From: mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Clark Panel
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:49:00 GMT
Organization: Incontinental Blather, Inc
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <schuck.702971840@sfu.ca>, Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes...
>mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:
>>In article <schuck.702773758@sfu.ca>, Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes...
>>>> mst4298@rigel.tamu.edu (Mitchell S Todd) writes:

>>	They could have mistaken badly lacerated cerebral tissue
>>	for cerebellum. Also, the photo of the brain (or at least 
>>	Ida Dox's redering of it) shows that most of the right
>>	side of the cerebrum was blown away.

>What photo? I've never seen this picture. You haven't.

	I've seen Dox's drawing of it. Lattimer and the HSCA assure me that
	there is such a corresponding photo. Dox's drawing appears both
	as part of the HSCA trestimony, and is found in Lattimer's book.


>Don't you think its strange there is no known photo of the
>head wound from the right side of JFK's head.

	That's odd. _High Treason_, and the new edition of Lifton, both
	show photos of the right side of JFK's head. 
	

>There's photos
>of the left side, doctored photos of the back of head.

	Which doctory? Groden's assertion about the matte lines, which,
	according to Lifton he has yet to substantiate?


>Photos of the back of the head with *NO* entrance wound.
>Drawings of the back of the head with an entrance wound.

	Which photo is this. The few photos of the back of the head
	that I've seen show the wound.

	And there's only one drawing of the back of the head.


>But *NO* picture of the wound and the brain taken from the right.
>Did they forget to take it? Was it ever taken?

	Now, Mr Schuck, it would be nice to know where you get your
	information, especially since all of the photos you allege don't
	exist seem to.
>>>The occipital is the rear of the head.
>>>How did a bullet enter in the rear and leave from the rear?

>>	The wound isn't solely in the the occipital. McClelland's
>>	report has the wound extending *at least* halfway into the 
>>	parietal bone. The exit of the largest bullet fragment (a
>>	globular lump of core) is at the forward margin of this
>>	wound. 

>The wound in the autopsy photo does *not* extend into the occiptial.
>The Parkland Doctors saw the wound extend into the occipital.
>Humes said he saw it. Why doesn't it appear in the autopsy photos?

	Since we have only a limited subset of the entire corpus of
	autopsy photos, I wouldn't go so far to say that no photos
	of the entire wound exist. In the enhanced version of the
	anterior-posterior x-ray, you can see that the area of missing
	skull extends into the occipital. In fact, this x-ray shows
	about the same wound as Jerrol Custer's sketch in High Treason 2.



>>	The SS agents and the Parkland doctors saw a large wound
>>	in the back of the head. Their interpetation was that the
>>	wound was an exit wound. That's what Bethseda found, that's
>>	what the Clark panel, the Rockafeller panel, the HSCA, et al
>>	found and determined. However, closer inspection of the
>>	head wound (ie, the notch/conical defect at the forward
>>	margin of the head wound, along with the distribution
>>	of the bullet fragments) shows that the bullet passed
>>	from back to front, not from front to back.

>How can anyone conclude that? The wound extended so far back
>as to put it right where Humes put the entrance wound?
>The trouble is, the autopsy photo (an obvious fake) tries to 
>make people believe that there was only a wound in the temple area.

	The various head x-rays (both enhanced and unenhanced; you have
	to look at both sets) are said to show a conical skull defect
	surrounding the entry wound that marks it as an entry wound.
	At the forward end of the skull wound, there is a notch with 	
	a similar defect that faces outwards (ie, this is the actual
	'exit wound').

	Yes, but Humes seems to have missed the location of the entry
	wound.

	The autopsy photo you refer to is the only one that clearly 
	(well, not exactly clearly, but it's not hard to find) shows
	the entry wound, so far as I can judge from the released
	autopsy photos. Since the HSCA published several other drawings
	and diagrams, etc. showing the main wound to be in the area
	where both Parkland and Bethseda said it was, I doubt there
	was any deliberate attempt to cover the wound location up. 



>>>Bethesda said there was a small entrance wound in the back of the
>>>head and an exit wound in the right temple.

>>	You might want to read the autopsy, or at least read it more
>>	carefully. Where did Humes report say that the wound was in the
>>	temple?

>>	Humes: "...there is a large wound, cheifly in the parietal, but
>>	extending somewhat into the occipital and temporal..."
>>	McClelland: a wound extending from the occipital region well
>>	into the parietal (He claimed that he saw the rear half of
>>	the pareietal bone broken off)

>The occipital bone is in the back of the head.
>The WC wants people to believe that an entrance wound that
>only shows up in *drawings* of the back of JFK's head
>exitted from the right side of the head, except most of the Doctors
>had the big hole in the head extending to where the WC
>said the bullet entered.

	The entry wound in the head is quite visible. I had little
	trouble finding it in the photo, myself.

	The Parkland doctors saw this at Parkland:

	JFK had a small, slightly irregular wound in his throat, and
	a large wound in the right rear quarter of his skull.
	Were I in their position, with the information that
	they had at the time, I would probably conclude that
	JFK was shot from the front, too. What happens if they all
	know about the back wound, too?


>Crenshaw says the bullet hit JFK near the right temple and basically
>plowed a groove from the temple to the occipital region, exitting
>from the back of JFK's head.

>His explanation is the best one I've read.

	His explanation is quite similar to the one put forward by the
	HSCA, WC, et al, with the notable exception that the bullet
	goes back to front. 


                                |  
		              \ | /	 
                               \|/
_________________________   ---(0)---   ______________________________________
\__                      \___/~/|\~\___/                              _______/
  \__ mst4298@zeus.tamu.edu / / | \ \\ 	      Ambiguity is the      ______////
    \__ Mitchell S Todd    /    |    \\   Devil's tetherball     ______////
      \___________________/           \\____________________________////
         \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/_____________\\\///////////////////////////
                           /////\\\\\\\\\\\