Corps installations and naval training centers to teach them how physicians function in the American Navy. One of the places to which I happened to take them--and we tried to teach them a little Americana--I took them to Greenfield Village, which, as many of you know, Henry Ford set up adjacent to his former home in suburban Detroit, Dearborn. And in that location is a courthouse in which President Lincoln used to hold forth when he was riding the circuit, and these men were very impressed with that, and they knew who President Lincoln was and were impressed with his courthouse and many other things in Greenfield Village. But what I was amazed to find there, because I personally did not know it was there until I made that visit, was the chair in which President Lincoln sat when he was assassinated. Somehow or other they got that chair out of Ford's Theatre, and Henry Ford got it into Greenfield Village, and it's sitting in this courthouse. Now the back of that chair is stained with a dark substance, and there's much discussion to this day as to whether that stain represents the blood of the deceased President or whether it is Macassar. I don't know if you all remember what Macassar is. When people our age were young and you'd visit yoar grandmother, on the back of the sofa there were lovely lace doilies in the homes of many people. And if you recall what I'm speaking of--they were on the sofas and reclining chairs--and those lace doilies bear the name antimacassar. You could go to a store in this country and buy an anti macassar. They don't exist any more. And Macassar was a hair dressing that gentlemen wore in those days to keep their hair in place. And these officers were appalled that the American people would wish to have an object stained with the blood of the President on public display. And I was--it kind of bothered me a little bit-it still does, to this day. And here I was, now in the possession of a number of pieces of paper, some of which unavoidably, and in the confusion which I described to you earlier, were stained in part with the blood of our deceased President. And I knew that I would give the record over to some person or persons in authority, and I felt that these pieces of paper were inappropriate to be turned over to anyone, and it was for that reason and for that reason only, that, having transcribed those notes onto the pieces of paper that are before you, I destroyed those pieces of paper. I think I'd do the same thing tomorrow. I had a similar problem, because I felt they would fail into the hands of some sensation seeker.
 
Last edited:
We know from testimony that the autopsy went a little longer after the Gawler's funeral home guys arrived. According to their own contemporary documents, they arrived at 11:30 PM. FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil have testified that they left the autopsy shortly after the funeral home guys arrived because they assumed nothing more of value would be found. So we have a window of time that explains why the FBI agents didn't know there was a throat wound.

Focus.

None of that helps you establish Barnum heard about the throat wound BEFORE the phone call.

That is what you're trying to establish, right?

Establish when the phone call happened. According to Humes' Warren Commission testimony, it was 11pm when the autopsy ended. And according to Perry's Warren Commission testimony, it was his initial recollection that he got the initial call from Humes on Friday night, which means no later than 1pm Washington time.

So tell us why we should accept your arguments here as meaningful?

You initially argued for the phone call happening somewhere about midnight. Now you're arguing for it happening about 12 hours later -- around noon on Saturday.

Make up your mind.

Hank
 
Focus.

None of that helps you establish Barnum heard about the throat wound BEFORE the phone call.

That is what you're trying to establish, right?

Establish when the phone call happened. According to Humes' Warren Commission testimony, it was 11pm when the autopsy ended. And according to Perry's Warren Commission testimony, it was his initial recollection that he got the initial call from Humes on Friday night, which means no later than 1pm Washington time.

So tell us why we should accept your arguments here as meaningful?

You initially argued for the phone call happening somewhere about midnight. Now you're arguing for it happening about 12 hours later -- around noon on Saturday.

Make up your mind.

Hank

I think you're the confused one. The official story is that Dr. Humes called Dr. Perry at around 10:30 - 12:00, whatever, several hours after the body had completed examination by Humes. Keep in mind that Humes was present for the mortician's work on the body.

I am saying that I think Dr. Humes et. al lied about this, and that they actually called Dr. Perry around midnight during the autopsy shortly after the FBI agents departed at 11:30 PM, and discussed this in front of the autopsy witnesses, and probably probed the wound. Whatever they discovered about the throat wound was covered up with the lie that they only realized the tracheotomy was made over a bullet hole long after the autopsy when body was inaccessible.
 
Google says that Dawn starts at 6:30 AM, so I meant some time before dawn.

No, you said "around dawn" or "after dawn". Not before. Until just now.

And you also want to leave wiggle room that Dr. Humes actually called Dr. Perry around Dawn? ... Do you want to say that this happened much later after Dawn?

And now you argue you meant "before dawn". So 1:00 AM is still in play?


Oh my God, you're starting to agree with me (in your own way).

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. In this analogy, you're the broken clock. Not sure however what you think I am agreeing with you on.


Those were Dr. Humes' words, not mine. "8-9" comes from his ARRB deposition, 10:30-12 comes from his HSCA interview with Humes & Boswell together.

Great, along with his 'early Saturday morning' we now have Humes all over the map. Not sure how you think this helps you, unless you somehow think you can just pick one of Humes' times and pretend that's the most accurate. Quite simply, you don't know when this call happened, and given it's 54 years later, you never will.

Hank
 
Wow, you're bad at getting hung up on words.

How many hours was Humes with the body with the funeral home people after the autopsy completed? 1 AM is not "still in play" for you. He still had the body then. It is inevitable to conclude that the autopsy doctors discovered the throat wound around midnight while they, or at least Humes, still had the body for examination.

Although you do have me interested in exactly when Burkley left Bethesda hospital or when he went to sleep.
 
What is your theory on why either George Barnum or the autopsy doctors are wrong?

No, that's just your strawman argument once more.

I've suggested a way they could all be right and your argument rendered meaningless.

If the autopsy concluded about 11pm as Humes testified, if the phone call to Perry happened about 12:45am or so 'early Saturday morning' as Humes testified, then Perry receives the phone call Friday night as he initially recalled, and Burkley could have all the information about both the back wound (from the autopsy before 11am) and the throat wound (from Parkland or via Humes from the phone call) to impart the information to Barnum about both about one pm or sometime later. We know Barnum was there to drop the body of JFK off and pick it up again, so that puts him in Bethesda at about the right time.

That's a resolution to your issue. Pretend some more there's anything worth talking about.

And you already admitted to this:
Barnum's report does not specifically say that Burkley told him that before the autopsy.

So when exacty did Barnum hear this from Burkley, according to Barnum? Quote him on the time.

Hank
 
Last edited:
No, that's just your strawman argument once more.

I already suggested a way they could all be right.

If the autopsy concluded about 11pm as Humes testified, if the phone call to Perry happened about 12:45am or so 'early Saturday morning' as Humes testified, then Perry receives the phone call Friday night as he initially recalled, and Burkley could have all the information about both the back wound (from the autopsy before 11am) and the throat wound (from Parkland or via Humes from the phone call) to impart the information to Barnum about both about one pm or sometime later. We know Barnum was there to drop the body of JFK off and pick it up again, so that puts him in Bethesda at about the right time.

That's a resolution to your issue. Pretend some more there's anything worth talking about.

And you already admitted to this:


So when exacty did Barnum hear this from Burkley, according to Barnum? Quote him on the time.

Hank

From BEST EVIDENCE:

In his November 29, 1963 account, Coast Guardsman George Barnum wrote that as the men were having sandwhiches and coffee sometime after midnight, Admiral Burkley came in and talked to them, and said three shots had been fired, that the President had been hit by the first and third, and he described the trajectories of the two that struck:

"The first striking him in the lower neck and coming out near the throat. The second shot striking him above and to the rear of the right ear, this shot not coming out...."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom