Skip to comments.JFK's fatal head wound: The truth for those who want to know (very graphic)
Posted on 11/22/2003 5:10:59 PM PST by Wolfstar
The Zapruder film proves itself to be authentic. There is no possibility that any frames could have been cut out of the film or altered. Why/how? Every time a frame was exposed, part of the background scene was exposed onto both the next frame and the previous frame in the sprocket hole areas. This is because the sproket holes are between frames, as shown below:
The head shot, frame-by-frame:
Frame 313 enlarged:
The head wound:
The large flap of skull, skin and other tissue blown out above and just in front of the presidents right ear. The flap stayed attached and hung over the president's right cheek. On the ride to Parkland, Mrs. Kennedy attempted to put it back in place. What the doctors saw at Parkland was the wound partially closed with the shattered pieces at the top rear of the wound missing. Hence, some doctors recalled a wound in that area:
Kennedy moves a couple of inches forward from the impact.
Swordmaker, not knowing either individual personally, all I can say is I have serious doubts as to whether or not CholeraJoe is a physician. As for Ophiucus, I missed his posts on the subject, so cannot comment. However, any bona fide physician worthy of the title who looks at the following still from the Zapruder film and still claims the head wound was caused by a frontal shot is someone who, at best, must have been dead bottom of his class in medical school.
Physical evidence is a funny thing. It speaks for itself no matter who says what, and who tries to twist things in order to make a buck off other people's tragedy. In this still, we see the upper right side of Kennedy's head blown apart. The autopsy x-rays show that part of the president's skull mostly missing, and what remains of the skull fractured in many places due to the explosive force of the bullet exiting out the right-front of the skull. We have frontal and side autopsy photos that show the shattered right front of the skull.
All of this material speaks for itself. Although, several times, I invited CholeraJoe to describe the injuries clinically, the fact is the material doesn't need an explanation. Certainly not from anonymous individuals posting on an internet forum, claiming to be physicians, and yet failing to explain clinically what they see in these materials. And no, claiming these materials are "faked" simply will not do. That's the fallback position of a charlatan.
B. The radiographs which you posted do not have any markings indicating their place of origin.
C. What they appear to show is massive head trauma due to a high velocity gunshot wound. There is no well-defined entrance wound in the parietal-occipital area (back of the head).
D. A high velocity hollow-point projectile entering from the front but at an angle could cause the massive avulsion of the scalp and bone flap, as well as the other skull fractures. Kennedy recoiled backwards, remember?
E. An intact bullet was found on Connolly's stretcher (I was wrong about it being on Kennedy's.)and was postulated to have passed through two men's chests and one leg and ended up intact??!
F. There are multiple metallic fragments noted on the radiographs. Were any of them recovered? If not, why not? Did they match the weapon Oswald carried?
G. There are unanswered questions about the wounds and the ballistics and your frantic ramblings haven't provided the answers.
Not necessarily. Just every radiograph I've ever seen is date/time stamped and identified by the institution which produced it. Even radiographs produced in the 60's in the rural south. One wonders why these aren't.
I still don't see an entrance wound on the back of the head, do you?
The X-Ray to me represents a right frontal view and appears to match this side view. The entrance hole looks like it's at the bottom of the loose plate in the X-Ray and isn't shown due to the right-front angle.
Kennedy Assassination Home Page
Lee Harvey Oswald's Paper Bag
Guinns neutron-activation Analysis
Warren Report: Table of Contents
One Hundred Errors of Fact and Judgment in Oliver Stone's JFK
The Academic JFK Assassination Web Site
HSCA (House Select Committee on Assassinations) Final Assassinations Report
A Critique of The Warren Report
Attempted assassination of General Walker
Oswald interviews, Acoustic studies and other information relating to the assassination of JFK
Queen of Diamonds
Photos and Illustrations of the JFK Assassination
Zapruder Head Shot
A Conspiracy Too Big? Intellectual Dishonesty in the JFK Assassination
The Single Bullet Strikes John Connally
Changed Motorcade Route in Dallas?
Maybe if you just stare at that magical bullet, that Sphincter dreamed up, it will calm you down. On second thought, just go lay down, the government will wake you up when they need you.
B. I am not the only person who posted radiographs on this thread. Have you looked at Post #173? Those x-rays show the identifying information.
C. The entrance wound could not be seen in the x-ray I posted because it was a side view. Look at enlargement (2nd image down) of the frontal view in Post #173. The entrance wound is clearly visible in the center-left just above eye level.
D. Since I am not a ballistics expert, I can't comment on your assertion in your Item D. However, again, look at the frontal x-ray enlargement in Post #173.
E. Being a voluminous reader, and having read most of the best-known conspiracy theory books over the years, I'm fully aware of the issues related to the so-called Magic Bullet. I would only say this: Acknowledging the truth that the fatal head shot came from the rear does not in any way preclude the possibility of a conspiracy.
F. Fragments of the bullet that struck Kennedy's head were recovered in the car and yes, they did match the ammo and weapon found in the Texas School Book Depository. As for the fragments embedded in his skull and head tissue, I don't know if any of those were extracted. (Once again, you are free to do your own research on these and other questions.)
G. My "frantic ramblings" are not intended to provide answers, although I've provided you and others who visit this thread with plenty of material to delve into their own search for answers. Rather, I've been taking extra time and effort with you, because I'm dismayed that a person who ID's himself as an MD seems so, well...