Skip to comments.JFK Assassination Files: Hoover Said FBI Must "Convince The Public" Oswald Acted Alone
Posted on 10/29/2017 3:43:00 PM PDT by Enlightened1
click here to read article
...And the Las Vegas shooter acted alone as well!
There were two bullets that struck Kennedy: the one through his back which exited through his throat:
“All of these doctors said the same thing in their Warren Commission depositions: that the throat wound could have been either one of entrance or one of exit.(14)
Of the five doctors who saw the wound, Dr. Pepper Jenkins had the most experience with gunshot wounds of anyone at Parkland. Jenkins says, “Even at that time, I was convinced it was a wound of exit because it was bigger than an entrance wound should be. Entrance wounds, as you look at them, are small and round, and may have a halo around them, black, from the bullet. But it makes a clean wound. When a bullet goes through the body, tissue moves in front of it and bursts.”(15)
As researcher Fred Litwin notes at the Kennedy Assassination Home Page,
The emergency room doctors at Parkland Hospital initially described the wound in Kennedy’s throat as an entrance wound. However, they never examined his back. A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that “the odds that a trauma specialist will correctly interpret certain fatal gunshot wounds are no better than the flip of a coin.” The study looked at 46 cases and found there were 16 errors in differentiating between entrance and exit wounds. See “Clinicians’ Forensic Interpretations of Fatal Gunshot Wounds Often Miss the Mark,” (JAMA, 28 April, 1994, pp. 2058-2061.) This is one of the reasons why forensic pathologists conduct autopsies.”
and the fatal head shot:
In interviews with author Gerald Posner, the Parkland doctors were nearly unanimous in their agreement with the autopsy findings at Bethesda Naval Hospital. Dr. Carrico points out, “We did [originally] say there was a parietal-occipital wound . . . and I think we were mistaken. The reason I say that is that the President was lying on his back and shoulders, and you could see the hole, with scalp and brain tissue hanging back down his head, and it covered most of the occipital [rear] portion of his head. We saw a large hole on the right side of his head. I don’t believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken.”(3)
Dr. Adolph Giesecke agrees. “I guess I have to say I was wrong in my Warren Commission testimony on the wound and in some of my pronouncements since then. I just never got that good of a look at it. . . . The truth is there was a massive head wound, with brain tissue and blood around it. And with that type of wound you could not get accurate information unless you feel around inside the hole and look into it in detail, and I certainly didn’t do that, nor did I see anyone else do that.”(4)
Dr. Paul Peters, portrayed in JFK by I. D. Brickman (see photo above), also concedes his initial impression was inaccurate: “. . . I now believe the head wound is more forward than I first placed it. More to the side than the rear.” Dr. Pepper Jenkins states, “The autopsy photo, with the rear of the head intact and a protrusion in the parietal [side] region, is the way I remember it. I never did say occipital.”
A third shot (not the third shot, but one of the bullets) ricocheted off the pavement. The reason the body was taken before an autopsy was performed at Parkland wasn’t due to some conspiracy but because his family and friends insisted.
Frontal shots> multiple shooters>conspiracy is question begging on top of bootstrapping.
Occam’s razor and David Hume in plain speak: if you can suppose more complicated solutions for problems, but a simple one explains the matter, go with what you know. One shooter, Lee Oswald.
Zapruder filmed the entire sequence of events. Ever been to a military funeral? Prepared or not, you react at the first shot; then much less at the next shot; then slightly at the last—all involuntary responses.
Zapruder was unprepared for any reports, but in that urban canyon had the same reactions, as evidenced (much later) by forensic tests of his film which show three physical reactions by him while filming. Oswald fired three shots. There were no other shooters. There was no grand, diabolical conspiracy. Oswald had motive (`Fair Play for Cuba’) and opportunity. Oswald killed Kennedy.
Yeah, it’s boring. And JFK’s worshipful fans want it to be something more than just a mundane murder—it all seems more meaningful if he was struck down by a cabal of wicked haters, but you go where the evidence leads you.
sounds like we could match paddock up to this scenario
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.