ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags JFK assassination , Kennedy conspiracies

Reply
Old 13th November 2017, 09:02 PM   #2841
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Wow, you're bad at getting hung up on words.
That's your way of admitting you said 'before dawn', "after dawn', and 'around dawn', while building your various strawman arguments.

Yes, words have meanings.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
How many hours was Humes with the body with the funeral home people after the autopsy completed?
This is your case you're trying to build. You present the evidence. And show why it's pertinent.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
1 AM is not "still in play" for you. He still had the body then.
He said the autopsy concluded about 11pm on Friday night. He said the phone call happened 'early Saturday morning'. 1:00 AM is 'early Saturday morning'.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
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.
Not according to the testimony of the people who were actually there and partook in the autopsy. The phone call happened sometime after the autopsy was concluded and the body turned over to the morticians for preparation for viewing.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Although you do have me interested in exactly when Burkley left Bethesda hospital or when he went to sleep.
Your conspiracy argument, not mine. We'll await your evidence.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 13th November 2017 at 09:28 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 09:11 PM   #2842
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I think you're the confused one.
Sorry, no. My evidence holds together and makes sense.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
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.
Quote "the official story" on that. Bet you can't. "Whatever"? You mean you don't know the official story, and are just making it up?

Once the body was turned over to the morticians, the autopsy was over.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I am saying that I think Dr. Humes et. al lied about this,
We know what you're saying. We're asking you to cite the evidence for that.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
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.
Who is 'they'? Humes made the call to Perry. No one else was involved.

And wait. A few posts ago, the phone call was at about noon on Saturday? Now it's around midnight on Friday night?

Do you remember arguing for the "about noon on Saturday" here:
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
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.
And here:
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
...Dr. Humes clarified that he meant 10:30 AM - 12:00 PM, 6-8 hours after completing the examination of the body.
I think you need to make up your mind.



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
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.
"Whatever they discovered"?

What do you think they discovered, and how does changing the time by a few hours aid in the cover-up? I need more specifics here. Your argument is awfully unclear.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 13th November 2017 at 09:51 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 09:11 PM   #2843
Steve
Illuminator
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,036
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What is your theory on why either George Barnum or the autopsy doctors are wrong?
What is your hypothesis on what happened that day? Why was JFK shot? Who shot him? Where was the shooter who fired the shot that killed him? Please provide as much detail as you can.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 09:26 PM   #2844
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
What is your hypothesis on what happened that day? Why was JFK shot? Who shot him? Where was the shooter who fired the shot that killed him? Please provide as much detail as you can.
He can't do that. Like all conspiracy theorists, all he knows is what didn't happen.... by golly, if the government says Oswald did it, then Oswald didn't do it. It's the "Anybody But Oswald" syndrome.

They will accuse Oswald's acquaintances like Ruth and Michael Paine, his co-worker like Wes Frazier, an ex-Marine he knew like John Heindel or Kerry Thornton, they will accuse anti-Castro Cubans, pro-Castro Cubans, the Mafia, the CIA, the FBI, the Dallas Police, the Russians, the Cubans, the far right, just about anybody but the guy the evidence points to, Lee Harvey Oswald.

MicahJava can't say who shot JFK from where, because he had no clue. All he knows is Oswald didn't do it.

Ask him how he knows that.

He probably can't explain that either.

He just knows.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 13th November 2017 at 09:39 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 09:44 PM   #2845
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
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...."
2:00 am is 'sometime after midnight'.

We have a resolution here.

Not that you'll accept it.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 09:46 PM   #2846
cmikes
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 365
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
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.

Embrace the power of "and"!
cmikes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2017, 11:18 PM   #2847
Axxman300
Master Poster
 
Axxman300's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central California Coast
Posts: 2,150
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What?
You said Lifton's book confirmed everything you believe. Lifton concluded the shots all came from the front, and the body was altered before the autopsy.

Unless you care to admit you have not read the entire book, and thus have made a fool yourself by siting a ridiculous source.
__________________
Disingenuous Piranha
Axxman300 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 07:14 AM   #2848
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
I would probably accept the "2 AM" resolution, since they almost certainly still had the body then. The autopsy participants have always said that their examination of the body went on some time after the morticians arrived. Documents from Gawler's funeral time say that they arrived at the morgue at 11:30 PM, and the witnesses from Gawler's say that they say the autopsy go on longer after they arrived. Dr. Humes also stayed at the morgue to supervise the mortician's work for a few hours after the autopsy officially ended.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 07:15 AM   #2849
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by Axxman300 View Post
You said Lifton's book confirmed everything you believe. Lifton concluded the shots all came from the front, and the body was altered before the autopsy.

Unless you care to admit you have not read the entire book, and thus have made a fool yourself by siting a ridiculous source.
That's Lifton's personal theory. It has nothing to do with his meticulous work at interviewing witnesses and finding important documentation.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 07:21 AM   #2850
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I would probably accept the "2 AM" resolution, since they almost certainly still had the body then. The autopsy participants have always said that their examination of the body went on some time after the morticians arrived. Documents from Gawler's funeral time say that they arrived at the morgue at 11:30 PM, and the witnesses from Gawler's say that they say the autopsy go on longer after they arrived. Dr. Humes also stayed at the morgue to supervise the mortician's work for a few hours after the autopsy officially ended.
None of that means Humes or anyone else was inspecting the body any further. The body was turned over to the morticians for cosmetic treatment. The autopsy concluded about 11pm on Friday. As Humes could summarize, "I had the cause of death. Two bullets struck the President from above and behind. One bullet exited the throat over which the Parkland surgeons made a tracheotomy, and the other exited the top right side of the skull."

We are done here. There is no mystery in any of this, and there is no conspiracy evidence in any of this.

Unless you want to keep beating a dead horse in the vain hope he will get up and walk again.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 14th November 2017 at 07:22 AM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 07:30 AM   #2851
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
That's Lifton's personal theory. It has nothing to do with his meticulous work at interviewing witnesses and finding important documentation.
His 'important documentation' consists for the most part in interviewing or re-interviewing witnesses years, even decades after the fact all in the furtherance of the most bizarre theory ever devised in the JFK conspiracy theorist annals.

Except for maybe his own earlier theory, that the grassy knoll was actually an underground bunker and the assassins were disguised as trees on the knoll.

Reminds me of "The Wizard of Oz" movie for some reason.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9bbxNV7QY8

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 07:59 AM   #2852
RoboTimbo
Hostile Nanobacon
 
RoboTimbo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Prosperity, AZ
Posts: 28,080
MicahJava, now you know to look for assassins who say "Hoom Hum!" a lot.
RoboTimbo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 08:19 AM   #2853
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,079
I'm having a bit of trouble following what MicahJava's getting at here. What difference does it make who phoned whom and when to tell them that JFK had an exit wound in his throat? Ideally I'd like someone other than MJ to tell me, because MJ's explanations tend not to make things any clearer.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 09:01 AM   #2854
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
None of that means Humes or anyone else was inspecting the body any further. The body was turned over to the morticians for cosmetic treatment. The autopsy concluded about 11pm on Friday. As Humes could summarize, "I had the cause of death. Two bullets struck the President from above and behind. One bullet exited the throat over which the Parkland surgeons made a tracheotomy, and the other exited the top right side of the skull."

We are done here. There is no mystery in any of this, and there is no conspiracy evidence in any of this.

Unless you want to keep beating a dead horse in the vain hope he will get up and walk again.

Hank
If Humes learned about the throat wound while he still had access to the body, he would have done something or said something. Unless you want to invoke some kind of incompetence theory wherein Humes decided he was literally too lazy to investigate the throat wound any further or somehow didn't have the jurisdiction.

Humes claimed to the HSCA "...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". Then much later after that he claimed he finally contacted Perry and learned about the original small throat wound.

Meanwhile, twelve witnesses (Dr. Perry of Parkland hospital, George Barnum of the Coast Guard, Jim Snyder of CBS, Joe Hagan and Tom Robinson of Gawler's funeral home, autopsy photographer John Stringer, autopsy witnesses Dr. Robert Karnei, Lieutenant Richard Lipsey, assistant James Curtis Jenkins, radiologist John Ebersole, White house photographer Robert Knudsen, Dr. Paul Peters of Parkland hospital) made statements indicating the autopsy doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, as they were examining the body. Dr. Boswell has made Freudian slips on two occasions indicating the same thing.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 09:03 AM   #2855
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
I'm having a bit of trouble following what MicahJava's getting at here. What difference does it make who phoned whom and when to tell them that JFK had an exit wound in his throat? Ideally I'd like someone other than MJ to tell me, because MJ's explanations tend not to make things any clearer.

Dave
If they knew about the original small throat wound during the autopsy, but lied and said they only learned about it the next day when the body was inaccessible, then that indicates they were trying to cover something up.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 09:15 AM   #2856
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,079
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If they knew about the original small throat wound during the autopsy, but lied and said they only learned about it the next day when the body was inaccessible, then that indicates they were trying to cover something up.
It seems to me, though, that there were two levels of knowledge here. One would expect that the people conducting the autopsy would be aware that there was a wound in the throat, as it's kind of the point of the autopsy to find stuff like that; however, as they knew about the tracheotomy, they might not have known that it was an exit wound. It also seems to me, though, that there's abundant scope for confusion after the fact as to who had what partial knowledge at one point, and one would expect some conflation of memory to the point that witnesses may have believed, viewing events retrospectively, that they knew the throat wound was an exit wound before in fact they found out. I would think that the burden of proof in such a case should be set extremely high.

So if you're claiming that certain people "knew about the throat wound" at certain times, that isn't good enough; anybody involved in the autopsy could have known that JFK had a throat wound. You'd have to establish with certainty that they knew how the throat wound was caused, and that level of certainty would have to exclude the very reasonable possibility that they got slightly confused about what partial knowledge was acquired at what time.

And that's only the first step. There are more to take before there's grounds for reasonable suspicion that someone was covering something specific up. Though, of course, you'll no doubt obsess on the second step in order to gloss over the fact that you haven't actually taken the first.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right

Last edited by Dave Rogers; 14th November 2017 at 09:18 AM.
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 09:26 AM   #2857
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
If you want to think everybody's memory changed in the same way, you must only do so after reading the important statements from the people who were there.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=956

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=962

Note: the passage from William Manchester's book The Death of a President is almost certainly from Joe Hagan of Gawler's funeral home, while I previously thought it came from the President's personal physician Dr. George Burkley.

I also did not add autopsy assistant James Curtis Jenkins to the list, as that information was from David Lifton's book BEST EVIDENCE, which I did not have a copy of at the time.

Last edited by MicahJava; 14th November 2017 at 09:29 AM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 09:43 AM   #2858
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 25,079
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If you want to think everybody's memory changed in the same way, you must only do so after reading the important statements from the people who were there.
The idea that "everybody's memory changed in the same way" doesn't come through in these; I think that's purely your personal construct, and one that the facts don't support. Having trawled through the first few, it seems fairly clear that people's recollections are all over the place, and nobody can recall exactly who know what when. It's a classic piece of conspiracy theorist's anomaly hunting. People get things wrong, days, months and years after the fact; so what?

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 10:01 AM   #2859
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If Humes learned about the throat wound while he still had access to the body, he would have done something or said something.
Investigation 101 according to MicahJava.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Unless you want to invoke some kind of incompetence theory wherein Humes decided he was literally too lazy to investigate the throat wound any further or somehow didn't have the jurisdiction.
Humes Quote: "I had the cause of death."



Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Humes claimed to the HSCA "...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". Then much later after that he claimed he finally contacted Perry and learned about the original small throat wound.
You need to make up your mind. You're all over the place. Earlier you placed the phone call as about midnight. Which is it?
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I am saying that I think Dr. Humes et. al lied about this, and that they actually called Dr. Perry around midnight...
You flop around like a fish on a boat deck.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Meanwhile, twelve witnesses (Dr. Perry of Parkland hospital, George Barnum of the Coast Guard, Jim Snyder of CBS, Joe Hagan and Tom Robinson of Gawler's funeral home, autopsy photographer John Stringer, autopsy witnesses Dr. Robert Karnei, Lieutenant Richard Lipsey, assistant James Curtis Jenkins, radiologist John Ebersole, White house photographer Robert Knudsen, Dr. Paul Peters of Parkland hospital) made statements indicating the autopsy doctors knew about the throat wound during the autopsy, as they were examining the body.
Your attempts at quote-mining has been exposed. Hearsay and recollections from decades after the fact are pretty much meaningless. How could, for example, Dr. Paul Peters of Parkland IN DALLAS know what the Bethesda doctors knew and when they knew it?

Knudson has been exposed as a serial fabricator... claiming he was the autopsy photographer, but he wasn't even at the autopsy.

We've seen that Barnum said nothing about the doctors knowing the throat wound was anything more than a trache during the autopsy. Humes places the autopsy's completion about 11pm on Friday night Washington time, and Barnum says Burkley mentioned the wounds "sometime after midnight".

You are just making stuff up now and throwing all those names into a Gish Gallop Alphabet Soup.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Dr. Boswell has made Freudian slips on two occasions indicating the same thing.
I thought Hoover was the one who dressed in lingerie.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 14th November 2017 at 10:18 AM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 10:08 AM   #2860
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If they knew about the original small throat wound during the autopsy, but lied and said they only learned about it the next day when the body was inaccessible, then that indicates they were trying to cover something up.
True, but meaningless, because you haven't established they learned about the small throat wound during the autopsy.

Even Dr. Perry confirmed the substance of the phone call as calling to learn about the trache, and him only then telling Humes about the bullet wound in the throat.

This has already been related to you. No matter where you turn, you find the evidence against you.

Don't let that stop you. You've got a theory, and by golly, you're going to push that rock uphill no matter what. But look at this kick in the pants:

Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Perry, did you have occasion to discuss your observations with Comdr. James J. Humes of the Bethesda Naval Hospital?
Dr. PERRY - Yes, sir; I did.
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.
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.


Oh look, there it goes rolling downhill again. Time to start over.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 10:16 AM   #2861
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If you want to think everybody's memory changed in the same way, you must only do so after reading the important statements from the people who were there.
Then you cite a bunch of people who were all over the map, and you have to argue with and against to fit your theory.

Is the name of that dead horse you're beating "Gish Gallop" by any chance?

Giddyup.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 10:27 AM   #2862
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
I shouldn't have to re-state what position I am arguing for, but here it goes:

1. At 11:30 the Gawler's funeral home guys arrived at the morgue. The FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil presumed that this marked the near completion of the autopsy, and that nothing else of value would be learned. So, they departed at around this time with their report only referring to the throat wound as a tracheotomy.

2. The autopsy doctors had the Gawler's people wait, and they continued to examine the body for some time after. Around midnight, Dr. Humes called Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas and learned about the original small throat wound that Perry and others saw.

3. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck discussed this during the autopsy in front of witnesses. Witness statements indicate that they physically investigated the throat wound as a bullet hole via probing, etc.

4. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck may have determined that the throat wound represented something incompatible with the official story. So later they concocted a story about the phone call to Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas happening long after Kennedy's body was inaccessible, after the autopsy and after the mortician's work was completed, later in the morning hours of 11/23.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 10:46 AM   #2863
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
I shouldn't have to re-state what position I am arguing for, but here it goes:

1. At 11:30 the Gawler's funeral home guys arrived at the morgue. The FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil presumed that this marked the near completion of the autopsy, and that nothing else of value would be learned. So, they departed at around this time with their report only referring to the throat wound as a tracheotomy.

2. The autopsy doctors had the Gawler's people wait, and they continued to examine the body for some time after. Around midnight, Dr. Humes called Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas and learned about the original small throat wound that Perry and others saw.

3. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck discussed this during the autopsy in front of witnesses. Witness statements indicate that they physically investigated the throat wound as a bullet hole via probing, etc.

4. Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck may have determined that the throat wound represented something incompatible with the official story. So later they concocted a story about the phone call to Dr. Perry at Parkland hospital in Dallas happening long after Kennedy's body was inaccessible, after the autopsy and after the mortician's work was completed, later in the morning hours of 11/23.
Now you just have to establish points 1 through 4 without the use of speculation, hearsay, supposition, recollections from 15 or 33 years after the fact, and conjecture.

You know, using *evidence*.

Good luck with that. So far you've failed miserably.

Start with this 'minor' point:

Given there was no 'official story' by the end of Friday, 11/22/63 (the suspect Oswald was in the hands of Dallas Police, it was a local crime, and there was every reason to believe a trial would follow), what possible reason was there for Humes, Boswell & Finck to lie about anything? The Warren Commission wouldn't even be formed until another week had passed and Oswald had been killed by Jack Ruby during the abortive transfer.

What official story were they trying to uphold, and why would they lie?

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 14th November 2017 at 10:50 AM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:06 AM   #2864
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
1. Although some might consider George Barnum's 11/29/1963 diary hearsay, it describes a verbal exchange with the President's personal physician Dr. Burkley which included him as an active role in the conversation.

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...."


2.How is Dr. Perry's original recollection of a Friday night phone call (and a second call never mentioned by Humes) to the Warren Commission hearsay? He was on the other end of the conversation. Even when being interviewed by the HSCA, he said that this was still his recollection.

3. The 11/25/1966 Baltimore Sun article which contains an interview with Dr. Boswell himself, states "The pathologists who had already been told of the probable extent of the injuries and what had been done by physicians in Dallas."; "'The wound in the throat was not immediately evident at the autopsy,' Dr. Boswell said, 'because of the tracheotomy performed in Dallas... We concluded that night that the bullet had, in fact, entered in the back of the neck, transversed the neck and exited anteriorly.'"

4. While the 1/10/1967 CBS memo by Bob Richter, reporting executive Jim Snyder's story is hearsay, it's still from the 1960's and keep in mind that people in the media generally understand that you should avoid distorting a story. Richter reported that Jim Snyder personally knew Dr. Humes, and that Dr. Humes told him an X-ray was taken during the autopsy of a probe going from the back wound to the throat wound in an irregular path. Again, Jim Snyder was describing a verbal exchange with himself on the other end of the conversation.

5. William Manchester's book The Death of a President states the following:

Joe Gawler and Joe Hagan, his chief assistant, supervised the loading of the coffin in a hearse, or, as Hagan preferred to call it, a “funeral coach.” The firm’s young cosmetician accompanied them to Bethesda. The two caskets, Oneal’s and Gawler’s, lay side by side for a while in the morgue anteroom; then Oneal’s was removed for storage and the undertakers, Irishmen, and George Thomas were admitted to the main room. The autopsy team had finished its work, a grueling, three-hour task, interrupted by the arrival of a fragment of skull which had been retrieved on Elm Street and flown east by federal agents. The nature of the two wounds and the presence of metal fragments in the President’s head had been verified; the metal from Oswald’s bullet was turned over to the FBI. Bethesda’s physicians anticipated that their findings would later be subjected to the most searching scrutiny. They had heard reports of Mac Perry’s medical briefing for the press, and to their dismay they had discovered that all evidence of what was being called an entrance wound in the throat had been removed by Perry’s tracheostomy. Unlike the physicians at Parkland, they had turned the President over and seen the smaller hole in the back of his neck. They were positive that Perry had seen an exit wound. The deleterious effects of confusion were already evident. Commander James J. Humes, Bethesda’s chief of pathology, telephoned Perry in Dallas shortly after midnight, and clinical photographs were taken to satisfy all the Texas doctors who had been in Trauma Room No. 1.

Since the book continues on to quote Joe Hagan of Gawler's funeral home, I presume that the "shortly after midnight" passage originates from him.

There, all of the evidence I posted above comes from the 1960's. Nothing fifteen or thirty years after the fact.

As Doug Horne pointed out, the original official story may have been that the throat wound was a fragment of bullet or bone from the large head shot, but then people in the investigation started realizing that the Zapruder film shows Kennedy reacting to frontal stimuli way before the large head shot at frame 313.

Last edited by MicahJava; 14th November 2017 at 11:12 AM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:24 AM   #2865
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
Then you cite a bunch of people who were all over the map, and you have to argue with and against to fit your theory.

Is the name of that dead horse you're beating "Gish Gallop" by any chance?

Giddyup.

Hank
All over the map? Not only did Dr. Perry tell the Warren Commission and HSCA that he recalled his first contact with Humes happened Friday night, but another Parkland hospital doctor, Paul Peters, made the following statements to Boston Globe journalist Ben Bradlee on 5/1/1981:

A. Alright, now. Just a second. See, part of that is what Mr. Lifton or whatever his name is, is saying, but what I thought that he was referring to was the neck wound at that time. You see, we did find out almost immediately after President Kennedy was taken to Bethesda that there was a hole in the neck that we had not seen at the time. Now Dr. Jenkins, I believe, has said later that he did see it. But I did not know that it was there at the time that we resuscitated President Kennedy. There is therefore, there are two wounds that we didn't know about at the time. The one in the neck posteriorly and then what was subsequenttly found underneath the hair, the wound of entry in the occipital area on the right side.

...

A. What I thought at the time was, as I told you, that he had been shot in the neck. See, it was only, it was going to be a few hours before I would know that the bullets were fired from behind. I thought, seeing the patient, if I had just walked in now and saw a patient like that who had a small hole in his neck and a large wound in the back of his head, I would have thought the bullet had entered here and exited through the back of his head. That's what I thought at the time. But then we began to get more information, that there was a wound in the back of the neck, and also a second hole was found in the skull, and I learned the President had been shot twice. Why, there were other explanations that appeared more rational.

...

A. Yeah, but with the high velocity of the missile striking, you'd think it would just go right on through. But bullets, when they're coming in at high velocities get deflected in strange ways, sometime. I've seen them deflected internally into blood vessels in the body. And zip right down the blood vessel once the pathway was started. But that's what we thought at the time, see? Plunk, plunk. But it was only a few hours later when we began to get calls back from Bethesda, that we learned that there was a wound in the back of the neck that had gone through, see? And that he had been hit twice, and of course the Zapruder film subsequently showed that.

http://www.kenrahn.com/Marsh/Jfk-con...y/PETERS_P.TXT, https://archive.org/stream/nsia-Livi...e/n21/mode/2up

Autopsy witnesses Joe Hagan, John Stringer, and John Ebersole all specifically stated that they recalled the first contact with Dallas happening midnight.

Dr. Robert Karnei told Harrison Livingstone the same thing on 8/27/1991, but he himself contradicted that in other interviews on 8/23/1977 to the HSCA and 3/10/1997 to the ARRB, saying that he did not know the tracheotomy was made over a bullet wound at that time.

That's not including the other witnesses who made statements indicating that the autopsy pathologists discussed the throat wound as a bullet hole, probed it, etc.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:32 AM   #2866
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
The whole story from Dr. Humes et. al just sounds dubious.

They somehow learned about the bullet discovered on the stretcher without also learning about the original small throat wound? Everybody at the autopsy attested how puzzled they were at the lack of any bullet found in the body, it would only make sense they they would try getting information from Dallas while they were still examining the body.

Last edited by MicahJava; 14th November 2017 at 11:34 AM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:39 AM   #2867
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,886
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
If they knew about the original small throat wound during the autopsy, but lied and said they only learned about it the next day when the body was inaccessible, then that indicates they were trying to cover something up.
If you believe that then they are all, in your view, unreliable witnesses and cannot be cited as evidence of anything at all.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:44 AM   #2868
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
If you believe that then they are all, in your view, unreliable witnesses and cannot be cited as evidence of anything at all.
What's wrong with corroboration? I accept that there was a small wound near the EOP, and that it probably had internal beveling indicating an entrance for a projectile as the autopsy doctors always said, because there's a lot of corroboration for it.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:48 AM   #2869
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There, all of the evidence I posted above comes from the 1960's. Nothing fifteen or thirty years after the fact.
What part of "Now you just have to establish points 1 through 4 without the use of speculation, hearsay, supposition, recollections from 15 or 33 years after the fact, and conjecture" did you not understand?

1. 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...

Hearsay.


2.How is Dr. Perry's original recollection of a Friday night phone call (and a second call never mentioned by Humes) to the Warren Commission hearsay? He was on the other end of the conversation. Even when being interviewed by the HSCA, he said that this was still his recollection.

Asked and answered. The autopsy finished about 11pm, per Humes. That's 10pm Dallas time. The call to Perry could have come as much as two hours after the autopsy and still been Friday night Dallas time.


3. The 11/25/1966 Baltimore Sun article...

Hearsay.


4. While the 1/10/1967 CBS memo by Bob Richter, reporting executive Jim Snyder's story is hearsay...

Yes. Hearsay.


5. William Manchester's book The Death of a President states

Hearsay.

You are still failing to post any evidence. Above you provided five examples of hearsay, admitting to one.

Whining that all you have is hearsay and it should be acceptable isn't helping your cause any.
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 11:53 AM   #2870
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 16,886
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
What's wrong with corroboration? I accept that there was a small wound near the EOP, and that it probably had internal beveling indicating an entrance for a projectile as the autopsy doctors always said, because there's a lot of corroboration for it.
Because if, as you claim that they have intentionally lied on any part of their evidence, then you must reject all of their evidence as tainted.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:26 PM   #2871
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
All over the map? Not only did Dr. Perry tell the Warren Commission and HSCA that he recalled his first contact with Humes happened Friday night...
Asked and answered. That could make it as late as nearly 1:00am Washington time ("early Saturday morning", according to Humes), about two hours after the estimated completion of the autopsy.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
but another Parkland hospital doctor, Paul Peters, made the following statements to Boston Globe journalist Ben Bradlee on 5/1/1981:

[color="Blue"]...You see, we did find out almost immediately after President Kennedy was taken to Bethesda that there was a hole in the neck that we had not seen at the time.
My goodness, you would not recognize hearsay and recollection if you tripped over it?

First, 1981 is 18 years after the event.

Who is 'we' in the above? Did he speak directly with Humes? No, Dr. Perry did. Not only is this a newspaper article, unsworn, where people can make all sorts of statements while suffering no problems with the judicial system for perjury, it's clear Peters is simply referencing something he heard at some point later from Perry. That's not independent corroboration. That's very dependent on what Peters heard from Perry. That's hearsay.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Now Dr. Jenkins, I believe, has said later that he did see it. But I did not know that it was there at the time that we resuscitated President Kennedy.
Say what? The Parkland doctors resuscitated President Kennedy? No, they didn't. Not according to Dr. Perry's sworn testimony to the Warren Commission.

Dr. PERRY - Dr. Clark's arrival was first noted to me after the completion of the tracheotomy, and at this point, the cardiotachyscope had been attached to Mr. Kennedy to detect any electrical activity and although I did not note any, being occupied, it was related to me there was initially evidence of a spontaneous electrical activity in the President's heart.
However, at the completion of the tracheotomy and the institution of the sealed tube drainage of the chest, Dr. Clark and I began external cardiac massage. This was monitored by Dr. Jenkins and Dr. Giesecke who informed us we were obtaining a satisfactory carotid pulse in the neck, and someone whose name I do not know at this time, said they could also feel a femoral pulse in the leg. We continued external cardiac massage, I continued it as Dr. Clark examined the head wound and observed the cardiotachyscope. The exact time interval that this took I cannot tell you. I continued it until Dr. Jenkins and Dr. Clark informed me there was no activity at all, in the cardiotachyscope and that there had been no neurological or muscular response to our resuscitative effort at all and that the wound which the President sustained of his head was a mortal wound, and at that point we determined that he had expired and we abandoned efforts of resuscitation.


There was an attempt at resuscitation. It failed.

People may speak less carefully in casual conversations than under oath. That's just one example. But if you wished, you could conjecture Kennedy was resuscitated, and said "Jackie did it" before expiring.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
There is therefore, there are two wounds that we didn't know about at the time. The one in the neck posteriorly and then what was subsequenttly found underneath the hair, the wound of entry in the occipital area on the right side.
Here's Peter's sworn testimony on the wound he said he saw in the occiput:
Dr. PETERS - Well, as I mentioned, the neck wound had already been interfered with by the tracheotomy at the time I got there, but I noticed the head wound, and as I remember--I noticed that there was a large defect in the occiput.
Mr. SPECTER - What did you notice in the occiput?
Dr. PETERS - It seemed to me that in the right occipitalparietal area that there was a large defect. There appeared to be bone loss and brain loss in the area.


So his recollection has clearly changed from 1964 when he testified to the Warren Commission and 1981 when he spoke with Ben Bradlee.

Now, we can establish that change in recollection. What you seem unconcerned about is the other changes in recollection that make relying on recollections from 15, 18, or 33 years after the fact extremely tenuous.


A. What I thought at the time was, as I told you, that he had been shot in the neck. See, it was only, it was going to be a few hours before I would know that the bullets were fired from behind. I thought, seeing the patient, if I had just walked in now and saw a patient like that who had a small hole in his neck and a large wound in the back of his head, I would have thought the bullet had entered here and exited through the back of his head. That's what I thought at the time. But then we began to get more information, that there was a wound in the back of the neck, and also a second hole was found in the skull, and I learned the President had been shot twice. Why, there were other explanations that appeared more rational.

He's saying two entry wounds in the back of the body and two exit wounds out the front make more sense than a bullet in the neck and out of the head. Or even, I suppose, in the back of the head and out the neck (your theory).


A. Yeah, but with the high velocity of the missile striking, you'd think it would just go right on through. But bullets, when they're coming in at high velocities get deflected in strange ways, sometime. I've seen them deflected internally into blood vessels in the body. And zip right down the blood vessel once the pathway was started. But that's what we thought at the time, see? Plunk, plunk. But it was only a few hours later when we began to get calls back from Bethesda, that we learned that there was a wound in the back of the neck that had gone through, see? And that he had been hit twice, and of course the Zapruder film subsequently showed that.

Who is 'we' and when did Peters actually here it? Days later back at the hospital when he ran across Dr. Perry, or do you suggest that Perry got on the phone at midnight Dallas time and started calling all the doctors involved in JFK's Parkland treatment to relate the story?

Or do you think Dr. Peters actually read something in the paper and created a false memory of hearing about it before everyone else? It wouldn't be the first time someone inflated their involvement in this case or simply confused details decades after the fact.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Autopsy witnesses Joe Hagan, John Stringer, and John Ebersole all specifically stated that they recalled the first contact with Dallas happening midnight.
And that would still be an hour after the autopsy concluded, according to Humes.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Dr. Robert Karnei told Harrison Livingstone the same thing on 8/27/1991, but he himself contradicted that in other interviews on 8/23/1977 to the HSCA and 3/10/1997 to the ARRB, saying that he did not know the tracheotomy was made over a bullet wound at that time.
So a flip-flopping witness who you admit contradicted himself is part of your Gish Gallop. Interesting.

I'm not concerned about why you accept it (you'll apparently accept anything that points to a conspiracy), but I'd like to know why you think we should accept this.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
That's not including the other witnesses who made statements indicating that the autopsy pathologists discussed the throat wound as a bullet hole, probed it, etc.
Yawn. We've gone through all those months ago. They were likewise recollections from 15 or more likely, 33 years after the event.

Trying for yet another fringe reset, I see.

Sorry. But no.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:31 PM   #2872
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
The autopsy did not end at 11 PM. They were still examining the body by then. Witness statements indicate that the morticians were waiting on the autopsy doctors as they were taking their time finishing their work.

For contemporary documentation listing the approximate times, see here:

Gawler's Funeral Home "First Call Sheet" which records events of November 22-23,1963

Arrangements:-When 11 P.M.

...

CASKET DELIVERY DETAILS

Date 11-23-1963 Time 2 A.M.


https://www.history-matters.com/arch...d129_0001a.htm

Gawler's after-action report titled: "Funeral Arrangements for John Fitzgerald Kennedy--events of November 22,23,24, and 25 are recounted.

LATE EVENING MESSRS. O'LEARY, O'DONNEL, O'BRIEN AND POWERS (KENNEDY'S STAFF) ARRIVED TO SELECT THE CASKET FROM GAWLER'S SELECTION ROOM. (THE CASKET THE PRESIDENT ARRIVED IN FROM DALLAS WAS DAMAGED - FROM THE HANDLING ON THE AIRPLANE - AND THE AMBULANCE). THEY SELECTED A MARSELLUS 710 SOLID MAHOGANY AND A WILBERT TRIUNE/COPPER LINED VAULT.

JOSEPH GAWLER IMMEDIATELY DROVE TO THE NAVAL MEDICAL CENTER FOR MEETINGS WITH MDW OFFICIALS, SECRET SERVICE, FBI AND HOSPITAL STAFF. JOSEPH HAGAN RESPONDED TO THE CENTER WITH THE EMBALMING TEAM - JOHN VAN HOESEN, EDWIN STROBLE AND THOMAS ROBINSON.

GAWLER AND HAGAN CONTINUED MEETINGS WITH MDW, HOSPITAL STAFF, SECRET SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, ETC. AT THIS MEETING WE WERE INFORMED TO STANDBY, UNTIL ALL EXAMINATIONS OF THE PRESIDENT'S BODY, WERE COMPLETED.


https://www.history-matters.com/arch...d134_0001a.htm

... page 2:

CLEARANCE WAS RECIEVED TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION AFTER 11 P.M., NOVEMBER 22, 1963. UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF MR. HAGAN, THE EMBALMING, COSMETICS, RESTORATION (EXTENSIVE CRANIAL DAMAGE), DRESSING AND CASKETING WAS COMPLETED BY 4 A.M. ON SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1963.

https://www.history-matters.com/arch...d134_0002a.htm

For what it's worth, I overlooked two ARRB interviews with Joe Hagan:

ARRB Meeting Report Summarizing 5/17/1996 In-Person Interview of Joseph E. Hagan





https://www.history-matters.com/arch...d182_0003a.htm

ARRB Call Report Summarizing 6/11/1996 Brief Telephonic Interview of Joe Hagan



https://www.history-matters.com/arch...d182_0007a.htm

Joe Hagan's 30-year-old memory couldn't give accurate times in terms of digits, but his message is clear: he arrived along with the mahogany casket to the morgue, and after that he had to wait about 20 minutes on the bleachers for the autopsy to really complete. Contemporary documentation indicates this casket arrived at 2 AM, contrary to his personal recollection that he arrived around midnight. So this is one of many good basis for saying that the autopsy didn't really end until around 2:30 AM. So about 3 1/2 hours of wiggle room for the autopsy doctors to discover and investigate the throat wound as a bullet hole, after the FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil left with their report which considered the back wound shallow and the throat wound a tracheotomy.

Last edited by MicahJava; 14th November 2017 at 12:57 PM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:34 PM   #2873
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The whole story from Dr. Humes et. al just sounds dubious.
Oh. So you don't have any evidence it's dubious. You just doubt it because you doubt it.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
They somehow learned about the bullet discovered on the stretcher without also learning about the original small throat wound?
Yes. The bullet arrived in Washington courtesy of the Secret Service Chief, James Rowley. While discovered in Parkland, it had a separate line of transmission of information that didn't start and stop with the Parkland doctors, who weren't involved in it's discovery whatsoever. We discussed the bullet in detail with Robert Prey, among others. Maybe even yourself about a year ago. You were advised when you first got here to read the discussion prior to your arrival so as to familiarize yourself with what transpired already. Did you ever do that?


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Everybody at the autopsy attested how puzzled they were at the lack of any bullet found in the body, it would only make sense they they would try getting information from Dallas while they were still examining the body.
I'm sorry. You've conducted how many autopsies where you reached out to witnesses or treating physicians to ascertain the facts? Tell us again how much you know about how to conduct an autopsy, from your vast experience on this subject.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."

Last edited by HSienzant; 14th November 2017 at 12:37 PM.
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:36 PM   #2874
Tomtomkent
Philosopher
 
Tomtomkent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 8,205
What about Joe Hagen suggests his memories will be any more accurate or reliable than anybody else’s?
Why should we believe the details that are convenient to MicahJava are any more accurate in this case, than we would expect from any other witness whose memory had thirty years to fool him?
__________________
@tomhodden

Never look up an E-book because this signature line told you. Especially not Dead Lament (ASIN: B00JEN1MWY). Or A Little Trouble (ASIN: B00GQFZZQW).
Tomtomkent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:40 PM   #2875
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by Tomtomkent View Post
What about Joe Hagen suggests his memories will be any more accurate or reliable than anybody else’s?
Why should we believe the details that are convenient to MicahJava are any more accurate in this case, than we would expect from any other witness whose memory had thirty years to fool him?
So you think Hagan completely fabricated his memory of him and Joe Gawler helping Kennedy's aides to select a mahogany casket, and then personally transporting it to Bethesda?
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:42 PM   #2876
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
Originally Posted by HSienzant View Post
Oh. So you don't have any evidence it's dubious. You just doubt it because you doubt it.




Yes. The bullet arrived in Washington courtesy of the Secret Service Chief, James Rowley. While discovered in Parkland, it had a separate line of transmission of information that didn't start and stop with the Parkland doctors, who weren't involved in it's discovery whatsoever. We discussed the bullet in detail with Robert Prey, among others. Maybe even yourself about a year ago. You were advised when you first got here to read the discussion prior to your arrival so as to familiarize yourself with what transpired already. Did you ever do that?




I'm sorry. You've conducted how many autopsies where you reached out to witnesses or treating physicians to ascertain the facts? Tell us again how much you know about how to conduct an autopsy, from your vast experience on this subject.

Hank
The shooting happened at Dallas, the doctors had a mysterious missing bullet they had to figure out, and they were specifically told try to find an assassin's bullet in his body. It would only be logical to call Dallas while the body was still being examined.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:48 PM   #2877
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
I can understand why single-assassin theorists would think that the occam's razor evidence just shows a two-hit scenario to explain Kennedy's wounds. But then there's stuff like this that wakes you up and makes you realize that the Kennedy case probably does involve serious mysteries like shallow back wounds, tiny throat wounds, EOPs, etc.

Last edited by MicahJava; 14th November 2017 at 12:49 PM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:49 PM   #2878
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
CLEARANCE WAS RECIEVED TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION AFTER 11 P.M., NOVEMBER 22, 1963.
So 11:00 pm is about the time of the completion of the autopsy, contemporaneous corroboration for Humes' 11:00 pm estimate in his Warren Commission testimony.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
For what it's worth, I overlooked a 5/17/1996 ARRB interview with Joe Hagan:
For what it's worth, it's still a 33-year later recollection and - dare I suggest it? - totally worthless.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
Joe Hagan's 3330-year-old memory couldn't give accurate times
Fixed that for you. Ask me how I know you're wrong in your time estimate.
You can't give accurate times with numbers before you. So let's not criticize Hagan's 33-year after the fact recollection all that much.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
... in terms of digits, but his message is clear: he arrived along with the mahogany casket to the morgue, and after that he had to wait about 20 minutes on the bleachers for the autopsy to really complete. Contemporary documentation indicates this casket arrived at 2 AM, contrary to his personal recollection that he arrived around midnight. So this is one of many good basis for saying that the autopsy didn't really end until around 2:30 AM.
You don't even realize how you're picking and choosing parts from his recollection and from the documented record to build your argument.

But we do.

The casket arriving at 2pm has nothing to do with when the autopsy completed. The contemporaneous documentation (which you cite for the casket but ignore for the autopsy completion) says the autopsy ended about 11pm.
CLEARANCE WAS RECIEVED TO PROCEED WITH THE PREPARATION AFTER 11 P.M., NOVEMBER 22, 1963.


Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
... So about 3 1/2 hours of wiggle room for the autopsy doctors to discover and investigate the throat wound as a bullet hole, after the FBI agents Sibert and O'Neil left with their report which considered the back wound shallow and the throat wound a tracheotomy.
The 'wiggle room' is a figment of your imagination and it's not for the autopsy doctors. It's for MicahJava to build a false argument of the autopsy ending about 3.5 hours later than it really did.

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 12:54 PM   #2879
HSienzant
Illuminator
 
HSienzant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 3,303
Originally Posted by MicahJava View Post
The shooting happened at Dallas, the doctors had a mysterious missing bullet they had to figure out, and they were specifically told try to find an assassin's bullet in his body. It would only be logical to call Dallas while the body was still being examined.
Why? Is that what you routinely do in the numerous autopsies you've conducted?

Hank
__________________
"Looks like we're really in nut country now, Toto."
HSienzant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2017, 01:02 PM   #2880
MicahJava
Master Poster
 
MicahJava's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2,219
I think the "11:00 PM" motif from the documents, Dr. Humes to the WC, and Dr. Hagan to the ARRB, comes from the fact that some of the embalming team arrived at the autopsy by 11:00 PM.
MicahJava is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:31 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.