Post by bigdog
For years now you have been insisting that the whole autopsy team saw
proof that the bullet that entered JFK's back stopped at the pleura. For
now we'll disregard the implausibility of such a thing happening and focus
on one simple question instead.
All three pathologists signed off on a report that says the medical
evidence indicated the bullet which entered JFK's back exited from his
throat and that opinion has been validated by every qualified medical
examiner who reviewed the medical evidence. On the other hand you have the
opinion of two technicians who were 20 and 21 years old at the time and
decades later expressed their opinion that the bullet had only made a
shallow penetration. So tell us why you find the latter to be more
compelling than the former.
You've gone off and become ridiculous again! You've heard my answer
many times on that question, yet you continue to repeat it over and over
again. Like they say, if you keep doing what you been doing, you'll keep
getting what you been getting. It's a definition of insanity.
I'll answer for everyone that is paying any attention to your continued
First, I must repeat for you that I'm NOT repeating OPINIONS of 2
autopsy assistants, I'm repeating what they saw, not what they thought.
You seem unable to get this through your head.
Second, here is the interview of Paul O'Connor, who had by that time
assisted at up to 50-60 autopsies:
"O'Connor: We started out with a rigid probe and found that it only went
in so far. I'd say maybe an inch and a quarter. It didn't go any further
than that. So we used a malleable probe and bent it a little bit and found
out that the bullet entered the body, went through the intercostal
muscles—the muscles in between the ribs. The bullet went in
through the muscles, didn't touch any of the ribs, arched downwards, hit
the back of the pleural cavity, which encases the lungs, both front and
back. It bounced off that cavity and stopped. It actually went down and
stopped. Went through the ribs and stopped (photo 10). So we didn't know
the track of the bullet until we eviscerated the body later. That's what
happened at that time. We traced the bullet path down and found out it
didn't traverse the body. It did not go in one side and come out the other
side of the body.
Law: You can be reasonably sure of that?
Law: It was just from the probe then?
O'Connor: Oh yes.
Law: And these doctors knew that?
Law: While it happened?
From: "In the Eyes of History" by William Matson Law, pages 40-41
Note that the interview does not contain any of the author's
impressions or thoughts, only the words of the subject.
Note that O'Connor was able to see that ALL of the other 'doctors'
(prosectors) and saw they viewed the proof that the pleura was the end of
the line for the bullet path. to take this further, I will show the
interview of the other Technologist who was on the autopsy team, James
"JAMES JENKINS' RECOLLECTIONS OF JFK'S BACK WOUND ARE INCONSISTENT WITH
THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY: Jim Jenkins recalled a very shallow back wound
in JFK's upper posterior thorax, that did not transit the body. He
recalled Dr. Humes sticking his finger in the wound, and seeing Dr. Humes'
finger making an indentation in the intact pleura as he viewed Humes'
probing from the other side, where the right lung would have been before
its removal. The pleura was intact. Jenkins also recalled seeing a
bruise at the top of the middle lobe of the right lung (but not at the
top, or apex of the right lung)."
Jenkins corroborates O'Connor's sighting of the pleura completely
undamaged by any bullet, though bruised. But Jenkins saw the probing from
inside the chest cavity with the organs removed. He was able to see the
probing that was going on from the other side, and see that there was no
place for the probe to penetrate the pleura. He also apparently saw the
bruise on the MIDDLE lobe of the lung, and not the top lobe.
So we are dealing with what they saw, not what their OPINIONS were.
O'Connor stated that he saw that the 'doctors' (prosectors) saw the
proof before them that they ALL saw, and that means that when Humes went
off home and wrote up th Autopsy Report (AR) that he lied. At such an
important autopsy, Humes would never have taken the initiative to lie on
his own, so he must have been ordered to say what the did in that AR.
The others that signed off on that AR had to also have been ordered to
The views of the pleura and the views inside the body were NOT seen by
ANY medical examiners or the medical panels. Absolutely none of them were
able to interview any of the Technicians at the autopsy, and for a long
time there was an 'order of silence' placed on ALL personnel at Bethesda
and the autopsy team. Only the prosectors were allowed to carry their
lies to other trials and hearings.
Since the medical panels had no chance to see the evidence of the pleura
and speak to the participants in the autopsy, they could not possibly have
gotten the correct conclusion of what had happened with the back wound
Third, while it is not common for a bullet to lose some of its power
and not penetrate a body too deeply, it has happened, and it is called a
'short shot'. The cause of the bullet losing it's power can be argued,
but not that it happened. The evidence is clear.
Now hopefully, you will stop repeating that question within various
threads, and here to get your name on the topic list with your wild
imaginations of a 'Single bullet' THEORY. face it, you were brainwashed
by the WCR.