IT BOILS DOWN TO THIS ---
SHOULD WE BELIEVE THE AUTOPSY DOCTORS WHO SIGNED-OFF ON JFK'S OFFICIAL AUTOPSY REPORT? OR SHOULD WE BELIEVE THE "BOH WOUND" WITNESSES?
As a firm believer in Lee Harvey Oswald's sole guilt in the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy in November 1963, I cannot deny that I'm puzzled
and concerned by the number of witnesses (mostly Parkland Hospital witnesses)
who have gone on record to say they saw a gaping hole in the back of
President Kennedy's head that day back in '63:
But I'm also curious as to HOW so many people at Parkland Hospital in
Dallas were of this singular opinion when JFK was in a prone (supine)
position, flat on his back, the entire time he was in the emergency
room? It seems to me as though Kennedy would have been literally lying
on the wound that so many people said was in the very back part of his
head. Very strange.
But in order to believe the several back-of-the-head ("BOH") wound
witnesses, we are also (at the very same time) being forced to DISbelieve
and completely disregard an enormous amount of the official, documented
evidence in the JFK murder case (and at the same time assume that a large
number of people, within various organizations, told numerous lies with
respect to the facts surrounding Kennedy's death and also faked evidence
to support a Lone-Assassin conclusion).
I ask -- Is that type of conspiratorial belief any MORE logical than
the LNers who disbelieve the witnesses who support a large wound in the
back of JFK's head?
If JFK had a massive hole in the back of his head at Parkland and at
Bethesda Medical Center on the night he was autopsied, then we must
totally trash the official autopsy report (signed by all three primary
doctors who performed that post-mortem exam on the President). In such
a conspiracy-favoring scenario, all three of those doctors MUST be
scheming, low-life liars, who didn't hesitate to sign off on the most
important document any of them would ever sign, even though they had to
know the report was nothing but a pack of lies.
And if there really was a big hole in the back of JFK's head, it would also
have to mean that the official autopsy photos and X-rays of President
Kennedy's wounds have been faked or altered, even though the
House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that those materials
"had not been altered in any manner".
As we can see, there's no great-big hole in the BACK (occipital) portion
of John F. Kennedy's head here:
If there had actually been a large hole at the back of JFK's head,
we've also got to swallow the notion that a large amount of the ballistics
evidence in the case is dead wrong and was deliberately falsified by an
unknown number of people who served the "cover-up" very well.
Or, short of believing that theory, we'd have to believe that a "magical"
thing occurred just after JFK was shot from the front, and that all of
those frontal-shot bullets (however many there might have been that
struck President Kennedy) just vanished on their own without the aid of
any conspirators' handiwork.
In order to believe in a JFK conspiracy, we'd probably also have to
believe that every member of the Warren Commission panel was up to no
good, with all of these guys rigging the Warren Report to paint Lee
Oswald as a sole assassin (and the lone killer of Dallas city policeman
J.D. Tippit as well).
And in such a "conspiracy mindset", it would also almost assuredly mean
that many, many members of the House Select Committee On Assassinations
in the late 1970s were also no-good, lying SOBs too -- because that
committee came to the same basic conclusion that the Warren boys did in
1964, when it came down to the question of: "How Many Bullets Struck
The Victims; And Who Fired Those Shots?" .... With the answers being:
only 2 shots hit any of the victims in the President's limousine; both
of those bullets came from behind the vehicle; and Lee Harvey Oswald
fired those shots from the Texas School Book Depository Building.
Does any pro-conspiracy book or any conspiracy theorist really trump the
hard, physical evidence in the JFK case? Because if it truly does, then a
whole bunch of OTHER STUFF sure worked out in perfect apple-pie order
for these unidentified conspirators who mapped out that amazing
multi-shooter plot to kill the President.
Did the "real assassins" really get THAT LUCKY with respect to all of
the physical evidence (i.e., guns, bullets, shells, and fingerprints),
which ALL adds up to ONLY Lee Harvey Oswald's guilt in the murders of
Jack Kennedy and J.D. Tippit?
Is it even remotely possible that a group of plotters could have
pre-arranged such a perfect "It Was Only Oswald" plot (save for those
"BOH" wound witnesses), while at the same time utilizing multiple
gunmen hidden throughout Dealey Plaza?
The number of people who needed to be "in" on such a massive
after-the-shooting cover-up operation must have been staggering. ....
Extending from the Dallas Police, to the FBI, to the Secret Service, to
the Dallas doctors who attended both JFK and wounded Texas Governor
John Connally (doctors who must have hidden some of the bullets from
view, surely!), to the scumbags at Bethesda doing the botched autopsy
and then faking the official autopsy report (a report which states,
unequivocally, that Kennedy was shot twice from behind....no mention of
any frontal shots at all striking the President). .....
"It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two
perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high-velocity projectiles fired
by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from a point
behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased." -- Via Page 6 of
John F. Kennedy's Official Autopsy Report
People who wish to believe that President Kennedy received the fatal
blow to his head as a result of a gunshot from the Grassy Knoll in
Dealey Plaza should ask themselves a thought-provoking question
regarding the above paragraph I just provided from the 1963 autopsy
That question being ----
Is it reasonable to believe that all three of those autopsy physicians
would have possessed a desire to attach their signatures to an
incredibly-important document like the official autopsy report of the
President of the United States, all the while knowing full well that
the conclusions they reached within that document they had just signed
were complete, outright lies? Is that truly a "logical" thing to
believe with respect to Drs. Humes, Finck, and Boswell?
What a perfect all-inclusive "Let's Frame Oswald" plot it must have
been (per many conspiracists) -- to have been able to wangle signatures
out of ALL THREE of those autopsy doctors....even though the doctors
KNOW what they're signing isn't true at all; and they know without
question that that "Report" they've signed-off on would probably be
more at home on a roller in their bathrooms!
And then (as if signing and fully endorsing an obviously-inaccurate
autopsy report isn't bad enough) -- All of these doctors then must have
been forced to follow up their initial falsification of the autopsy
report by lying about the true nature of JFK's wounds whenever they
spoke of the matter to anyone .... for years and years on end,
including during their sworn testimony in front of the WC, the HSCA,
and the ARRB. An amazing and comprehensive decades-long cover-up that
is still continuing to this day evidently.
And that's precisely one of the biggest reasons to know why such a
large-scale JFK conspiracy never could have possibly happened (or have
been covered-up so beautifully) in the grandiose fashion that many
CTers champion. Because only Houdini could have masterminded such
sleight-of-hand magic and such indomitable powers of unrelenting
influence and domination over so many different people (within various
official and unofficial capacities) in 1963, and for all eternity
Back to reality now.......
The documented evidence that exists surrounding the 1963 murder of
President John F. Kennedy does NOT indicate "conspiracy". Not even
close. Let's have a quick look:
1.) Three bullet shells are discovered in the Book Depository's
"Sniper's Nest" by police (shells that positively came from the rifle
of Lee Harvey Oswald).
2.) A bullet ("Commission Exhibit 399") is found in Parkland Hospital;
and CE399 is a bullet which just happened to also come from the rifle
of Lee H. Oswald.
3.) Two large bullet fragments (also from Oswald's rifle "to the
exclusion") are found inside the very vehicle which was being occupied
by John F. Kennedy when he was killed by rifle fire on the afternoon of
4.) Lee Harvey Oswald's fingerprints are all over the "Sniper's Nest"
area, including his prints on a paper bag THAT HAD NO LEGITIMATE AND
LOGICAL REASON FOR BEING THERE IN THE COURSE OF NORMAL DAY-TO-DAY
BOOK DEPOSITORY OPERATIONS. (A very important point, IMO.)
5.) Eyewitnesses who place Lee Oswald (or someone who looked remarkably
similar to him) in the Sniper's Nest at the exact moment JFK was being
assassinated via rifle fire (or just seconds prior to the murder).
6.) Oswald's actions after leaving his workplace on 11/22/63; e.g.:
6a.) Oswald leaves work three minutes after the American President is
gunned down right in front of his place of employment (and lies about
why he did so, with his excuse of "I figured there would be no more
work today" being one that won't make the grade, even via "CT"
standards -- because of WHEN he actually left -- 12:33 PM; there is no
way, at that time, he could have KNOWN he could just leave without
getting permission first from one of his bosses, Bill Shelley or Roy
Truly; which is permission he never obtained).
6b.) Oswald rushes into his roominghouse on North Beckley Avenue, grabs
a jacket and a revolver, and quickly leaves.
6c.) Oswald shoots and kills police officer J.D. Tippit with a handgun
at approximately 1:14 PM on Tenth Street.
6d.) Oswald is seen acting and looking "funny" (suspicious) by
shoe-store employee Johnny C. Brewer just minutes after the Tippit
6e.) Oswald punches in the face and attempts to kill another of Dallas'
finest within the Texas Theater.
6f.) Oswald's comments made in the theater: "This is it!" and/or "It's
all over now!" ... Now, can some CTer come up with a good and
reasonable "He's Innocent Of Killing Anyone" explanation for Oswald
having said those two phrases -- or even just one of them -- just as
the police approach him in the theater on November 22nd? Good luck
trying, because Oswald's "It's all over now!" has "consciousness of
guilt" stamped all over it.
7.) Oswald's continual lies to the police and to the American people
VIA LIVE TELEVISION after his arrest .... e.g., "I didn't shoot anyone"
and "They've taken me in because of the fact I lived in the Soviet
Union; I'm just a patsy!", among gobs of other provable falsehoods
spouted by LHO.
8.) And let's not forget this not-so-trivial little item --- Oswald's
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (proven to have been used to kill JFK without
a shred of a doubt) is found on the Depository's sixth floor at 1:22 PM
on November 22nd -- the very same rifle that just happened to turn up
missing in Ruth Paine's garage that very same day.
And what do conspiracy theorists have in their "Physical Evidence Of A
Conspiracy/Multiple Shooters" basket? (Stuff like "guns", "bullets",
"shell casings", "clothing fibers", and/or "eyewitnesses who positively
identified a specific human being to the exclusion of all other humans
as being the killer of both JFK and Officer Tippit"? How much of that
kind of stuff is on the CT table to date?)
Answer: None. Not a scrap. And there never has been.
The above batch of "single-assassin evidence" (with all of this
evidence spelling out "Oswald is a murdering and lying
President-killing, cop-killing piece of filth") means little to
hardline CTers, I know. But, in reality, that's of little consequence,
and always has been. Because what theorists WANT to believe regarding
this evidence is meaningless -- because, like it or not, THAT'S the
physical evidence CTers must deal with (and somehow squirm their way
out of in order to paint Oswald as an innocent "Patsy" on 11/22/1963
And the "Hole-In-The-Back-Of-The-Head" witnesses do not come close to
trumping all of the above evidence. They can't. No matter how many
there are. Because there's too much OTHER STUFF on the "LN/LHO" table
that is telling us that those witnesses cannot possibly be correct
regarding the precise location of President Kennedy's head wound; and
too many OTHER PEOPLE who would all have to be included in the category
of "co-conspirators" in order for the back of JFK's head to be missing
-- way too many to believe such a plot could have possibly been
But, thankfully, there are people like Dale Myers, Larry Sturdivan, and
Vincent Bugliosi around who DO still put some value on the physical
evidence in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases, instead of merely
screaming "It MUST all have been faked (somehow)", which is nonsense of
the first order, of course, when considering the totality and perfect
"LN/LHO Cohesiveness" of such a huge basket of would-be "faked"
evidence (in both the Kennedy and Tippit cases).
Ignoring (or deeming as "all phony") the above batch of "One Assassin
Named Oswald" evidence is about as silly an exercise as believing that
some dumbbell plotters tried to frame a lone "patsy" by shooting up
Dealey Plaza from every conceivable angle. THAT goofball plan should
have everybody laughing out loud (even the CTers). But, remarkably,
many conspiracy theorists have latched on to that "Patsy" theory and
won't let go of it, despite its obvious implausibilities.
The following text has been extracted from my review of Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History":
CHAPTER 3 (68 PAGES) -- "PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S AUTOPSY AND THE GUNSHOT WOUNDS TO KENNEDY AND GOVERNOR CONNALLY":
DVP: This chapter brings about a "closure" (of sorts) for me with respect to the single biggest "question mark" that I personally have had regarding the entire JFK case -- that being: How could so many different witnesses claim to see a large hole in the back of President Kennedy's head on 11/22/63 (at Parkland and at Bethesda)?
I've scratched my head more than a few times when thinking about those back-of-the-head wound witnesses. But at the same time, I have also always realized that there is a bunch of evidence that totally contradicts those witnesses (regardless of how many of them there might be).
That contradictory evidence includes: The official autopsy report (signed by three doctors), the autopsy photographs and X-rays, the Zapruder Film, and the never-wavering testimony of all three autopsy doctors (with each doctor agreeing that President Kennedy was hit by only two bullets, with both of those bullets coming from "above and behind" John F. Kennedy). And all of this evidence is also pointed out numerous times by Vince Bugliosi in this chapter as well.
Vincent doesn't pull some magical rabbit out of a hat when he discusses this often-heated controversy about the head wounds of the late President. Instead, he relies on basic sound judgment and common sense (like always) to try and figure out a reasonable answer for why the many Parkland witnesses thought they saw what they said they saw.
And Vincent's primary explanation regarding this matter is actually an explanation offered up by someone else, HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel member Michael Baden:
[Quoting from Mr. Bugliosi's book:]
"Dr. Michael Baden has what I believe to be the answer, one whose logic is solid. [Quoting Baden] "The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as the Parkland doctors said. They were wrong," [Baden] told me. "That's why we have autopsies, photographs, and X-rays to determine things like this. Since the thick growth of hair on Kennedy's head hadn't been shaved at Parkland, there's no way for the doctors to have seen the margins of the wound in the skin of the scalp. All they saw was blood and brain tissue adhering to the hair. And that may have been mostly in the occipital area because he was lying on his back and gravity would push his hair, blood, and brain tissue backward, so many of them probably assumed the exit wound was in the back of the head. But clearly, from the autopsy X-rays and photographs and the observations of the autopsy surgeons, the exit wound and defect was not in the occipital area. There was no defect or wound to the rear of Kennedy's head other than the entrance wound in the upper right part of his head." [End Baden quote]." -- Pages 407-408 of "Reclaiming History"
DVP: The above explanation is one that I, too, have postulated as the probable answer to this enduring "head wound" mystery over the years, such as HERE, HERE, and HERE.
One other point that I think is worthy of mentioning here is the fact that (as far as I'm aware) there wasn't a single witness at Parkland or Bethesda who claimed to have seen TWO large wounds of exit in JFK's head on 11/22/63.
This fact would certainly suggest that there was, indeed, only ONE large wound in Kennedy's head, and that wound was located, per the autopsy and the authenticated autopsy photographs, "chiefly parietal" (i.e., the side and top of the head).
On page #410, Bugliosi provides some additional strength to the "No Exit Wound In The Back Of JFK's Head" rope, when he says:
"Lest anyone still has any doubt as to the location of the large exit wound in the head...the Zapruder film itself couldn't possibly provide better demonstrative evidence. The film proves conclusively, and beyond all doubt, where the exit wound was. Zapruder frame 313 (when the president's head exploded) and frame 328 (almost a second later) clearly show that the large, gaping exit wound was to the right front of the president's head. The back of his head shows no such large wound and clearly is completely intact." [Bugliosi's emphasis.] -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 410 of "RH"
DVP: Another excellent visual demonstration that pretty much proves that JFK was shot in the head from BEHIND is the following slow-motion clip from the Zapruder Film, which positively depicts the President's head being pushed FORWARD at the all-important moment of impact when Oswald's bullet strikes the back of Kennedy's head:
David Von Pein