From: david@cats.ucsc.edu (David Wright)
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk
Subject: Re: Clark Panel
Date: 6 Apr 92 21:17:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.32188
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz


In article <1992Apr6.152643.11792@PA.dec.com> grant_jo@ripple.enet.dec.com (Joel Grant) writes:
|
|I keep reading about JFK's head wounds and I keep reading what
|simply is not true.  There is a small hole in the back of
|his head and a very large hole in the right and frontal portions
|of his head.  How this has been translated into a large exit
|wound in the right rear of his head is quite beyond me.  

The photograph showing the rear head of the president is a forgery, or
a composition. The head wound extends to the back of the head, as all
the Parkland people said it did.

You say you read, but you cannot interpert what many of us have been saying,
nor do you adress all the points we raise. Rather than quoting from the
panel report, you might want to explain why you think that the photos and
X-rays should be as untainted as anything else in the Kennedy assassination. It
is clear that the picture of the back of the head does not represent Kennedy's
head, and who knows what the other pictures show? Could they also be
misleading? What piece of evidence has *not* been misleading and full of
doubt?

The fact is that we have three different interpretations of the Kennedy
assassination: one from Parkland, one from Bethesda, and one based on the 
incomplete autopsy photographs and x-rays.

If you read the Clark Panel well enough, you will find that it was also
skeptical of the photos. It came to the conclusion that the back wound was  too
small to put a finger in, as I have already stated.

|First, they quote from the autopsy report:  

|"The fatal missile entered the skull above and to the right of the
|external occipital protuberance. 

Then why did the House hired radiologist say that a missle could have enterd
the front, if Kennedy's head was looking down, as it was?


| A portion of the projectile
|traversed the cranial cavity in a posterior-anterior direction
|(see lateral skull roentgenograms) depositing minute particles
|along its path.  A portion of the projectile made its exit
|through the parietal bone on the right carrying with it portions
|of cerebrum, skull and scalp. 

This is rather inconsistent with Humes's autopsy findings that the entrance
wound was visible only after skull reconstruction: i.e., the "exit wound" went
as far rearward as the "entrance wound".

|1. The photographs - "Photographs 7, 14, 42, and 43 show the back of
|the head, the contours of which have been grossly distorted by
|extensive fragmentation of the underlying calvarium. 

Doesn't this contradict what was said above, and your assertion that the exit
wound was in the forward part of the skull?

|...  The sylvian fissure on the right side has been opened,
|revealing a rolled-up mass of arachnoid and blood clot which
|is dark brown to black in color.  [this was part of the
|"surgery" on the head which has lead such as Lifton into
|a State of Ridiculousness - jg]

I see. It is ridiculous to quote from an FBI report of what the autopsy doctor
observed? If Humes said there was surgery of the head area, then why should
we disbelive him?

|2. X-rays - 
|
|"There are multiple fractures of the bones of the calvarium
|bilaterally.  These fractures extend into the base of the
|skull and involve the floor of the anterior fossa on the
|right side as well as the middle fossa in the midline.  With
|respect to the right frontoparietal region of the skull, the
|traumatic damage is particularly severe with extensive
|fragmentation of the bony structures from the midline on the
|frontal bone anteriorly to the vicinity of the posterior
|margin of the parietal bone behind.  Above, the fragmentation
|extends approximately 25 mm. across the midline to involve
|adjacent portions of the left parietal bone behind.  Above,
|the fragmentation extends approximately 25 mm. across the midline
|to involve adjacent portions of the left parietal bone; below,
|the changes extend into the right temporal bone.  Throughout
|this region, many of the bony pieces have been displace
|outward; several pieces are missing.

If you want to read about a criticism of the Clark Panel, see Kurtz, Crime of
the Century, p. 89. He finds inconsistencies between the Lattimer's and another
doctor's examinations of the x-rays and the Clark Panel. Also, the Clark Panel
concludes that the president was shot with a "high-velocity" bullet, where as
the M-C is low velocity, and at impact was travelling at a low 
1880 feet per second. 

I quote the above to show that the fragmentation of the skull is inconsistent
with copper-jacketed amunition, which the comission itself tested. Copper
bullet tend not to shatter the upon impact but go right through to the exit
location. 

|The suggestion that someone, somehow, between the cradle of
|Dealy Plaza and the grave of the autopsy altered the
|President's wounds pursuant to a conspiracy plan that
|would have boggled even the mind of Rube Goldberg is more
|than absurd.  It is clearly obscene.

Well, you could try to at least argue this point. There is nothing to it. The
plane lands, they unload the body in a helicopter, take it to another hospital.
Or, they work on between the time the body arrived at Bethesda and when
the cerimonial casket arrived. 

|The evidence in this crime points firmly and decisively
|to Lee Harvey Oswald murding President Kennedy and wounding
|Governor Connally. 

The evidence you cite above does nothing to the kind. Why would you even say
something like that? That is a whole other argument that has nothing to do with
this. The point of the debate is arguing about what the shape of the wounds
were, and which version is correct. Your version could be tottally correct, and
you could place the assassin nearly anywhere behind Dealy Plaza. You could
place him at the TSBD, and still not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that
Oswald did it. And so on...
-- 
   |^^^^^^|      _______________________________________________________
   |      |      |                                                     | 
   |      |      | "Be Prepared for Enormous Fustrations"              |
   | (o)(o)      O         --Kreps, A course in Micro theory, p. 352   | 
   @      _)    o|_____________________________________________________|  
    |  ____\ o o
    |     /   
   /     \                              All comments  are mine---(David Wright)