The Bio on Speer is he makes great arguments against the magic bullet, which we already know didn't happen, then he posts these long-winded theories of a top of the head exit wound /rear entry. It doesn't really matter if Speers really believes it or not it's a waste of time and there's so much to study. All the Parkland docs saw the rear wound, so did the Bethesda ones who were there when the body arrived (before post-mortem surgery), and the knoll witnesses saw huge debris flying out from the rear of his head. ** This wasn't the point of the movie but Speer also gives his theory on the mystery autopsy photo Fox 8 which Horne & Mantik think is (the only surviving copy of) the rear blowout. Speer explains what he thinks well in person (in writing, no so well) and better than Horne but I doubt he's right, since ultimately his interpretation is 26 doctors at a top research hospital imagined a giant hole in the back of JFK's head that wasn't there, including Crenshaw and McClelland: https://rumble.com/v6u4i3l-dr-crenshaw-before-we-placed-jfk-in-the-coffin-i-looked-at-the-wound-again-.html https://rumble.com/v6ul8k1-the-dallas-doctors-and-the-autopsy-fraud-mcclelland-and-crenshaw-then-peter.html https://rumble.com/v6v1vtl-parkland-docs-v-humes-and-boswell-on-jfks-extruding-cerebellum.html https://rumble.com/v6v2tip-horne-crudele-2-the-5-shots-and-possible-6th-supporting-medical-evidence-ex.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp_pl%2Csrc_v1_pl&playlist_id=VUNBE8wuRxE https://rumble.com/playlists/VhO4twhF3cQ Speer and David Josephs debate Hofeling on HOrne's theory, and what they think, here: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31173-doug-horne-on-autopsy-photo-fox-8-the-mystery-photograph/ I could not not understand this at all from Horne and Mantik but that thread made sense of it for me. Looking at the two arguments is a good way to make it come to life and visualize it. Discussion of Speers' theory: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31068-the-mystery-photo-and-the-pat-speer-analysis/

From Horne's movie The JFK SKull X-Rays, A Trail of Deceit Keven Hofeling: "Here's a timestamped bullet point summary of the transcript: - 2:06 - Horne introduces what researchers call the "mystery photo," explaining that its orientation has historically caused various arguments among researchers. - 2:35 - He explains that the widely circulated "bootleg" version of this photo (shown in a gray box) was created by Secret Service agent James K. Fox in 1963, but this version was cropped compared to the full image in the National Archives. - 3:23 - The uncropped version in the Archives shows additional features, including abdominal wall fat that was retracted during the autopsy, which helps establish the body's orientation. - 3:56 - Dr. Mantik and Dr. Chesser confirmed through stereoscopic examination at the Archives that President Kennedy's right eyebrow and eyelashes are visible in the image, proving it shows his forehead. They could also see his right nipple in the uncropped version. - 5:14 - The photo shows a man-made incision in Kennedy's forehead, which appears bright red and is clearly visible in both color and black-and-white versions. - 5:59 - Horne explains that this incision was made by Dr. Humes before the autopsy began, evidently to remove evidence of a frontal entrance wound above the right eye. - 6:30 - Horne interprets a feature in the photo as a small exit defect created by fragments from the forehead bullet. - 7:00 - He notes that Dr. Humes initially testified to the Warren Commission that there was no evidence of exit wounds anywhere in the periphery of the large skull wound. - 7:16 - However, in January 1967, when reviewing photos for the Justice Department, Humes, Boswell, and Finck changed their position and identified evidence of an exit wound by labeling the photograph as being of the "posterior skull." - 8:00 - Horne disputes Dr. Baden's interpretation that Kennedy was lying face down, arguing this orientation is incorrect based on the photographic evidence. - 9:36 - The lecture concludes with Horne's interpretation that the photo shows where the "Harper fragment" (a piece of skull) fit into the head, and explains that the forehead entry wound would have been hidden in Kennedy's hair at Parkland Hospital. ________________ Original Source: 'New "Director's Cut" of THE JFK SKULL X-RAYS, 1963 and 1979: A TRAIL OF DECEIT' | Douglas Horne with More on the JFK Assassination | Jan 27, 2025 | https://youtu.be/5oeFn7pjsek?si=6uTc-Lzd8FsfPaOV This presentation was originally posted on another YouTube site in August of 2024, but I want everyone to know that this "new edit," completed in January of 2025, is a greatly improved version, characterized by a MAJOR CONTENT CHANGE (regarding the forehead bullet that hit JFK), and by numerous audio and video upgrades. So it is well worth watching, in my opinion, even if you have already viewed the first version posted in August of 2024. The raw footage was filmed in Los Angeles on December 7, 2023; and after the initial editing was completed in California, it was first posted on YouTube in August of 2024. It is a deep dive into the interpretive and analytical work of two bonafide experts on JFK's skull x-rays: Dr. David Mantik, and Dr. Mike Chesser. Both men have made repeat visits to the National Archives to view the JFK autopsy materials (with the permission of the Kennedy family representative), and are eminently qualified to interpret and analyze what is seen in the extant JFK skull x-rays and the JFK autopsy photographs. [Six skull x-rays were exposed; only three survive today.] This presentation is my layman's attempt to present the highlights of their findings in both a format, and in non-technical language, understandable to other laypersons who---like me---do not have medical degrees, or a degree in physics. The high-resolution digital images of JFK's skull x-rays used in this presentation were obtained by Dr. Chesser from the National Archives, and are far superior to the skull x-ray images published in my 2009 book, Inside the ARRB (which are scanned photocopies of the paper images published by the HSCA in 1979). Following the end of the powerpoint on JFK's skull x-rays, I have included about 30 minutes of additional discussion of some of the more controversial autopsy photographs; commentary on some of the most important and revealing eyewitness wound diagrams of the damage to JFK's skull caused by the bullets in Dallas; and an in-depth discussion of Dr. Boswell's free-hand sketch (of the damage to the top of JFK's skull) found on the reverse side of the Autopsy Descriptive Sheet. Four different people have provided significant support in bringing this presentation to fruition: independent JFK researcher and author Peter Janney of Boston, Massachusetts; two close friends in Los Angeles involved in the video's production and post-production (who wish to remain anonymous)." Discussion/explanation: https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31173-doug-horne-on-autopsy-photo-fox-8-the-mystery-photograph/

Both Hearings (the next one will go up here too): https://rumble.com/playlists/MWVg2WNQAW8

Earlier rear entry: https://rumble.com/v6uesbn-horne-shot-1-from-dal-tex-to-lower-rear-of-skull.html The question which this answers is why the rear exit would be on the right side and not the left, if the shot came from the right/grassy knoll. The question this doesn't answer, unless I missed something, is how the exit debris hit the motorcycles on the left if the shot exited through the right. The first thing to take in mind is the Z film is altered and may or may not be accurate of which way JFK's head tilted. If accurate, JFK's head was tilted AWAY from knoll as the bullet hit, which makes even less sense of the debris hitting Hargis on the left, with the exit wound pointed at a steeper angle toward the knoll. (Fiester says that shot would have to come from far side of steet/the South Knoll: rumble.com/user/johncleer?q=fiester) This suggests the Z Film is not real OR that the skull debris came not from the huge exit wound but the upward shot that landed high above the right eye, as seen in stare of death Parkland photo: https://rumble.com/v6v1tuz-dark-legacy-nyt-reports-on-112263-drs-perry-and-clark-saw-right-side-front-.html https://rumble.com/v6uesm7-doug-horne-on-the-likely-shot-from-storm-drain-2-or-3-to-high-right-forehea.html https://rumble.com/v6uesz9-pre-existing-fbi-report-disputes-wc-on-limo-location-storm-drain-best-expla.html So it's hard to imagine a clean answer for the debris exiting the right wide of the skull then hitting the DPD on the left.

Marince Corps Sgt Roger Boyajian https://rumble.com/v6qt99k-doug-horne-on-the-three-versions-of-the-jfk-autopsy-report-.html?playlist_id=VhO4twhF3cQ

https://rumble.com/v6lce9j-doug-horne-on-the-jfk-three-head-shot-scenario-w-which-drs.-chesser-and-man.html?playlist_id=VhO4twhF3cQ https://rumble.com/v6qt99k-doug-horne-on-the-three-versions-of-the-jfk-autopsy-report-.html?playlist_id=VhO4twhF3cQ

from TMWKK-6 With corpsman Dennis David describing slides and film Pitzer showed him of autopsy, in which there were visible the large right rear exit wound and the upward shot that left a fragment trail in the non-"enhanced" X-Rays. Pitzer ran the A/V Dept at Bethesda and could access all the cameras from what I understand.

The bullet they show a picture of is the one at steep upward angle with the fragment trail that Horne describes, that's not the origin of the rear exit, but they didn't know that yet in 2009. I muted that part at the end because they imply that's the entry. I've seen researchers confuse the two wounds, they're both close to the right eye area so it's understandable. Crudele in the videos I'm cutting does it once. The temple entry sounds like it would by near the hole in the picture by the end but it's not, it's lower just above the ear.

#JFK Rear Blowout #JFK Brain This should be from DiEugenio/Stone's Destiny Betrayed, the 4h version (I saw the 2h version., "Through the Looking Glass"). Well-done film but a little overrated in my book. Not as good as TMWKK or as good as Doug Horne's, but good. DiEugenio does not have Horne's knack from giving simple explanations and he's almost 30 years behind the news on the Zapruder Film. Horne gives some insight into DiEugenio's process in the vids I'm cutting. I recommend watching some other movies or materials and learning a bit about the different facets of the event before watching that one. I found it a heavy watch to sit through, seeing so much info for the first time. Learn the case with Horne's presentations on this channel, and the many others on Keven Hofeling's youtube. They're better lessons. Start with the Dealey plaza witnesses, then medical evidence, then the autopsy which is more tricky. https://rumble.com/v6qc6os-jfk-kill-shot-from-the-right-front-massive-right-rear-exit-wound.html (1 min 55) https://rumble.com/v6qc6kc-no-exit-for-jfk-backwound-so-not-in-throat-dr-perry-obliterated-throat-entr.html (1 min 21) https://rumble.com/v6qtyhy-frontal-shot-evidence-front-of-the-head-entry-woundrear-exitautopsyx-rays-g.html (24 min) https://rumble.com/playlists/VhO4twhF3cQ https://rumble.com/playlists/BdHtAtpsjX4 I dont recommend the Zapruder film for understanding what happened because it's edited: https://johncostella.com/jfk/intro/ https://rumble.com/playlists/Ueqa5-5PnXE https://rumble.com/playlists/WzsyV12pq8w https://rumble.com/playlists/OibRrluZah0 https://rumble.com/playlists/dhAEZNGOlqA https://rumble.com/playlists/BdHtAtpsjX4 ALL rebuttals of the alteration evidence are appeals to authority, sometimes mixed with technical jargon.

from Stone/DiEugenio I think Keven Hofeling clipped these

from Stone/DiEugenio

Keven Hofeling's annotated "PATHOLOGIST JAMES HUMES" playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLwgFpE4V5hJVefVTrr6LecsS5lfuygY0c Hofeling Summary: "Dr. David Mantik on the Failings and Fraud of Pathologist James Humes and Later Experts": (00:01) Dr. James Humes was the lead Navy pathologist at JFK's autopsy in 1963, assisted by Dr. Boswell (Navy) and Dr. Finck (Army), with Humes completing 20 years of military service that year. (01:43-04:08) Humes observed a large hole in the right occiput (back of skull) but initially reported a bullet entry point near the External Occipital Protuberance (EOP); he later moved this entry point 4 inches (10cm) higher during House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) testimony in 1977. (05:34-07:05) The HSCA focused on a 6.5mm object visible in X-rays that wasn't mentioned in the original autopsy, which contradicted their physics expert's assessment that it couldn't be a piece of metal. (07:53-10:12) The "single bullet theory" trajectory appears implausible based on the autopsy face sheet, which shows the back wound significantly lower than the throat wound, and the proposed path would have hit bone or punctured a lung. (11:01-13:40) Humes wrote a supplementary brain examination report despite believing JFK's brain was buried with his body; the reported brain damage pattern is inconsistent with a bullet entry at the EOP. (14:21-17:48) X-rays show a metal fragment trail across the top of the skull starting at the forehead, inconsistent with the official entry point; Humes described this trail as 10cm lower in the autopsy report. (18:31-20:11) Multiple witnesses, including Dr. Robert Walker (bullet expert present at autopsy) and Charles Crenshaw at Parkland Hospital, reported seeing an entry wound in the right temporal area (above the ear). (21:47-24:36) For the HSCA in 1977, Humes changed his description of the entry wound location by 4 inches, moving it from the EOP to the cowlick area, closer to the fragment trail. (25:19-27:59) Radiologist John Ebersole recalled two phone calls with Dallas during the autopsy and stated 5-6 skull X-rays were taken, though only 3 exist in official records today; two oblique skull X-rays are missing. (29:15-32:03) The 6.5mm object wasn't observed or discussed on November 22, 1963, but appeared in X-rays by 1967; forensic radiologist John Fitzpatrick, working for the Assassination Records Review Board, couldn't explain this discrepancy. ______________ Excerpt from Apr 27, 2021 'JFK's Head Wounds' by Dr. David Mantik " Auto Transcript 0:01 but in 1963 at the autopsy James Humes occupied 0:06 center stage on your left is Boswell his 0:11 assistant both were Navy Pathologists on the right is Dr thinkink 0:18 Who was borrowed from the army that night these photographs were taken in 0:25 1963 in 1992 the Journal of the American Medical Association published their 0:30 interviews with Humes and Boswell things came later that year Humes had signed on with US Navy in 0:40 1943 so in 1963 he was completing 20 years of 0:45 military service which is a magic interval according to an online Source 0:51 in 2017 US military offers very generous pension benefits after 20 years of 0:57 service members can retire with % of their final salary for the rest of their lives I don't know exactly what the 1:04 rules were in 1963 but I suspect Humes had a lot at stake at that 1:11 time Albert Einstein said imagination is more important than knowledge for 1:17 knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand while imagination 1:23 Embraces the entire world so imagine with me what it must 1:30 have been like to be at the autopsy on November 22nd 1:39 1963 imagine being a pathologist at JFK Autopsy and having just been told that 1:45 three shots were fired all of them from behind so for a few moments let's 1:51 imagine the scene as I play the role of Humes at the autopsy I see a large hole in the right 1:58 oxit the image here was prepared for the movie 2:05 JFK Robert groden's reconstruction is fairly accurate this is close to what Hume 2:11 saw you can see the large hole in the right rear here which is fairly 2:18 close to what was actually uh seen by 2:23 Humes now pretending to be Humes here again I saw the back of the head 2:30 but I did not see the red spot here and I did not wash the 2:36 hair the large hole extended into the oxit which is this 2:43 area as I stated and commenting as Mantic I I 2:49 would say you can do your own stereo viewing with these two images you can check for yourself whether they seem 2:55 authentic 3:01 here's a common myth the scalp was not being stretched over a gaping hole here I know that from 3:09 my stereo viewing at The Archives the image is not 3D as it should be I looked 3:14 at all the pairs of photographs at The Archives and they are essentially all 3D 3:19 as they should be but only here on the back of JFK's head where the image is 3:25 Highly Questionable does it become 2D and that's because the same fake image 3:31 was inserted into each member of the paired photographs shown uh just above 3:36 look for yourself the Pathologists were unable to completely cover the defect with the scalp as they themselves 3:46 admitted speaking as Humes in the posterior skull I originally identify a 3:51 portion of a bullet entry hole the black mark was placed on the 3:58 skull by Hughes here's the uh EOP also marked with the 4:03 black uh Mark there this is the original site that Humes reported to the warrant 4:11 commission and what he started with before the uh house select committee on 4:16 assassinations which I will be calling hsca but before he was finished with his 4:23 hsca testimony Humes had moved the wound all the way up to here 4:30 10 cmers higher or 4 inches and we will come back to that issue and I hope before we conclude you 4:37 can actually see a video of Humes uh testifying before the hsca during which 4:44 he describes um his thinking on 4:49 this Humes I invented a new definition slightly is 4 4:56 in hum speaking I see the skull the AP skull X-ray and I would call this image 5:03 on your left the red arrow here identifies a 5:09 small metallic fragment which lay at the back of the skull this was cited uh in 5:15 their report by FBI agents cyber and O'Neal and I must thank phield rru field 5:23 rru for his Photoshop work here and also Larry Rivera for his offer of assistance 5:30 Humes again I did not see that 6.5 millimeter thing this object 5:38 was actually played the central role in the hsca proceedings they decided that this 5:45 was a cross-section of a bullet and and that this represented reality and reflected where the bullet 5:52 had come in on the back of the head unfortunately for them very stur of 5:58 in their physics expert claimed that this thing could not be a piece of metal unfortunately however Larry didn't tell 6:05 them that that only came up later when he was asked about 6:10 it Humes again I see the throat 6:16 wound near the throat I that's Humes note tissue damage to the 6:23 following at the lung Apex there is a 5 cmet contusion that's 2 in 6:30 and there's also um bruising in the strap muscles of the 6:36 neck I immediately recognized that this meant trauma on Elm Street damage to 6:42 these sites could not be caused by a tracheotomy Dr Perry who did the 6:48 tracheotomy at Parkland would surely not accidentally cause a twoin contusion at 6:54 the top of the lung that's preposterous so I promptly know during 7:00 the autopsy that a projectile had passed through the throat I did not need to speak to Dallas to learn 7:07 this my comment Boswell later confirmed this while at the autopsy they knew 7:14 about the throat wot everol told me the same story and his comments are on a 7:19 recorded interview which is now at The 7:24 Archives uh my comment here again in 1977 BOS well had an epiphany for the 7:32 hsca the original face sheet placed the back wound here where it's marked 7x4 7:38 millimeters indicating its size but he raised this back wound into the neck as shown by the red arrow here 7:46 Gerald R Ford my fellow resident of ranching Mirage concurred with this even 7:53 though he was not at the autopsy Ford nevertheless claimed to know this 8:00 these are identical Woods on the left you see rid Berg's 8:05 drawing for the Warren Commission circled in Blue on the right JFK's shirt at The 8:12 Archives and you can see where the uh shirt was penetrated by 8:18 something but these are supposedly in the official conclusions the same 8:24 wound Robert Frasier for the FBI measured both the single hole in the shirt that you see here and the single 8:31 hole in the jacket is a little more than 5 in below the 8:39 collar this is the photograph of the back wound this is an official autopsy 8:45 photograph still present at the National Archives Glenn Bennett who was in D 8:52 Plaza stated quote I saw the shot hit the president about four inches down 8:58 from the right shoulder does that match the redberg drawing 9:10 hardly ridberg later expressed his regret for his misleading JFK diagrams 9:16 but the archives refused his request to view the JFK evidence so he published his own 9:24 book back to Humes again Humes on the single bullet theory 9:29 even though we had no CT scans I knew that this trajectory was unlikely on the right you can see a cross-section 9:36 through the critical area of the uh lower neck on the lower right uh the bullet 9:45 enters the back about 5 cmers to the right of the midline and uh according to 9:51 the pathologist that it exited at about the midline in the throat so there's the trajectory it should have followed but 9:57 it can't do that without crashing into bone which is shown in white here so the spine should have been fractured but of 10:04 course it wasn't Humes made that clear if it happened at a slightly lower 10:10 level it would have punctured the lung but that didn't happen either we have hum's word on that so this is an a 10:18 basically impossible trajectory here we have the autopsy face 10:23 sheet which was prepared that night uh notice that there's a green 10:29 horizontal line at the top and one at the bottom so from this you can tell that 10:35 the the two figures uh should be able to be compared 10:41 with respect to Vertical levels the upper red line goes through 10:48 the throat wound here the lower red line goes through the 10:53 back wound so purely based on the face sheet humans can say of course I knew that the 11:01 back wound was much lower than the throat wound which made the single bullet theory quite 11:08 implausible weeks later I that's Humes again write the supplementary brain 11:14 exam even though Boswell and I both believed that JFK's brain was buried 11:20 with his body now this is rather fantastic how can they write a report on 11:27 an exam of the brain that has already been buried with the body the following Monday but that is what they said that 11:33 is what they believed on the left is a drawing an 11:38 overhead view of nine photographs at The Archives of the 11:44 brain the report described a laceration that went all the way from front to back 11:50 shown by the yellow line and there was essentially no damage to the left side of the brain and you 11:58 can see for yourself the damage to the right side um you can see here this is 12:04 the cerebellum at the back of the head it was totally intact in this 12:12 brain hims can defend himself here by saying well I only had a limited supply 12:18 of spare brains Humes was responsible for the weekly brain cutting session so this was 12:26 right in his bilyy weight what kind I say he might reply I did the best I 12:31 could with this brain this was the closest brain I could find to the actual damage in 12:40 JFK but he could argue that they should get credit for omitting the date we 12:45 don't know when this was done I think the date was deliberately 12:51 omitted back to Humes again I describe a 4.5 CM deep laceration we're talking 12:58 about the distance from vertex to the bottom of the laceration so using Kim's 13:04 own words and 4.5 cmers I've tried to place where the laceration would have 13:11 been this is my work not hum's work he never did place this on a skull but this is consistent with what 13:20 he said 4.5 cmers from the vertex to the bottom of the laceration now here's the 13:26 problem Humes has told the Warren Commission and tried to tell the hsca 13:32 that the bullet entered near the EOP if the bullet entered here how can 13:37 all this brain between the bottom of the laceration and the EOP be intact but 13:43 that's basically what he's telling us it makes no sense whatsoever and Humes could very well say 13:48 I was lucky that Cornwell with the hsca in 1977 did not nail me for this huge 13:55 discrepancy between this laceration which was described in our brain report 14:01 and the EOP entry a few more comments about this lateral skull x-ray since this is the 14:08 first time we've seen it this very dark area here is very large and it's completely 14:15 devoid of brain or soft tissue the optical densities here are about the same as in the maxillary sinus so 14:22 there's nothing in this area on the skull x-rays which are taken 14:27 at the autopsy some people have said that the black area here means that the face the the 14:34 right face is gone and maybe the right eye has gone too but that's not the case we have autopsy photographs uh which 14:42 demonstrate clearly that uh JFK is Right face and um even even the view from the 14:49 anterior was essentially uh intact the Parkland uh Personnel agreed with that 14:55 one other item we should note is this metal fragment Trail which is uh 15:01 demonstrated by these tiny white spots all the way across the top of the skull that trail starts right at the forehead 15:07 as you heard from Mike Chester last week but this is the famous fragment Trail which is of course totally inconsistent 15:13 with the bullet coming in here more of this 15:18 later Humes at the autopsy on November 15:24 22nd we saw cerebellar damage but the brain We examined later had intact 15:30 Thell the high fragment Trail on the x-rays would have meant a second head 15:37 shot so this must be one head shot here but Hume said the bullet entered here so 15:44 he can't have it both ways he knows that two head shots means conspiracy so he's 15:49 been back into a corner so the high fragment Trail on the x-rays would have meant the second head 15:56 shot so we had to rewrite the autopsy report and describe the cerebellum as 16:03 intact so the photographs of the brain in the archives today do show intact 16:09 sarabellum so he was going to put his money on that 16:14 horse Humes again I am forced to offis skate And even lie when necessary so 16:20 I've listed here hum's response to all of the dilemmas he faced number 16:26 one hum speaking again I see the large occipital hole so I obfuscate he doesn't 16:33 deny that it's there but he really doesn't pay attention to it nor does he describe it number two on the x-rays the 16:40 fragment Trail is too high it implies another head shot so I lie and in the 16:45 autopsy report I described it as 10 centimeters lower this gets him into real trouble 16:52 with the a ARB in 1996 number three the autopsy uh 16:58 cerebellum was damaged but it disagrees with the fake brain so I simply ignore the 17:07 cerebellum number four on the X-rays I see metallic debris near the 17:12 forehead you heard about that from cheser last week I also see the forehead entry wound in the skin on the 17:20 photographs so I iniz the wound and I ignore the metallic 17:25 debris I see bruising in the throat tissues I know this means trauma while JFK was still alive so I must lie and 17:33 claim that the tracheotomy hit all this damage I had two phone calls with Dallas 17:38 during the autopsy so I lie or else everyone would know that I knew about the frontal throat 17:44 entry I see a temporal bone entry near the right ear so I ignore it I correctly 17:51 identify a right EOP entry at the back of a skull but I later mislocate on 17:56 video for the hsca and we'll see more of this I had no choice that entry had to match the high fragment 18:04 Trail to cover my tracks I had to write different Au types of reports at different 18:09 times especially after the exam of the fake brain I had no 18:16 choice if this had not been JFK Robert carai would have performed the 18:22 autopsy like James Jenkins the technologist who stood at the table all 18:28 night long with a pathologist and like Dr Robert Walker a bullet expert who was there Dr 18:37 carai also recalled a wound on the right side of the head in the temporal area approximately above the right 18:44 ear this information from about Dr Walker came quite recently as you see at 18:51 the bottom on May 19th in an email from Dr Don Curtis who 18:56 was uh very much involved in this case too at Parkland 19:03 Hospital Charles khaw saw an entry right there at the 19:10 hairline I could not locate a higher resolution image so I copied this from 19:15 my original um 1992 VHS tape which I had recorded live if anyone has a better 19:24 resolution image I would loow to get it 19:29 this is an artist rendering of a photograph seen by Quenton Schwin in Rochester New York the home of eastn 19:36 Kodak Rochester was also home to Hawkeye Works where the zaper film may have been 19:45 modified and now Humes I hope for the best and I 19:51 succeeded until the hsca in 1977 and the ARB in 19:57 1996 then all hell broke loose especially in front of the ARB with Doug 20:03 horn but I got to play golf in for three more years until 1999 when I died of lung cancer just 20:11 like everol and took all of my secrets to the Catholic Corner in heaven and got to meet my fellow Catholic 20:18 JFK but meanwhile I kept my pension and even got a military promotion later LBJ 20:24 even gave me presidential cuff links after I served as his pathology 20:32 Humes again the hsca interviewed me in 1977 they wanted to know about that 20:39 entry room so I changed my mind and pointed to the car Lake Area there he 20:44 is he moved it from here to here after all that's closer where the 20:51 closer to where the fragment Trail was that's up here still doesn't really match but it's it is closer 21:00 you can listen to this testimony on YouTube the link is 21:06 there this encounter occurred on September 16th 1977 I want you to 21:11 remember that date uh for a good reason as you'll see later September 16th so 21:17 for the hsca then Humes moved the entry site there was only one 21:22 only one bullet he moved it from here to here 10 cm or 4 in 21:33 before the hsca during this encounter Gary Cornwell who was deputy chief asked 21:40 me some tough questions and he took all the credit for my 4-inch move Cornwell regarding the posterior 21:47 skull entry quote do you now have a more cons well-considered or different opinion end quote Humes quote I think I 21:56 do have a different opinion and uh a few minutes later he adds this 22:02 comment I erroneously previously identified the entry site end quote 22:08 Cornwell is this 4-in discrepancy explainable end quote Humes I have a 22:13 little trouble with that you can also read about Cornwell's uh recounting of these events 22:20 in his book 22:26 Humes this is my final statement to the hsca quote I and my associates are quite 22:32 elated in fact that all the subsequent findings of the panel are in basic concordance with our 22:40 findings Mantic this is my rejoiner in other words don't worry about four 22:48 inches the video of hymns with the hsca will be played after my lecture so sit 22:56 tight hum can claim that he was blindsided he could say I 23:01 did not know in time that critical autopsy photographs would be 23:07 destroyed or that critical autopsy photographs would be altered or that 23:12 some skull x-rays would be deliberately lost and that the three exan skull 23:18 x-rays would be decisively altered and he would be right about 23:23 that in 1992 when Kims was interviewed by the Journal of the American Medical 23:30 Association he recanted his hsca testimony and the Journal of course 23:35 ignored his backsliding here's what he told the journal quote the fatal wound 23:41 was blatantly obvious end quote Humes recalls quote again the entrance wound 23:48 was elliptical 15 mm long and 6 millim wide and located 2.5 cm to the right and 23:55 slightly above the external occipital prot tuberin so my comment is hum's 4-in move 24:03 for the hsca just went up in smoke ADV vanished but HS has some 24:10 excuses number one he was placed into a spray jacket he had no choice but to write misleading autopsy reports if he 24:19 had refused conspiracy would have been apparent to wall due to the obvious frontal 24:24 shots number two he inserted misleading eyewitness stat into the autopsy report 24:30 of course he didn't know they were misleading but in fact eyewitness statements are virtually never included 24:36 in an autopsy report as Dr sirel W has advised me number three he did not have 24:42 JFK's clothing number four he did not know about the Harper fragment which was 24:48 not even cited by the Warren Commission he did not know that the Magic Bullet was 24:53 bogus or that the FBI had two bullets that night but did know and he never 24:59 told us about the two brain exams for that he is 25:07 culpable but hums was a respected professional I accept that I don't think 25:12 he was incompetent after all he directed The Weekly brain cutting sessions at 25:18 thetha and Gary Cornwell in his book real answers besides the strong respect 25:24 he got from the forensic pathology panel of the HS 25:30 CA we turn next to the radiologist John everol like me he was actually a 25:36 radiation oncologist he recalled to me two phone calls that he uh remembered 25:45 had occurred with Dallas during the autopsy the first one at about 10:30 at 25:50 night uh this conversation has been recorded and has been placed at the National Archives you can listen to it 25:56 yourself Perry who did the tracheotomy at Parkland originally also recalled two 26:03 phone calls and he initially stated that they were on November 22 William Manchester who wrote The 26:09 Death of a president cites two phone calls during the autopsy Robert carai who we've discussed 26:17 before quote he told the ARB staff that he was aware of hearsay that Dr CES had 26:22 called Dallas to talk to a surgeon later in the evening before the body left the morg and 26:29 quote John everol also recalled for me during my phone conversations five to six skull x-rays 26:37 there are only three in the official collection today Gerald kuster the technologist also confirmed this to me 26:45 and most importantly these two gentlemen never spoke to one another after the autopsy so there was no collusion here 26:52 CER specifically recalled two oblique skull x-rays that no longer exist 26:59 so what about these later government experts how did they mislead us the hsca parens pathology panel 27:07 trusted the photographs some of which you have not seen and they ignored the 27:12 autopsy pathologist even when they disagreed with the 27:18 photographs but they were not told that there was no Providence for the photographs they were not told that the 27:24 camera did not match the photographs and here's another myth they all believed that the x-rays were as 27:31 immutable as God himself we know that's not true now of course the real problem 27:36 was that they had never actually worked in the dark room so they did not know how x-ray copying was 27:44 done what about the later government Radiologists what they missed or 27:50 deliberately ignored number one the fragment Trail is centered at the front of the skull with 27:56 many tiny pieces right at the forehead as you heard last week from Dr Michael Chesser I agree with 28:02 that this clearly implies a frontal shot number two the forehead wound in the 28:08 photos seems consistent with this number three the magical materialization of the 28:15 6.5 mimer object is totally absurd its 28:21 absence on the lateral x-ray is also observed this is not physical 28:26 reality number five the missing upper temporal bone on the x-rays we will return to this issue the white patch we 28:33 will discuss that there is an absence of Emulsion under the t-shaped inscription 28:38 which we will also discuss it's interesting to note that the warrant commission did not utilize the autopsy 28:44 materials so the hsca was really the first government investigation to 28:51 include these items later government 28:56 Radiologists miss all three Clues to x-ray alteration optical density was totally 29:03 outside their worldview no one ever mentioned that possibility and the white patch which we 29:09 will discuss is indeed otherworldly the 6.5 millimeter object 29:14 simply cannot materialize like a magician's rabbit between 1963 and 29:19 1967 nobody saw it on November 22nd no one discussed it on November 22nd it's 29:27 totally absent from the record and I suspect from the uh original 29:32 x-rays this 6.5 M millimeter object cannot be absent from JFK's lateral 29:37 x-ray which it is this is not physical reality if you see something from the 29:44 front you should also be able to see it from the side on the X-ray that's not the case here these experts were too 29:50 obtuse to look for missing Emulsion under the t-shaped inscription more about this later furthermore the forehead shot was 29:58 obvious tiny metal fragments precisely at the forehead cannot possibly imply a posterior 30:04 shot Russell Morgan was the sole radiologist for the Clark panel which 30:09 released its report in 1968 based on work they had done in 30:16 1967 here's the newspaper article whose uh headline says expert 30:22 backs waren report if you read the report it really should have said expert question s war in report look at this 30:31 highlight the key questions remaining this is Russell Morgan 30:37 talking are those of a possible conspiracy that's hardly the war 30:45 report so Russell Morgan had his own Brun hog here let's read this highlight 30:51 the fragmentation depicted in the X-ray that's the fragment Trail we've been talking about was so severe that had to 30:58 wonder if it was a so-called dum dum or hollowpoint bullet as opposed to the kind which was found on the floor beside 31:05 Cony said Dr Morgan I'll show you those uh photographs a little later 31:13 here so for Russell Morgan this was the last ditch effort to 31:19 cya the above article appeared in the Lancing State Journal on here's that 31:24 famous date September 16th 197 7 do you remember that date hum's above testimony 31:31 occurred on September 16th 1977 the very same day that Morgan almost 31:38 recounted was this a coincidence it was the same day that the American public saw the skull 31:45 xeries for the ARB a forensic radiologist the so-called ultimate 31:52 expert was enlisted John Fitzpatrick the forensic radiologist confessed that he could not 31:59 solve the Paradox of the 6.5mm object but he ignored my optical density data 32:05 and in response to my letter he offered only cliches instead for the a RB he returned 32:14 for a second day just to stare helplessly at this 6.5 millimeter fate 32:21 and he never explained it ironically his expertise was in childhood brain TR trauma not in x-ray 32:29 orary

#TMWKK Episode 3 more detail in Part 5: https://rumble.com/v6ubx4b-segments-on-parkland-hospital-and-the-autopsy-bethesda-nih-from-tmwkk5.html TITLE in that above link has been corrected to show it was NOT at the NIH, but at the Bethesda Naval Hospital, but Rumble URL's keep the original title.

Massive rear exit and everybody saw it. from Robert Durk YT

Excerpts from Director's Cut of Doug Horne's A TRAIL OF DECEIPT: THE JFK SKULL X-RAYS, 1963 & 1979: https://rumble.com/playlists/BdHtAtpsjX4

#Doug Horne 1 #Dr Mantik

#JFK #JFKA The Medical Evidence

Title corrected to show it was NOT at the NIH, but at the Bethesda Naval Hospital. #JFK #JFKA #The Men Who Killed Kennedy

& the Warren Comm did NOT call him to testify Incredible detail here, this is the best interview I've seen on the head wound. Found on Popeye's channel.

Shot from the front #Doug Horne #Parkland docs at 2013 (50 year) reunion #J Lee Rankin Warren Commission General Counsel #Anna Paulina Luna #JFK Murder and Coverup #DR BOSWELL FRAUD

"Doug Horne on the JFK Three Head Shot Scenario with which Drs Chesser and Mantik Both Agree" J. Keven Hofeling https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mG38BwX-8fw Feb 10, 2025 full 2h+ vid https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oeFn7pjsek Here is a timestamped bullet point summary of the transcript: 0:05: Doug Horne, who served as the Chief Analyst for Military Records for the JFK Assassination Records Review Board, introduces himself and the topic of his presentation. 1:07: Horne's presentation is titled "The JFK Skull X-ray 1963 and 1979: A Trail of Deceit," and he dedicates it to Dr. David Mantik and Dr. Michael Chesser for their contributions to the medical evidence in the JFK assassination. 2:04: Horne states that evidence points to a three-headshot scenario in the assassination of President Kennedy. 3:10: Horne displays Dr. Chesser's slide, which superimposes the three headshots over the lateral skull x-ray, and identifies the entry wound from the shot fired from behind, designated as entry wound #1. 4:13: Horne asserts that the Clark Panel and the HSCA were incorrect about the entry site of the shot from behind, and he explains why their conclusions were flawed. 6:07: Horne discusses how the Review Board consultants disagreed with the Clark Panel's identification of the entry wound. He then summarizes the details of shot #1, stating that it entered low in the right rear of the head and did not exit the skull. 7:15: Horne presents images of the Harper fragment, a piece of occipital bone with traces of metal, and explains its significance in supporting the theory of a shot from behind. 8:30: Horne analyzes the Altgens 6 photograph, which shows a possible gunman and an open window in the Dal Tex building, further supporting the possibility of a shot originating from that location. 11:01: Horne cites witnesses Dan Rather and Cartha DeLoach, who saw JFK's head move violently forward in the original Zapruder film before it was altered, which is consistent with shot from behind. 12:02: Horne presents witness testimony that supports the theory of a shot from behind. He clarifies that his presentation focuses specifically on the headshots and skull x-rays, not the throat or back wounds. 14:26: Horne shows images of the Harper fragment with a ruler for scale and explains how it was found. 17:05: Horne analyzes Dr. Boswell's sketch of JFK's skull, which shows damage to the right orbit and vomer bone but no exit wound. 19:20: Horne analyzes the shot that entered high in the forehead above the right orbit and discusses potential firing locations for this shot. 20:13: Horne explains that if the Zapruder film is accurate, the forehead shot likely came from the left front. 21:25: Horne cites an FBI report (CD 298) that supports the storm drain theory, placing the fatal shot at a distance of 307 feet. 24:10: Horne discusses how Secret Service Agent Clint Hill and witness Sam Holland both heard a handgun sound, and Clint Hill heard an echo, which supports the storm drain theory. 26:56: Horne reads Clint Hill's Warren Commission testimony about the "double sound" he heard when the fatal shot was fired. 28:40: Horne summarizes the evidence supporting the storm drain theory, including the angle of the fragment trail, witness testimony, and the presence of an echo. 29:34: Horne discusses the likely position of JFK's head when the storm drain shooter fired. 30:41: Horne explains that Zapruder frame 312 does not match the trajectory of a shot fired from the storm drain. 31:06: Horne shows how Dr. Chesser identified the forehead bullet entry in the right lateral skull x-ray. 31:51: Horne reveals that the HSCA's 1979 publication blacked out the metallic snowstorm near the forehead entry. 32:14: Horne presents an image of the enhanced right lateral skull x-ray, highlighting the fragment trail. 32:50: Horne discusses how Dino Brugioni witnessed a massive vertical head explosion in the unaltered Zapruder film. 33:34: Horne examines the "mystery photo" and the bootleg autopsy photographs, explaining their significance and how they have been misinterpreted. 35:12: Horne identifies the abdominal fat and JFK's forehead in the mystery photo, providing a definitive orientation of the image. 36:31: Horne confirms the definitive orientation of the mystery photo, showing how it reveals a man-made incision in JFK's skull. 37:23: Horne explains that the incision was made to obliterate the entrance wound above the right eye. 37:53: Horne identifies a small exit defect in the mystery photo that he believes is from a fragment of the forehead bullet. 38:13: Horne discusses the semicircular notch and Dr. Humes' testimony about evidence of exit wounds. 39:24: Horne criticizes Dr. Baden's incorrect orientation of the photograph and explains how it led to misinterpretations of the evidence. 40:01: Horne discusses Dr. Humes, Dr. Boswell, and photographer John Stringer's identification of the photograph in 1966.

https://rumble.com/user/johncleer?q="horne" #Dr michael chesser #jfk autopsy

"Dr Peter cummings explains Location of President Kennedy's Fatal Head Wound." Boston Globe Of course, that was NOT the fatal shot, but more likely the first hit: https://rumble.com/v6lce9j-doug-horne-on-the-jfk-three-head-shot-scenario-w-which-drs.-chesser-and-man.html You can bet the House Select CMTE moved it up the skull to promote the lie of the rear kill shot, because there's no way that bullet enters the rear LOWER skull at a downward angle from the Sixth Floor and exits the top of his head.

"A snowstorm of lead can't come from a jacketed bullet." (Thompson) Which means, on top of all the other reasons, that it wasn't shot from the planted Carcano. There's also confirmation here that the Kennedy family is restricting access to the X-Rays, & they let Aguilar see them. Aguilar has disputed Horne over the medical evidence, over what Horne terms a "major blind spot," so, and I'm just thinking out loud here--which is what all these notes in the description are--I consider that to be a possible factor in Aguilar's blind spot, that he may need to alter his version to maintain access to the X-Rays. Haven't looked into it, don't know, but that is a possible explanation, because Aguilar appears to be honest and competent, and he says Horne hasn't provided extraordinary evidence, which is clearly not true. https://insidethearrb.livejournal.com/23105.html https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/30250-doug-hornes-response-to-gary-aguilars-review https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/jfk-what-the-doctors-saw-an-important-addition-and-a-missed-opportunity

https://insidethearrb.livejournal.com/21893.html https://www.bitchute.com/video/kkYJBX0fDKEC

https://rumble.com/v6q8q3c-ron-paul-thoughts-on-jfks-death-tucker-apr2024.html Full show- https://rumble.com/v4lpgti-tucker-carlson-uncensored-ron-paul-full-episode.html

6th JFK Conference Dallas. posted to YT NOV2018. see also- https://rumble.com/v6lclss-horne-jfk-brain-photos-are-not-jfks-brain-the-2-brain-exams-following-the-a.html The Audio is very fuzzy, with a lot of uh's and um's and medical jargon. I Fixed the auto transcript as well as I could. Transcript: "The brain that we had at autopsy did NOT have 8damage that you would expect if by comparing to the damage that was to the skull to the Head itself there were other other anomalies considering the brain the brain um the convolutions on the brain uh ... they they were abnormal they they didn't look like the normal brains that we we had taken at autopsy the (Dar eye?) were flat, uh seemed to be larger the color instead of the gray that we normally saw was had a white Sheen to it I have worked with Dr Mike Chester for several years in 2015 uh Mike had approached me about the brain that he had he had actually seen the photographs uh in the archives he believed at that point in time that the brain had been uh had been been in a jar with other brains, that would really account for uh for the appearance of the brain as you can probably attest to it Audience member: "What happened to the brain after you put it in the jar and put it in the brain room?" It wasn't, it was in the bucket. I don't know what happened to the brain, because when Paul and I went back to the morg after we... after we were given the orders to make sure that we had finished everything that was necessary, the morgue log was gone. The casket that that was pushed up against the coal box was gone, actually it was gone before we left the morgue. And the Brain bucket was gone. "Thank you." Host (John Judge?): we're going to have everybody who wants to ask questions come over here so everybody can hear okay so if you want to ask a question come up here please [Music] Audience question: "Paul Connor told me the same thing in Florida about the brain was gone, okay. That's what he told me in person. Now here's the question: you said there was a quite a bit missing, part of the head back here right, okay. Now what about up here, what did you see there?" I did not see anything there. "Nothing there. Okay. Now the zapruder film that shows this thing you think was uh not really I I think what what Pro it there was a _" Not really. there was a flap on the side of the head that in one of the photographs is actually extended out, I think. In my opinion that flat was was actually fractured um, and so on and so forth, prior to um Dr Hume's making the _ inscision in order to remove the brain, which freed that up to allow it to to be flexible. "The Zapruder film though it shows the flat going like this (gestures it was flapping open) I'm not sure "Did you see the Zapruder film?" yeah I had and my interpretation was or what I assume was that there was the flap that was was separated.. but it actually went back because when we first saw the body the flap was not... I didn't see the flap there. And it wasn't until--actually, to be honest with you I never saw the flap in that position that is showing in the photograph and uh let me address the thing of brain or no brain. I believe Paul. I believe the two people, but I also believe that even though they were sincere in what they said, I think it was more-or-less a shock effect in their perception. Now I also I guess... I will go on record saying this. I do NOT believe personally that the brain that we took at autopsy was the president's brain. And I also would like to explain why. First of all the brain uh had an unusual appearance. When I first talk to David, I told David, I told Harry the same thing: the first thing that flashed in my mind and this was in my mind was this uh you know a a female right now out of all of the studies that I have I participated in in The Graduate programs that I was in uh I searched to see if there was a difference I never found anything. o it wasn't until I talked to Dr Chester who is a neurologist and very much into this, that a possible explanation for that was presented to me and when he told me that he felt like that the brain appearance was the appearance of a brain that had been infixed along with other brains for a period of time which caused the flat area. He also said the brain was very asymmetric That was the first time that I had a logical explanation for what I saw I base that and I base ... the fact is that I now do not believe that that was the president's brain. Second is, in the the official autopsy report, the extensive damage that's reported in that report, in the secondary area or supplemental autopsy, which is specifically autopsy of the brain after it's fixed--the brain that we took at autopsy was not that extensively damaged, because if it had been damaged as extensively as was reported in the autopsy with such fine detail, then there would be no reason to infuse that brain. Because what would have occurredm the formula would just run out. Because there was damage to uh the superior satchel (?) Canal and that's that's a collection point for basically the vascular system in the body. We would have been just as well off dropping it in the bucket, because there would have been a vast amount of internal tissue and so forth, it would have been exposed directly to the formula. So those are the two things that I that I use for myself to say that at this point in time I do NOT believe that the brain that we took that autopsy of was that of the president I do believe that the supplemental autopsy uh ,and I agree with with Doug horne, there were actually two supplemental autopsies, each on separate brains. We know that, from testimony ... that Dr Bosell, Dr Humes and Mr Stringer attended one. Mr Stringer says that he did the _ sutures, placed them on a a viewing plate and took photographs. There was also one where Dr Bosell, Dr Humes, Dr fink and a unknown photographer attended, and Dr Humes in his supplemental oopsy described a vast amount of damage to the brain, I mean an extreme amount of damage to the brain. But he also said that in his supplemental autopsy, they didn't do sections in order to preserve the brain in total. So those are two contradictory reports, on two separate brain autopsies which are supplemental autopsies. ... 9.01 in the book I did not avoid these controversies I actually put them in because I want you the reader to make your own determinations about this you know a lot of it is perplexing to me also ... when I first met them, and they found out were already uh proceeding with the autopsy, it was shocking to them but they provided valuable information to clarify some of the gray memories that I had uh or partial memories that I had of of a casket being brought in, other than the one that the president was in. So that was the one that was pushed against the gold boxes. "my question Jim is again I'm not disputing you but when you just testified that there were no bullet fragments or anything that you saw on x-ray ... my question is I also knew Dennis David as you guys all do and Dennis Davis supposedly had metal fragments that he admitted into evidence, that was later taken out, just the same as it was with the timing of the log taken out the following day so where were those metal fragments from?" The metal fragments were brought into the morgue somewhere late in the autopsy. They were in a (bag)-it's similar to a zip lock bag except it has a twist tie on it, a small bag. There were metal fragments and there were also bone fragments They were small, they were measured in millimeters and those fragments during the autopsy, Dr Humes & Dr Fink tried to fit those into some of the niches that were in in the wound itself. It was not very successful I saw no medium-sized or large bone fragments in the morgue with the exception of those. actually those metal fargments Dennis brought in were the were the ones that that were brought in and placed at the right ear of the president on the table, and later, there was an attempt to see if they fit within the structure. Those are the fragments that Dennis was talking about well I can only assume that, From the description that Dennis gave me and so forth and from what I saw, I can only assume that that those were the same fragments those fragments were given to Jim cyber, one of the FBI agents and they took them to the lab Audience question: "yeah hi I'm wondering if any of you gentlemen have any insights or observations about Lieutenant Commander Pitzer and his subsequent murder well if you go back and read the reports on piter uh they came to the conclusion that he committed suicide the reports all suggest that he committed suicide. However, Dennis David to the end of his days was convinced that Bill Pitzer did NOT commit suicide, and it was because he had film of the autopsy that Dennis said that he looked at, uh one day, a couple, 3 days after the autopsy that bill was running through a hand crank machine and so we just don't know that's part of the bigger mystery 12.42 Audience member: "Question for Jim um earlier you mentioned that you thought maybe Admiral Berkeley who was Kennedy's private physician was leading the autopsy in some way-- Do you believe that he's he was Pro Kenedy or was he complicit in some way?" I really don't I don't really know that I think that he was directing the autopsy uh following directions from from the Kennedy family and probably from Bobby Kennedy. (crowd reacts "whoa") There was a reluctance when we first began the autopsy we were only going to do the head and up, and (Photo graphics?) One day with no fragments found in the x-rays, Dr Fink and Dr Humes almost insisted that we do a full body x-ray, because as the lady Docter here knows, in forensics, the bullet can be anywhere so we actually started the full body autopsy before we had permission to do it, at Dr Humes and Dr Fink's insistance Audience Q: "just in support of the other brain I was reading in the last year it was the X-ray like the man, The Underneath photo in the National Archives he said he never took that it was never underneath and I don't know what the word is yeah uh Mr sing um Stringer uh actually said that he never took any photographs of the underside of brain uh the basal sign and yet the photographs in the archives ... now Dr David Mantic and Dr Michael Chester have both been allowed in to the archives. I have made two attempts to get permission I've been denied both times uh first thing to the Kennedy lawyer that controls it, I do not meet the criteria the criteria is quite High you almost well you do have to be a physician and you have to be a well-known physician and even at that point in time there's always an "if" factor involved in it and like with Dr Chester who is a teaching neurologist well known in in his field, in the area where where he practices at University, actually Baptist Hospital Little Rock, he's involved with the university there-- He had requested and he actually had to submit his request several times before he was allowed in to view the x-rays and the photographs. Dr Mantik uh of course has been been in a few time or I think he's been in nine times but that was in the early years I think the last conversation I had had with he and and Dr Chester that uh he had requested permission but had been denied recently It's an extremely frustrating thing to be asked questions about photographs and so forth and not be able to view the original photographs that are in the archives and this is this is a situation ... Dr Mantic and Dr Chesser have both tried to get me into the archives. I requested permission from um my local Congressman. He was unable to to actually get permission for me to go into the x-rays. This is not an unusual type of situation. I wanted to return to Bethesa to verify or answer some questions about the morgue its present Location, what had occurred and things of that nature. We weren't able to do that too. supp to us yeah and and but we were unable to do that also This is a this is one of the situations that the researchers run up against, these things are sequestered Paul and I were never called to actually testify before any of the government inquiries. We were only required to give a deposition for the house select committee which turned out to be a fiasco. we were at the record review board, they were not allowed to contact us. So it's been ... after the house of _ committee uh supposedly uh all of the records or most of the records were to be released to the public with the exception of ("Mine pause?) which was put into another 50 years Sequestion, which was only released because of I think this is I'm not sure what the ACT is called but the ACT establish the record review board Audience Q: "thank you Mr jenin please show me with your hands on your own head, where the entrance wound for the large exit wound and where the large exit wound were exactly" I can show you where the wound is. The wound is approximately in this area (touches right rear of head) and the occipital, bridal and as I described earlier there was more of a fractur line than anything that formed a tail that came down and touched on to the bridal the temple area here the wound here was a small wound that I can only tell you what I left the board thinking or feeling that I had seen seen two actual wounds uh during the autopsy we were told ththe roat wound was isolated on emergency tracheotomy and not to bother with it um that was the one that Dr Perry said he did the tracheotomy on. I went home the following morning thinking that the President had been shot from the right front with an exit wound in the back of posterior portion of of the head and he had also been shot in the back, primarily between the shoulder blade which is the scapulaa uh at the top of the scapula uh halfway between that and I think it's 2 T3 T2 uh which is the vertebrae, there. That wound was probed. When it was probed, it actually went downward at approximately a 30° angle, and the depth of it was Dr Humes could could prob the depth of it with his little finger. Now Dr Humes had large hands and but he could actually probe the depth of that wound with his little finger they began to probe it with a metal probe which was basically a flat Probe on one end. it went to kind of a bobbed point on the other end. Dr Fink expressed his concern that they may create a false entry into the floral cavity and they went to a sound uh a sound is a type of probe, it's almost like a metal catheter. It's rounded on one end uh it's Hollow it's a little larger and they use that to probe it and then Dr Humes actually used his little finger prob it the wound stopped. It never penetrated the floral cavity because I could see the impression that they were making as they were probing it from because we had already removed the the organs and I could see the impression they were making on the back of the ("anticavity"?) Audience: "Could I ask a followup please?" sure "the throat wound or whatever, could that have been the entrance and blown out the back side of the Head?" I really can't say 0:21:40.980 uh we're we're talking about probabilities here and possibilities "from what you saw" what I saw "Yes" uh I saw a wound in the throat that appear to be a grossly um or hurried tracheotomy had uh the right side the upper borders were rather rough uh Jagged the rest of the incision was smooth the wound in the back in order to have exited the neck wound would have had to have gone straight in made approximately a 20° angle upward and to have exited there I can't really say it's possible it's possible that this wound was here and and cost uh the back of wound in the back of the head but we don't know because there was any dissection in that area the throat wound was never examined uh now as the doctor here would understand that if if you possibly had a wound that was through and through like that, there would be a path that you would expect and that is the description given in in the passage of the single bullet theory uh they supported it with ecosis bruising and in the strap muscles in this area which on some of the photographs you can you can actually see a little of it but that in my opinion could also have been done when the head was snapped back the only way to know for sure would have been to dissect that out thank you audience q: "Dr Humes described in his Warren commission testimony ("speaking to the mic please") Dr Humes described an elliptical entrance wound in kennedy's lower neck 4x7 m.m. it's in his testimony and I can find it on the Mary ferell website for anybody who wants to look for it. 4 by 7 milimeters in the quarter of the neck here. Is it possible that the president might have actually had two wounds to the back and and one was obscured by some kind of technique?" In the last three years when I agreed to write this book, I've read that but I also I've read all of the testimony of the three Physicians to actually to the warant commission, the Clark commission, house select committee, the Jama article and the Record Review Board in that the wounds have changed and I don't think this was a intentional thing I think that over the period of time, as Dr Humes once said I think he he was talking to the record review boardm, how do you expect me to remember this without my notes? um or something similar to that well I you know I did all of this review for one simple reason. In writing the book I was trying to collect/elaborate the memories that I had to actually clarify some of the gray Memories the partial memories and things that had some of the contradictions between earlier members and later members or instance I'm still not clear about the casket entrance is other than the fact is the casket that the body came in, I don't specifically remember the time that I saw the the other casket that was pushed up against the, coal box. after talking to the honor guard _ uh Humes and Tim Chee I became uh convinced that the casket that was pushed up against the coal box was actually the Dallas casket that they brought in. Looking at the Times uh that are published as the when the honor guard brought the Dallas casket in. And related to when the body was received: that time frame, as I explained earlier, is not the fact that I looked at a clock or I say, it was something that I had to have a time, a starting time or a timeline for the book itself. I chose and believe Dennis, because there's a collaboration for that."8

SECTIONS- At 6:30 he talks about his interview with the HSCA. At 26:51 he talks about what he saw at the autopsy. At 30:23 he talks about an incision and prior surgery on the head. At 37:32 he talks about the headwounds and the direction of the shots. At 41:50 he talks about the doctors who wrote the official autopsy report. At 43:48 he talks about who could possibly be behind the conspiracy. At 51:30 they are in Dealey Plaza discussing where the shots came from. AUTO TRANSCRIPT- 0:00 The wound bills in the back was not a fatal one. I did help John Kennedy's brain. Yes 0:06 Well, I assume it was john, f kennedy's brain When the body first came in and you sod did you notice anything out of the ordinary 0:14 There's a portion of the brain here that was missing. There was an incision in the scalp. Why would there be an incision? 0:21 That's a good question Throat one probably would have come from over the bridge probably right right off of the railroad 0:32 What's your opinion on Lyndon Johnson Who was it two people that benefited the most him in 0:48 Soloq if the topic of JFK assassination intrigues you you're gonna love today's interview Here's why obviously I've had other people on value tenman before with Clint Hill who was a former Secret Service agent 0:59 He was the first agent that jumped on the car when John F Kennedy was shot We've also had Abraham Bowden who was the first African American Secret Service agent. But today we go complete different angle 1:10 Today I wanted to sit down with somebody. This is very rare because it's been 55 years since the event the assassination, November 22nd 1:19 1963 when the autopsy happened there were four people in the room. Who did the autopsy 1:25 He is one of them and during the autopsy three people held the brain. This is what we have the brain here 1:32 He held the brain. He was one of them and he saw some stuff That's gonna surprise you and we're time as somebody that witnessed 1:39 What he saw in the brain that's different than maybe what you've read about and so we're gonna take a deep deep dive today on 1:45 What happened from the moment the body was announced dead to the delivery to Air Force One From there to protest that the casket go with Jackie did it go with somebody else? What happened there? 1:56 All I can tell you is I'm gonna ask one question during this interview that I'm so curious with the answer and we're gonna see what Jim Jenkins gonna tell us today in this interview with that being said, 2:06 Jim thank you so much for coming down and being willing to open up and talk about this topic with us Thank you for inviting your document it all over the place 2:14 If you go read any the you know, the autopsies any of the reports, whether it's the Warren Commission Whatever the reports you read your document or there are somebody that was a part of it 2:23 But you've not wanted to come out and talk a lot about it Now obviously William a friend of yours who decided to write a book with you 2:30 Kind of maybe persuaded you to say this is a story. We need to go tell are you willing to do it? But first I want to thank you secondly 2:38 Is that want to kind of a get some thoughts from you on? What caused you not want to talk about it all this year all these years and why now, are you a little bit more? 2:48 I have to answer The people who asked me and it's like, you know If I had told you when I was in graduate school that I did the autopsy 2:57 you know JFK, would you ever believe me and That's kind of the way that I look at it 3:03 It was a part of it the fact that you didn't think people would believe you If you told them that because if we were friends, let's just say I'm your friend and I'm your best man at your wedding 3:11 well You're my best man at my wedding and you told me something like that like oh my gosh, Jim That's crazy to really tell me about it. I'd want to know more as a friend on what you did 3:18 You seem like a private guy. He seemed like a simple man You don't seem like a you know, he seemed like you just wanted you've been married since August of 63 3:26 Was there also part of it? We just didn't want people to have a certain level of intrusion on your personal life 3:31 I think a lot of it was that. Okay. There's a lot of Memories that I have in that book that are specific but there are other things in the book that I remember 3:42 That I've tried to you know, try to tie in some of the events when I first began this book 3:47 I was going to read and and I have all kinds of books have a bookcase 3:53 the books that people have sent me over the years I Haven't read them. I'm from Iran. So it's born in Iran. I saw the war I saw people dying 4:02 I saw things that happened that maybe you don't necessarily want to experience I saw something weird scenes in my left with ten thousand men 4:09 Flagellating their backs on the streets and there's a streak of blood I mean, I was eight years old and I saw that that's not something I want to see again, right? 4:17 Was this one of those things where you said man? This was so traumatic on me that I don't ever want to revisit it or was it the fact that you were just doing your job you have a lack of 4:27 Interest on the topic, like honestly, you know, it just so happened. I accidentally was chosen to be a part of this 4:33 I didn't choose to be a part of this. I was just doing my job. Which one would you say was more? I think the latter. Okay god, I this is not a 4:41 You know It's not a highlight of my life. It hasn't affected my life 4:46 at all, but I think that's because I Really you're not Participated in it. What's the reasoning though? 4:53 Paul O'Connor was the other core woman right by the way Just to say when you say the other core mean the other core man who was part of the RIT 5:00 They were too. I was only two of us Pauline George's You know being involved and that type of thing I had other goals in my life most of the participation that I have done 5:12 Was at the encouragement of Paul Paul would call me and say well, you know This individual once wants to interview you I would be hissing about and he said well if hall would tell me well 5:23 He's a good guy, but it was it was a reluctance somewhat hard, you know I didn't want to get involved in all of what was going on 5:30 is this after the two gentlemen who were kind of hostile to you with the HSC a Committee that they interviewed you even after that you were open to it or after he like, I'm not doing any interviews 5:39 Well, the interview was interesting. I was in graduate school at that time I was in my office and I got a call from a lady and she told me that these two individuals 5:49 Kelly and Purdy were going to show up at my house on such-and-such state is such a such time and 5:56 They were going to talk to me About my participation and in the autopsy. I said no you're not I 6:04 Said you're not going to come to my house. I don't know you you're strangers So then she told me that this was a congress mandated 6:12 Commission and that I Was compelled to do this or they would subpoena me at that time. I was at Jackson, Mississippi and in the medical school there and 6:23 so I went to my local congressman one of his aides 6:29 Checked to make sure that this was legitimate and he suggested that I meet in his office 6:35 So I met Purdy and Kelly in his office. It wasn't an amiable type 6:41 Situation they had told me that that Ferdie and Kelly were actually lawyers for the House Select Committee 6:46 Anyway, they were going to come in to take a deposition Well when? the secretary 6:52 for a congressman checks their credentials we found out that 6:58 Indeed Purdy was an attorney. The Kelly was an FBI agent. What were they trying to get from you though? 7:04 I mean What did they would they conspiracy a conspiratorial? Did trying to they basically were looking for confirmation of the Warren Commission findings 7:13 They wanted me to firm that the magic bullet was yeah yeah, and in a single Bullet theory was correct and 7:22 they never really asked me, you know, basically what I did what I saw or 7:30 what I participated in and every time I would 7:36 they were they were always saying well that King possibly happened because of this this and this they say well, you know 7:42 I don't know another witnesses said this there are there was only the doctors and 7:49 Paul So I knew that you know what they were saying came from 7:56 from one of those individuals and this one you knew that in a moment based on the question because see I 8:03 Until Paul called me in and talked to me about this interview. They were are this deposition? 8:10 I Really never discussed the autopsy with Paul and so wait a minute 8:15 So after the autopsy you and Paul didn't have a debrief. You guys didn't talk about it and nothing ever. I don't know 8:20 No, because we were given orders you know, we were given orders by the Secretary of the Navy and 8:28 also by Department of Defense not to 8:33 discuss him So so the only reason you were open to the House Committee coming to you is because it's coming from Congress 8:39 Well that it wasn't Plus. That was the first time they rescinded the orders 8:44 Got it We they sent us letters for sending Miller's when they interviewed. You did. Did you get a feeling that they were for? 8:52 What the Warren Commission came out and they results that's what they said Oh, were they against it to try to get? 8:59 conspiracy were they kind of trying to get the check mark from you to say that he also agrees that what they said in the Warren Commission is accurate. I said I believe that's I mean that was my my feeling did you watch JFK movies? 9:09 Did you watch the you know, did you watch anything so you do know till today? You don't you don't watch or follow any of this. You've never been to the Dealey Plaza before no for 55 years. You have fully 9:21 Disconnected that part of your life to not have to be tied to it. I was actually surprised about 9:29 No interest that people had in this after the 50 years 9:35 We were surprised by them. Oh, yes. Why would you be surprised by its a president that was assassinated was well 9:41 I mean the assassination and to me in such an enigma and it's never had a legal conclusion 9:48 The conclusion has always been political. Would you want to see a legal conclude? Yes. I'd like to see usually participate in a legal 9:55 Yes Oh So you would be yeah So you so it's not the fact that you're just trying to set it aside and not do anything with it 10:03 So you would be you would like to see like you know what I think was 1995 when they came out with the AR RB 10:10 When they came out and they wanted to reinvestigate and find out what's going on and they went through certain things 10:15 You would want to see somebody else open it up again to go through an investigation to find out what happened a legal investigation 10:22 I know not political the investigation but everything even even the 10:28 Record Review Board, which is what you're speaking of It had restrictions when the Clark Commission was there all of the people appointed to the Commission 10:39 Had ties to the government. They had obligations to the government The pathologist's that reviewed the case and so forth 10:47 Are the doctors? I'm not sure although more pathologists but they had ties to doctors they had grants they were 10:57 participating in federal projects and that type of stuff and the one step probably would have been 11:05 more objective Certainly people like dr. Sarawak after the House Select 11:12 They were they were kind of excluded they were all pushed away. So there's never in my in my mind in my opinion 11:19 There's never been a real Objective committee or anything that's delved into this. Why do you think 11:27 why is it because if we found that we would all be well, I think that we 11:33 that that gets into Some things and and I'm only judging and I can only judge by the autopsy in and there 11:43 more people out there that know more about anything outside that more than I do, but I 11:49 It just doesn't make sense That what we saw at the morgue what we did it to more and what I participate in 11:58 Like the brain, you know, there were two FBI agents that said there was no brain. Paul said there was no brain 12:07 But yet Dr. Humes took a brain out of the cranium handed it to dr. Boswell and dr. Boswell and I went over and 12:15 I Knelt down and he gave me to the brain. I turned it upside down put it in the sling you did 12:22 I did help John Kennedy's brain. Yes. Well, I Assume it was john. F kennedy's brother. That's one other part, right? So right and 12:31 What you know is the book describes and in that I don't know if you I've been asked many times 12:38 Is it was it? John f kennedy's brain? do you think it was I haven't I really don't have any any way of knowing and neither does anyone else unless 12:49 Somebody who? Who really participated in in? You know 12:56 covering up some parts of the assassination can come forth and say now I'm also personal mistake in that since 13:05 There's so much stuff that's come out that if I relate it back to what I saw and so forth 13:12 There's always a question about it It sounds like you believe it's important for us to know the truth on what happened 13:17 But you also believe that if it's a government investigation being done Whoever's involved on the inside if it's only the government controlling and not on the other side 13:26 We're only gonna get the answer from somebody's on the inside. Well, for instance, I've worked with a friend of mine 13:33 who's a neurologist I've tried to be allowed to go into the archives and review the 13:41 photographs and any evidence that they have there I've been denied but yet he he was allowed in and 13:51 To see the x-rays and so forth now Those x-rays I fade-in. I actually helped 14:00 position of the body and so forth and when the first set of x-rays that we did I remember the first photographs went ahead was first unwrapped 14:08 They took photographs all during the autopsy, and I was busy so I really wasn't paying much attention to that 14:14 But there's a photographs from the Fox photographs 14:20 They're strange But let me ask you this because you said you didn't have interest but why were you asking to money to get the photographs? 14:27 it was there a moment where you kind of felt obligated to want to find out again some answers because well 14:32 It sounds like there's a little bit of conflicted The willingness the desire and also at the same time wanted to stay away three years ago 14:39 I committed to this to writing this book and All of this has occurred within that time frame. So you asked for the photographs on the last three years 14:48 Oh, yeah, so your desire to want to go deeper on this is the last three years well, I have talked to you like said the friend of mine the neurologist and 14:58 He and I have discussed what he saw in the archives and what I remember seeing 15:04 Or what? I actually participated in and remember seeing we've come to some conclusions, but not really 15:10 things that I would consider to be emphatically true Okay 15:15 As far as participating in this three years ago when I when I finally agreed to do this if William wood 15:22 would furnish because I I'm basically finding in medicine and science and I'm not a 15:29 Journalist or a writer and he agreed to help with you. Then his first suggestion was that I need to start reading 15:38 the material I started a couple of books, but then I began to realize that if I read all of this material then I 15:49 May have a little brain melt, you know, and it might come in because you know 50-year old memories 15:58 are difficult enough to begin with so I stopped doing that and 16:03 Then I began to talk to the people that I knew we're at Bethesda not necessarily in the morgue 16:09 We're at Bethesda. And then I I was fortunate enough to be able to talk to 16:16 the honor guard people gentleman named Dennis David who was in charge of a 16:22 Detail that actually he was an e6 who became an officer later on. I'm you sir for we love and yours, I think right 16:28 Yeah, what did he tell you when you spoke to him? Well, he he and I talked about the 16:33 Unloading of the body from from the black hearse Dennis gave me more of a time frame than anything else because I was in the morgue actually from about 3:30 in the afternoon 16:42 To about 8 9 o'clock the next morning You knew the body was coming. We were told about he was coming. Yes. Would you mind us going through the 16:53 Timeline of what happened from the moment they found out he's dead 16:59 To the moments because that's where that's where the challenges with this story. Right? I mean you write autopsies 17:04 I've been challenged for me when I look at it. I'm a numbers guy So first they find out he's dead boom checkmark, then they say let's put his body 17:13 They wrap him up in a nice. They put him in a really nice casket. They take him to Air Force One. That's number two 17:19 Lyndon Johnson's waiting there rather than going back to DC to have the body being delivered to the plane 17:25 Which is kind of a little bit wild for that gets to Air Force One then they fly back to Bethesda 17:31 DC they land They take that nice casket and they put it in the automobile that Jackie Kennedy is writing you to go to 17:40 Where you're at the morgue they arrived actually at 7:30 But the body doesn't come in to 717 and the body doesn't come in till 8:00 and the challenge that I'm seeing 17:49 There is another automobile delivers cascade that's used for Vietnam veterans back in the days just to gb type of casket that 17:59 apparently they took John F Kennedy and they put him in a body bag and they put him there and that was Brought to you guys at around 6:00 at 6:30. There's an hour and a half before 8 o'clock. So 18:10 That's the part. That's completely cure see and again - I really don't have 18:16 Any insight into that either but reports are at the boys young report. And yeah All of that him and Dennis David's timing and seeing this I had to have a timeline for this 18:28 As I was writing it I had no personal timeline because you know all I saw 18:34 Was the body being brought in in? What I consider to be a shipping casket that 18:41 Was striking in the fact is that it was the president's body in that in that such a ordinarily you saw that yes 18:49 Yes, you saw the shipping cast. Yes, I did and that's not typical protocol to put a president under shipping casket 18:56 I wouldn't think so you witnessed at yours. Yes. I saw checkmark in that time. Well, you saw that part 19:01 Yeah, the casket came in and it was brought in by by people they were in 19:09 Business suits mmm, and they may have been a couple of military officers with it, but they were brought it was brought in and it was 19:19 brought Into the morgue proper sat down on the floor Paul 19:26 Helped them take the body out and they put the body on the table in front of me now 19:31 I've you I'm used to Dennis Davis timeline and I use it because 19:37 sergeant Morgan's action report stated 635 several years ago. We talked to an individual his name and was well, he was dr. J 19:48 Scott I believe and he's told us that he was the officer of the day for the Vitesse a hospital during the conversation was with william law William asked him what time the 20:00 Body came in and he immediately said 6:30. So I took sergeant Boren and 20:07 Dr. Scott as collaboration for the time That Dennis quoted and then I used that time as a lie as a timeline for the autopsy 20:19 at that point in time I had memories but I I wasn't quite sure of sequencing of them and then over the three years that I've been 20:31 Writing this book. I basically just write sections and certain things and so forth and then each section would begin to support RS or 20:41 create questions about that particular memory the timeline that I use like I said as his Dennis's 20:48 That timeline gave me the ability to say the body was here at 6:30 20:53 When when the body was put on the table, everybody was asked to leave the body was still it was on the table 21:00 It's still wrapped in the sheets had anybody was separate and then dr. Boswell left the morgue for I 21:08 Don't know 15 20 minutes, maybe and I just assumed he was going back up to the laboratory to 21:14 You know talk to dr. Humes and while the bodies in front of you yeah, the body is in the morgue and the morgue what Paul and I this is what time I 21:24 assumed that had to be somewhere between 6:30 and 7:00 o'clock if I say it took him approximately 21:32 10 minutes to unload the body from the Hurst and bring it to do that because see 21:39 Dennis in his his group or his his crew. They did not bring him into the morgue 21:46 They brought it to the morgue door According to Dennis and then someone back. Yeah, and somebody took you from there 21:55 The morgue was set up where there was little any room that had Coll boxes where we put the bodies to me and then then it came into the morgue proper 22:05 So let me ask you from the moment. It was delivered to the morgue from the back Not the one with Jackie Kennedy had a right around 7:30 to 8:00 o'clock 22:12 I'm talking to one that arrived early from that moment word showed up in that cheap casket to the moment where you saw it 22:20 What was that time line? I would say probably no more than five minutes, okay, because you just was unloaded onto the to the dock and then 22:31 Brought in to them in through the double doors and then mork's mmediately to the left as soon as it came 22:37 through the door from the inner rooms and I saw the casket and That's when I that's what I remember. And the reason I remember that is the fact is that it was such a plain casket 22:49 You know and and that was that struck me as being the president's body would be in a in a 22:55 Transport casket now this entire time Jackie's thinking the bodies and ornate casket that she was driving in that that's the one that's being delivered 23:02 I really owe my part. That would be Conjecture or speculation got it. And 23:09 I'm not comfortable with that. We're getting into that Let's come back to when the body came in when the body first came in and you saw it 23:17 Did you notice anything out of the ordinary the body was? was wrapped 23:22 You know, the head was wrapped in sheets and the body was wrapped separately in sheets The body was taken out of the casket the morgue had two tables 23:29 We did the autopsy on the table where I was the casket the body was actually taken out between the back table and 23:39 He was on the floor and it was put on the table in front of me at that time 23:44 Dr. Boswell thanked everybody in nestin relief and everyone left the morgue then dr. Boswell left and 23:51 Paul and I were there we were told not to unwrap the body and not to let anyone in the morgue and about 23:59 15 minutes I say about 15 minutes later. Dr. Boswell came back and 24:05 We unwrapped about the body We left a head wrapped and then we spread a sheet over from the waist down and then dr 24:13 Boswell handed me the clipboard what we called a face sheet. It's a form where you put all scars 24:21 Wounds any surgical traumatic whatever. It's basically a 24:29 Superficial Description of everything then before you go to the body we were doing that as we were doing that 24:35 I was writing down. What dr. Boswell was Just telling me it's it was a little unusual to be doing it that way 24:43 it was Jesus the other way around while we were doing that just Almost when we were finished. Dr. Humes came in and he had a 24:53 He was followed by I believe three or four military officers they were 25:00 They were flag. Great. In other words. They were at rules are our general got it. The officers went into the gallery. Dr 25:07 Humes came to the table. I'm not exactly sure when dr. Fink came in 25:12 He was there when Humes unwrapped ahead. That's kind of con 25:18 Kindig turi to what he says. I mean we just reported to 25:24 his commanding officer, which he said he didn't come in until The brain the heart and the lungs were out of the body when in dr 25:33 Humes he unwrapped the head he and and dr. Fink examined the head and that in front of you 25:41 Oh, yeah Oh, well, I'm saying the shoulder I'm standing it's the right shoulder of the president looking down like that 25:47 And at this point how many autopsies have you done yourself up to this point? and how many brains have you seen a lot of no we 25:56 When I started I you know, it's Marian August. We went immediately. It's Bethesda 26:02 I started doing and my duty I was a student there. I had classes and so forth, but 26:08 Every fourth night I had duty and we would do Two maybe three autopsies a night. So I really don't know how many I had done. So you've seen a number of different 26:18 Yeah, I wound it brains. You've seen a different scenarios most of the things that we did it at 26:25 Bethesda were actually patients from the hospital I remember only probably one other trauma that I remember is that a sailor had night out and hit a 26:37 concrete barrier most of the others were People who had died from that we had drownings from Annapolis 26:45 Had you seen any other shooting like had you done an autopsy where there was a I know I had not got it 26:51 No, so while you're looking at Fink and Humes doing what they're doing What would what did you notice did you see anything different? 26:57 You know the description of the head wound that is in the autopsy report hesitate to use the word spin 27:03 But I think it's a spin on what what we really saw. Could you elaborate please? 27:09 well, it's actually the size of the wound 27:15 Location of the wound, I believe that the measurement that's in the autopsy report 27:20 Actually is the measurement of the wound Not of the opening where the bone and scalp was missing but actually was a measurement of the total 27:32 Wound shown after the scout was reflected In other words the whole right side of the head was malleable. You could actually just move it around with your hands 27:42 The skull was fractured in Multiple areas from would you mind if we take out the brain? 27:49 Yeah, you kind of showed to us what you would you mean by the little bit more visual. Is that okay with you? 27:54 Okay. Now the description of the wound is not going to be this is not going to give you a description of the of the 28:02 Wound itself. It's only going to be the skull the skull is going to give you a description of the one this will 28:08 Will give you an idea of what I saw the brain looked like as opposed to the extensive damage 28:16 that was in the autopsy report and 28:21 This brain the brain that that I had they 28:27 this should be about The damage for this brain was 28:34 basically in this area here That's what you saw. Yeah. Okay, there's a portion of the brain here 28:42 That that was missing fully missing. Yeah, okay But it was it was less than a third of the total brain 28:51 Less than a third of the total brain or less than a third of half the brain no the right side No, it's less than a third of the total brain. Okay was approximately the area right here. Got it 29:02 Okay, that's significant because in the autopsy report They say that over 29:08 Half of the total brain was was missing the other thing in the autopsy report 29:14 they say that there was a deep laceration that ran this way and 29:19 Was internally down into the ventricles here 29:25 and then also in the ear had a description of 29:31 It penetrating into this area here now the wound that I saw this is the occipital area here in the parietal area here and in the temporal area in 29:43 here the wound was here about approximately where my finger is and 29:48 It's extending down here. It was about three and a half inches long 29:55 Just being the length about two inches wide that was where the missing bone was and the missing tissue was 30:03 Okay, it wasn't it wasn't exactly a square or round thing the top of it of the wound was kind of domed 30:10 and it came down and kind of had a little Te'o type thing that came back down into here and then it kind of came back up 30:22 In this area now the strange thing about it was at this top of the wound here 30:28 There was an incision in the scallop they went Approximately to the coronal suture here. I 30:35 went a little bit past here an Incision an incision. Well, I saw right it was actually see. Why would there be an 30:44 That's a good question the scalp Had, you know remember all of this all this this portion in this area is fractured 30:54 Okay to the sagittal suture, which is this suture All of this area was fractured now, but it was it wasn't gone 31:02 it was he was still being kept intact by the by the scalp scalp had rents and tears in it and 31:09 along this area It seemed like that some of those tears in the scalp had been 31:20 surgically connected the little connections to follow fracture line in here 31:27 Okay, and that extended to about here? Okay, you know that was the same when when dr 31:35 Humes took the Wrappings off of the head. There was a secondary wrapping on it that I 31:41 you know, I think was the towel but the scalp and And the whole thing 31:47 this was all all matted hair and Missing scalloped torn scalp fatty tissue from underneath the scalp which is all normal. Yeah, which is all normal 31:57 Okay, it had kind of stuck to that secondary layer. So as he was taking it off 32:03 This Eric kind of gaped open but as soon as we separated it from 32:08 from the towel It went back together now 32:14 that significant rule and for the fact is that you could actually 32:20 If if you want you to do that you could actually lay this skull open you could actually take your hands and separate it 32:28 okay, so That would have given you access to the brain 32:34 Which means which Again speculations short as that fact is that that you would have had access? 32:44 You possibly had access to the rain before we received it in that in the morgue But where would they that is that's a question that I would force one on the drive. That's not enough time 32:56 Well, I don't know There's a lot of theories 33:02 There's a lot of probabilities last year. I have friends that were in school with me and and I visited one of their friends in DC and 33:13 Just out of curiosity william law and I we actually went to visit think Oh Franco Lennox it was given to 33:23 the military and Before World War one It was under 33:29 Walter Reed Walter Reed was responsible for it. They used it for 33:34 Convalescence for world one world war two patients and so forth So I wanted to check out that because there was an individual 33:42 Had speculated and he said that surgery was done a clandestine service surgery was done 33:48 At this Glen Cove annex, and so we decided to see if it was possible 33:53 we Drove to the complex Drove back to the back gate at Bethesda. He was eight minutes 34:02 GPS the funeral home that was involved in it was scholar's 34:09 we actually time to distance from Gaulish funeral home to Bethesda, which again was about eight minutes now and 34:18 Recently, we found that there may have been another funeral home that was involved in it Humphreys 34:25 paw fries supposedly had the Contract with Bethesda Naval Hospital at that time 34:35 understand I My command was not in the Naval Hospital My command was the Naval Medical School there. There's also a possibility that the person 34:47 Tom Robinson who performed who actually prepared the body along with a couple of other people was not an employee of 34:55 Callers he was an employee of Humphreys We haven't been able to confirm that I've tried in the last three years to get in touch with Tom Robinson 35:07 Not been able to do that. What will be the difference if that was a case? Well, I read an interview of Tom with a Swedish our Danish 35:20 Researcher Tom's description of the wounds and so forth are similar to 35:26 mine and almost Opposite of what's in you know? 35:31 what what's being told in public and so forth the exaggeration of the wounds when we receive the body there were other 35:38 other things that were unusual the Tracheotomy that we were told it was a tracheotomy in the throat very unusual even for an emergency trach 35:48 Why is that? Well, first of all I never really seen a trach that was done horizontally and I've never seen a trach 35:55 That was that large it also had some ragged edges. Dr Perry said that he actually had done that trach over a wound his description of the 36:06 trach wound that he did was Was what you normally would would expect 36:14 but if you did a trach there that was that Wide you wouldn't you would probably never do it 36:21 Because in that area you you there would be a danger of damaging the thyroid so you wouldn't 36:27 It wouldn't be even as an emergency trach. You wouldn't want to create more damage 36:32 And especially in this situation when you wouldn't want to damage one of the primary 36:39 life supporting organs that and 36:45 The wound in the head the only other wound that I actually saw 36:51 was the one in the back and It was it was in the upper back 36:57 at the upper border of the scapula but this is that's the wound that that was on the 37:05 Only head itself the wound wasn't obvious as to the extent of it and the margins and so forth until the scalp 37:14 was actually reflected back from him and When the Scout was reflected back 37:20 Some of the bone that was here to scalp had fallen off of it made it look larger than it really was 37:26 And I think that's the measurement that send the official autopsy 37:32 So when you saw the brain cuz you know, the conspiracy is it's not just one bullet the magic bullet 37:37 Whatever you want to call it and there's shots from the front not just from the back. It's not just Oswald 37:43 And by the way, no one's saying Oswald didn't shoot and he wasn't one of the shooters They're just saying that there may be somebody from the front as well that shot. There's six or seven shots 37:52 What's your thoughts on that? From what you saw if in fact Oswald did shoot from the depository the wound that was in the back? 38:01 That I saw Was not a fatal one the wound. I saw in the right temple and that couldn't have been Oswald. No 38:09 No, he couldn't it would have had to have come from from actually the right front 38:16 Look, I mean you're certain about that I'm yeah I saw the wound 38:22 Dr. Humes, and dr. Fink found the wound you examined this whole area of the back. Yes, sir 38:29 were there any other wounds except one at the base of the neck and One up in the spill. No sir that we're not about the 38:37 Head wound sir. There was only one it was the only one entrance wound in the head. Yes, sir 38:43 Now can you be absolutely certain that the wound you described as the entry wound was in fact that? 38:50 Yes, indeed we can so let me let me ask you this when you see everybody on TV 38:56 Every news everybody from TV Senate's from back at that moment when this happened you're there in the room 39:03 Every conversation go to dinner or lunch friend people Co-workers, how are you? Holding yourself back from saying they're lying. That's not the case. I guess it goes back to the same same credibility 39:16 You didn't think that would believe you've got anything right? How do I really don't want to be critical, but there are some really fine 39:25 Researchers out there a they've done a fantastic job and have dedicated 39:33 most of their life to them they don't readily accept the possibility that 39:39 that they could be incorrect everything that is new or 39:46 contradictory to their theories so forth is 39:53 Automatically Rejected I Would be I you know, I would be more than willing to 40:01 participate in a Objective legal inquiry where where you would be able to you know 40:10 Someone who's objected not and I'm not talking about a group of physicians 40:15 They were to review the evidence and that type of session I'm talking about a true 40:21 law-enforcement objective investigation Into a murder. Why do you think it hasn't been done yet, though? 40:29 Well, I'm not sure that it can be done. Why do you say that? I think the assassination of Oswald eliminated that possibility 40:38 and I think it was they wanted to keep And this is all my opinion. Okay. I'm not I have no inside information anything 40:47 I think they wanted they wanted to keep it within the realm of control 40:53 of the government, you know how sometimes when me and my wife go and let's just say a 41:00 Name comes up. That's her father's name and her father passed I say are you thinking about your dad or you know how you go some places and 41:08 For me something comes up about Iran and home Amy and the Shah. She asks. Hey, are you okay? 41:14 I'm sure JFK came up many times was there ever like babe. What do you think about this Jim you okay? 41:20 Was it all buried those moments or she just respected and says look if you don't want me to go there I'm not gonna go there. Well, actually 41:27 Since I started writing a book She's become more involved It's important to know you've been you guys been married for 55 years and three months 41:35 You got married August of 63, which was three years before the assassination So you're selling I see it was actually August before this 41:44 The August before tea sends annexed. Yeah, that's what I was referencing always. So 55 years. You've been married 55 years 41:49 You've been married, this is maybe going a little bit deeper Myself, and I'm just curious to know 41:56 What do you think about it? What what is your opinion on Humes yourself? Do you have an opinion on Humes? 42:02 I think in Humes and Boswell and Fink they were good people 42:08 but one of the things that that everybody seems to 42:13 To negate is the fact is that they were military They were in knew in the Navy. They were all career officers. They were getting close to their retirement 42:24 My feeling is that they were given a scenario and they were 42:29 Directed to actually support that through all the autopsy findings now. I 42:35 Don't think that set well with dr. Humes He really wasn't that kind of an individual, but he had no alternative 42:44 and that's one of the reasons I say that the autopsy a lot of the autopsy report is a spin on what we actually 42:52 saw the measurement wounds 13 42:57 Centimeters that's almost 5 inches. That's It's almost inch and a half over what? 43:04 What I actually saw now as a Cavett Cavett to that 43:09 I would like to say, you know, I didn't measure them but he did 43:14 Well, well what I think he used and then dr Boswell actually said and his his notes that it was 19 centimeters 43:24 and I think what they did was that the measurement was taken after the 43:29 scalp was retracted some of the bone it separates from the scalp and have fallen in so it had increased the size of the 43:37 Wound that was actually missing where just seemed to be bone was missing. Would they being ordered? 43:43 Oh, yes, I'm sure All the way from the top. Oh, I'm sure so then send. What's your opinion on Lyndon Johnson? 43:55 Not very well I figured that was the entire question I wanted to ask you today I was in San Antonio 44:02 and I lived in San Antonio and Lyndon Johnson and San Antonio are in, Texas 44:10 was I Guess you could say a good old boy Politically he was supported he's not someone that you even want to invite to dinner. You know, it's amazing 44:19 I'm reading a book right now. I just finished a good friend of mine wrote Robert Greene and he talks about 44:25 Lyndon Johnson, heavily. Yeah, and he talks about how Ambitious he was to the point where he was willing to 44:32 Do anything at all cost to make it to the next level in his career? And how coming up for him he would go against Hubert Humphrey, you know the Triple H Ebert Humphrey and 44:43 then he had this one mentor of his Russell that kind of calmed them down and he tried to keep his motivation in it and 44:49 When you read about him There's a little bit of animosity as towards JFK and amount of la viga because a lot of a lot of animosity because he was never a great orator and 44:57 He was never loved like JFK was loved and he was way more ambitious It was way more 45:03 important for him to become a president in JFK because in JFK's family his older brother was supposed to be President Joseph's right and you 45:10 know this because if you read history the older brother was a war he died as a pilot and his father was 45:16 Depressed for several years. And so when you read this the part as I get deeper into this a lot of things make sense 45:22 You know when when you when you tie it up a lot of things make sense Do you think a part of the investigation that is to be done? 45:30 Do you think there needs to be him involved in it as well or no? You're thinking more specifically from researchers because I think a part of this is also to see two things one 45:41 You know the six soldiers that saw the casket coming in early, right? You knew there was a couple a force a couple a fives and an e6 that later on became a lieutenant 45:50 So either they're lying, which why would they they're not be monetized? Why would they say that they didn't see it? And then the other side is? 45:58 You know, why wouldn't they tell the truth? And then the opposite side is what is the motive behind wanting to take the front bullet wounds out? 46:07 Would be the motive so would you say Lyndon Johnson would need to be a little bit investigated to see there was a motivation there a small I 46:13 I would say I Guess I can answer that with a question 46:18 Who were the two people? In the government it's a time 46:25 That benefited the most Him and Hoover 46:32 That's right, is that the right answer yeah, I Just got the chills all over my body 46:38 Yeah It goes deeper than that by the way, because you have to go like five steps prior to him and Hoover on why Hoover so the story goes back of 46:48 Kennedy's running I'm gonna go a whole different angle here and and and I'm curious to know where you're gonna say here. Kennedy's running 46:56 And Kennedy's having a hard time with Illinois, and there's a mayor Cook County 47:02 Who helps with the seven to eight thousand people? This is some conspiracy who were dead, but he helps and that mayor 47:10 Who one? One because if Chicago mob boss apparently helped him out and the mayor's son who has became a late mayor later on they asked them 47:19 Was a mob ever involved in helping you? So then you go to Chicago right and Chicago you go to 47:26 The mob that's trying to get JFK to become president after JFK's up winning He didn't need Illinois, but he ended up winning illinois's. Well he won 47:33 Single-handedly over Nixon, okay So then that happens and when that happened the mob always had Hoover 47:42 Not say that there's the mob There's no such thing as the mob and Hoover never said it Jed guven ever said it 47:48 but because the mob had some insider information on Hoover that Hoover didn't want to become public and I think you may know what some 47:54 Of those things may be at that time. It was a big deal. And so When this whole thing is taken place 48:00 Linden's extremely ambitious on what he wants to be fastest way to become a you know, they say the fastest way to become a millionaires to marry one and 48:09 The fastest way to become a president is to be a vice president who? Eliminates a president now again 48:15 This is all stuff that I read and I research and then you find out why he waited by the plane 48:21 Air Force One, you know why? Years later when Jackie did a recording that the tapes was earned they found and he looked at Jackie Kennedy's recording. Why did she say? 48:32 Lyndon was a very dangerous man. She always feared him because she always felt like he wanted to do something to to John 48:39 and so when you put all these pieces of puzzle together, and why when the 48:45 Commission came out. Is it the Warren Commission when it came out? Why would he say 75 years seal? 48:50 Why not 30 years because that's the typical number. Why would we do 75 year old enlisted would be dead? 48:56 So no one would be able to investigate these guys All these things are little bit too much for someone to say there's something here 49:03 we're dealing with you know, and you know even after the House Select Committee my 49:09 deposition and Paul's deposition was sealed again for another 50 years and 49:18 It was only released because of the record review board, there's so much involved in this and 49:26 one of the things that I've tried not to do is to speculate now at the end of the book I a 49:35 Little bit I do. Yeah, and and you know, I've had people say well, you know, and and 49:44 and I guess I have to defend I Guess I have to defend the doctors if you were looking at a retirement and you had a family 49:56 You'd spend all your life you know in one organization one company or something of that nature and 50:05 something came in threaten your retirement and your pension and 50:11 even Possibility of 50:16 Jail time and you were told well, you really don't have to lie about it, but you have to adjust it 50:23 What you know what you know to fit this yeah, well, you told that I was and I was just I mean I was too low on the 50:34 totem poles Howard Hughes Boswell and they may have been because a retirement so they had to make the right decisions for their families because 50:43 The 25-30 years is on the line. Sure I mean they were they were all I think they were thirty-year people and third year people. You know, what happens with them? 50:51 You know what? I wouldn't mind doing why don't you and I take a break and why don't we go to the Dealey Plaza and kind of see that and 50:58 Then come back and finish the interview if you don't mind because it's based on what we're talking about here I'd like to see what you think. The other angle would be if they was shot 51:06 Where would are we coming from? If you don't mind taking a break and going to the Dealey Plaza? 51:31 So that's the X right there So Jim if that's the eggs and the shot from Oswald came from there and you're looking at the brain 51:40 We would have to assume the other shot that you saw in the front would come from where if we're standing there probably 51:47 Right there somewhere around there because actually the shot was in the temple 51:52 Exited here. Temple hit the temple of God, right a little bit above and in front of the year right in the hairline 51:58 That's that's was the first And then it exited back here and that's why he kind of shook back and he won back 52:05 yeah, and say the thing about it, is that the wound that they Mentioned in the autopsy and so forth in the back of the head is missing 52:13 I never saw that you never saw that no I should have seen him because I handle the body for the x-ray actually placed 52:23 The film cassettes for Custer what is this - for your own level of curiosity being here. Does it do anything for you? Not really? 52:34 I I mean I always wanted to come down It's it's a lot smaller than I I see. Oh, yeah, that's right. It's a place now people all over the world 52:44 Come here to see the sex There's a throat wound probably with it come from right over the bridge 52:50 Probably right right off of the railroad Or it could have come from 52:56 Individuals see where those people are standing this group or the ones in the back. Yes 53:01 To where the guy is to begin? It could have come from there in one of the photographs in the book the neck wound 53:08 You can see in the right side of the neck one where there's a ragged area 53:13 top If you look closely you'll also see that there is a a 53:19 Ridge or tunnel under the skin that goes up with so what was that the are you saying? That's another bullet 53:25 I think that's probably the one that dr. Perry described I think it was removed because see the one in the back never penetrated the pleural cavity and 53:36 Humans could actually probe it with his little finger, but there was no room. There was no boy later 53:41 You said he went in what a an inch an inch and a half with his finger? Little finger with his middle with his pinkie was a little bit 53:49 yeah, huge that huge mean but he did it actually in never penetrated the 53:54 chest cavity AutoCAD apparently did make a bruise on the wrong because hummin on the 54:00 Backside of the middle lobe of the right long just to call the middle lobe 54:05 On the first load there was kind of a reddish spot there that we saw they moved it up to the top of the line 54:13 he also moves the wound in the back from the Area where it was to the neck wound and all of that was the support to single Bullet theory 54:22 So let me ask you. Can you put a number two how many? Bullets, you think there was shot or know just what you saw with the brain 54:29 You wouldn't be able to know that tell you when I left the mortgage Like I saw at least two wounds that I thought that you were one 54:37 I wasn't aware of the neck wound because we had been told it was a it was an emergency trach and believe it alone 54:44 got it, and That was those were there only two wounds that's all I never saw the supposedly entry wound in the back of the head and 54:53 In reality if there had been an entry wound They're where they located it would have been within the big wound in the back of the head where all the stuff was missing 55:02 it would have had to have been either on the margin of it or whatever and I Didn't see that and then the pictures of the face show. Honestly, I believe that was that was government in this information 55:13 It's inconceivable for me that that Fox would have had possession world 55:19 They've been so tight on everything else. Everything's been just totally Locked away in all of the real evidence that was given to Robert Kennedy, and apparently he disposed of it 55:30 Yeah, there's just too many questions. Well, so you're saying there's nothing really can happen for there to be an open investigation now, right? 55:37 I don't think that the government will allow it because they there's so much stuff that they still have sequestered 55:44 they won't release and what we were hoping Trump wouldn't be involved in all of this to the point and he was released it but 55:51 And he did he released a lot of it But the thing about it is it wasn't submitted so it wasn't significant stuff. It was not it 56:00 Had nothing to do really with the autopsy what's the biggest worry with it as though what is the worry and the concern that if 56:07 Comes out that it was an inside job It's going to show the rest of the world a level of instability, you know a level of unstable government internally 56:15 I don't think that that's the case, you know, when the founding fathers established the country. They didn't establish the House of Lords 56:24 Now we have a House of Lords, which is Congress, so I think it's it's a 56:31 see why I Cya, you mean Yeah, neither cosa, I believe that. Yeah, I believe it to 56:38 investigate a Attorney General or Assistant Attorney General, they subpoena me. He just ignores it 56:45 How is that possible without repercussions of course Johnson said it was because the people couldn't handle the right information 56:51 Are those what really happened? I think it's to go further, but that's again - that's my 56:59 That's my take on that Speculation of course and which you notice with him? He was loved around the world, you know 57:05 a lot of Countries around the world started museums on behalf of his name because of the level of admiration that for us 57:11 I think that's probably why there's such a high level of wanting to know exactly what happened. What was the motivation behind it? 57:17 well I think that he was one of the first people in a long series of presidents that actually was 57:25 Beginning to look at the people as people power of who's in charge. Where the Republican Democrat? 57:31 Yep army, or you yep? No, and that's that's all is I saw politics in this country as we go power 57:38 They buy them they buy it's easy to buy in nowadays It's a money game and you wonder you you go and see who can be bought and who can't be bought and you know 57:45 The voters sitting there saying I like this guy, but it's not as much as you like in the voter there's too much of that like you said corporations are coming in and are able to buy votes and 57:54 Whether they want to do something that has to do with regulation or making it difficult for their competitors to do something 58:00 They're not looking at the political side. They're looking at more regulations that's going to hurt competition Let me ask you did you ever did you spend a lot of time study in Oswald or not? 58:07 Really his background, you know him wanting to be a Russian citizen and all that stuff or no I really don't know, you know people ask you do you do I think he he killed Kennedy? Yeah 58:18 well That's actually not a climbing to stay off question Because if he's shot at Kennedy and he shot from behind Kennedy 58:25 Then what he did he was he was apparently responsible for the back room, which was hospital and would not have been available 58:31 You're certain of that that it wouldn't been fatal, you know And you saw that back wound? Yeah, what would have been worst case with that? 58:38 They would have done surgery and he would have recovered. Oh no, I they probably would have just 58:43 Removed the bullet and closed it I mean, it wasn't destructive in any sense that it hit a vital organ or it even broke a rib the whole 58:54 Information the whole report that are out there The autopsy report that's that point they don't make sense from a medical standpoint from an anatomical standpoint 59:04 They just don't make sense. It's almost like they've been Manipulated or spun? The real information is to lead someone to 59:13 Conclusion is not the truth. Is there anybody out there that is 59:19 Coming from the right place morals values character integrity that is 59:25 Extremely motivated to one investigate this and want to do something about is there someone you know That's out there wanted to get deeper in this topic or now if this is ever going to have a legal 59:34 solution and so forth it's going to have to come through the government and 59:39 Because they're the only one who can release the evidence what evidence is still there and see we still don't know, you know 59:47 I'm not allowed to see photographs that I was there when it that's amazing that amazes me I'm not allowed to see the x-rays that I took pardon 59:54 How is that even possible that amazes me or any of those guys the enlisted guys? Even Dennis or O'Connor or any of them still in contact with you. Are they still around? 1:00:05 Humes Boswell or any of them still around and that's what Lyndon wanted because he knew once everybody was gone 1:00:11 There's nothing that's gonna come back Trent Wow. That's right. And what year was the fifty years put on you? Oh, it was seventy-five 1:00:19 Seventy-five to 20 25 that's amazing. And by the way, they measured it they said you know is this 1:00:25 One of the things about Oswald is how long the distance was they said they brought 12 marksmen to test shooting it 1:00:33 While a target is movement 12 out of 12, they all hit the target. So it said it's not a target that 1:00:39 really needs somehow to be a You know sniper to be able to hit it it wasn't that difficult of a target to hit but also of himself is an interesting 1:00:46 Character and Ruby died as well two years later so he's not even around for some other to be investigate and say what do you connected to as a local nightclub owner or a 1:00:53 Restaurant owner. Well, you know my opinion if Oswald had lived they would have had 1:01:00 If the administration did reach out you to want to go deeper on this would there be an interest on on your line or no? 1:01:06 Sure, but I only have the information that I have. There's always an interest with this So maybe if the right person sees this message, they're able to reach out and billions of people 1:01:14 This is not millions billions that people would like to know what happened here There's too many unknowns that are not fully answered yet. And there's too many signs from credible sources that makes you question things 1:01:24 Well, I agree. Also, I'd like to know Who what where and why I don't think in my lifetime I'll ever know but it would be you know 1:01:33 It'll be something I really would like. Well, you never know You never know what happens that the part about you is from me on 1:01:39 Why I wanted to do this because bill contacted me says Pat, you know Let's try to see if we can do something with you and Jim 1:01:45 I'm in a business of reading people because that's what I do for a living I run a business I'm supposed to see who I'm doing business with and what I do for a living. There's nothing about you with a 1:01:54 motive to monetize and use this as a platform to make a multi-million dollar contract book any that you come across as somebody that you're just trying to get to the bottom of it and 1:02:05 Investigate it because there's some unknowns and 50-plus years later you've agreed to kind of talk about it a little bit more than before and so I 1:02:12 Don't I think there's something there the purpose of the book is to get the information out there, you know I guess it has to do with my own mortality 1:02:19 It's just absolutely unconscionable That what's being taught in schools 1:02:25 now It's not true, but it's accepted as part of history. Someone once said that history is written by the winner, and we definitely lost 1:02:33 Here the other one whoever controls the present controls the past some see whoever controls the present controls the future of a history 1:02:39 It says a lot Well, this was great to kind of see the perspective of something was to happen Which angle would have come from without being able to stand out there? 1:02:48 It would be Impossible, but I can I can tell you the angle from the wound in the back. It actually went down at about 1:02:58 30 45 degree Angles like oh like abyss. Yeah from the front. No, what's he like this one? 1:03:05 He got shot or was he straight with because he was he was going like this and then he got shaky He got shot first in the throat. That's what his hands came up, but he did was hand came up 1:03:17 He went down like this and then he went back like this and this 1:03:22 And you can see the tissue stuff And people say oh well half his brain was blown out. They don't understand that a brain 1:03:32 That's a very delicate type see once it's protected by them in energy even 1:03:39 in the skull there would have been a lot of Nicola fication a lot of liquid there they were 1:03:47 Cause of the pressure of the bullet as the bullet energy created personal opinion 1:03:53 And he fractured all of the sides and then we're excellent it blew the 1:04:00 loan out but as it passed through and created pressure 1:04:07 Seen demonstration completely shooting watermelon. Yes. Yes. We just have we just shot that's interesting 1:04:13 we were we were at a place called drive tanks two weeks ago and I was on a tank when you're shooting stuff up and 1:04:20 I was shooting at watermelons and a Few pumpkins and I shot the pumpkin and the front is just a hole but the back is a blast right and the gentleman comes 1:04:32 Up and he says the best things and says this the front this is the back this the front this tabac He says if you want to know exactly what this means it's what happened with JFK the same exact rhinology 1:04:43 So look if you're somebody who follows history, I'm sure you were fascinated by what we just saw here at the 1:04:48 Dealey Plaza, I am myself as somebody who was in the military, but you know what I'd like to do if you don't mind 1:04:55 Jim is obviously we're at the end here and the book that you wrote would William Law at the cold-shoulder of history 1:05:01 why don't you take a Minute and tell us a little bit about what I'm going to get as a read if I read this book 1:05:06 I think you'll get a different perspective on the whole JFK assassination, these are my memories of what I actually participated in concerning the brain. Dr 1:05:17 Boswell and I did did the Body proper and what I observed from? Dr. Humes and and 1:05:26 Dr. Fink's examination of the head. We actually took three sets of x-rays I Actually helped Gerald Custer who was the x-ray tech placed the cassettes and moved the body and so forth for the first set of x-rays 1:05:40 He took him and when he came back, he brought an assistant with him I think it'll it'll give the reader some thought but it also is going to 1:05:52 Require the reader to make some judgments on its own. It's gonna make you go and say 1:05:57 Really? Let me go look it up. No way and let me go google it which I think it's great 1:06:02 But that's you saying that's a great thing Yeah, that's the purpose and I think that book does that if you're interested in that topic you your parents your kids anybody? 1:06:10 I'll go get the book gifted for somebody click on the link below to go buy the book and If you haven't watched the interview, I did with Clint Hill. It was an interview done about two years ago 1:06:21 So click on a link over here. Are we gonna put the link for the interviews while down here a Clint Hill? 1:06:26 I suggest you go watch that as well with that being said Jim. Thank you so much for coming out truly Thank you for your time and thanks 1:06:31 Thank you for your courage for wanting to open up and tell the story and as well as your service #Jim Jenkins #Patrick Bet David #JFK Assassination

#Doug Horne #JFK lies

Forensic Investigator Joseph Scott Morgan 06DEC2024 "November 22, 1963: John F. Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States, was shot and killed during a presidential motorcade in Dallas, Texas. The President is taken to Parkland Memorial Hospital. By law, Dallas County Coroner Dr. Earl Rose had jurisdiction over the case and should have performed the autopsy. However, against Dr. Earl Rose's protestations, the body of President Kennedy was wrapped in a sheet, placed in a casket with a broken handle, and flown over 1,300 miles away to Washington DC, where 2 naval doctors, who had never conducted a forensic autopsy performed the autopsy on John F. Kennedy. Join Joseph Scott Morgan and Dave Mack as they take a close look at the autopsy that was so bad, 60 years later questions are still being asked."

11/1/2024 from J. Keven Hofeling channel: "July 24, 1996 ARRB Research Memo entitled "Chain-of-Custody Discrepancy Re: Original Copy of President John F. Kennedy's Autopsy Protocol": https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/ar... ____________ Timestamped summary Doug Horne discusses the medical coverup and alterations of the JFK autopsy report, highlighting inconsistencies and manipulations in the narrative surrounding the assassination. 🔍00:00 Doug Horne reveals insights on the medical coverup and alterations related to the JFK assassination in his presentation based on his extensive research and published work. 🔍01:06 Dr. Boswell and Dr. Humes reviewed the first draft of the JFK autopsy report at Bethesda (the original Autopsy Report), which was deemed unacceptable by Captain Canada, suggesting it contained a controversial three-hit scenario. 🔥02:36 The autopsy report underwent multiple revisions, with the initial draft rejected due to conflicting accounts of the shots fired at President Kennedy and Governor Connelly, leading to a final version that changed the number of hits from three to two. Dr. Humes then burned the original Autopsy Report (along with his original autopsy notes). 🕵️‍♂️03:58 The first signed version of the JFK autopsy report (the second version of the Autopsy Report), which was never returned to the government by the Kennedy family, contains crucial details that have been pieced together by Doug Horne. 🩸04:40 Dr. Humes suggested that JFK's throat wound resulted from a fragment of the headshot, attempting to reconcile conflicting accounts from Dallas doctors during the autopsy. 📰06:16 Two December 1963 newspaper stories suggested that JFK's throat wound was caused by a headshot fragment, indicating a manipulated narrative surrounding the autopsy report. 🕵️‍♂️07:21 The missing signed autopsy report likely didn't survive due to the government's focus on the Zapruder film, which revealed critical details about JFK's injuries. 🔍08:19 The JFK autopsy report has multiple conflicting versions, with the latest (the third version of the Autopsy Report) claiming a bullet transited the body in an implausible manner (the Single Bullet Theory), undermining its credibility. ____________ Excerpt from Sep 18, 2014 'Altered History: Exposing Deceit and Deception in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence' In this 5-part video, Douglas P. Horne, who served on the staff of the Assassination Records Review Board and who is the author of the five-volume book Inside the Assassination Records Review Board: The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK, discusses deceit and deception in the official autopsy of John F. Kennedy. from Altered HIstory: Exposing Deceit & ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrVyOYsx81k Doug Horne reveals insights on the medical coverup and alterations related to the JFK assassination in his presentation based on his extensive research and published work. 0:00 'my name is Doug horn and I worked for 0:02 the assassination records review board 0:04 from August of 1995 through September of 0:07 1998 I was hired in 0:09 1995 as a senior analyst on the military 0:12 records team and was promoted halfway 0:15 through my three-year tour to become the 0:17 chief analyst for military 0:20 records more than one decade after the 0:22 review board shut down I published my 0:25 five volume book inside the 0:26 assassination records Review Board in 0:29 November of 0:32 2009 in this book I present my 0:34 conclusions about the medical coverup 0:36 surrounding the JFK 0:38 assassination about the alteration of 0:41 the zuder film and about the reasons why 0:44 President Kennedy was killed I want to 0:47 thank the future of Freedom foundation 0:49 for allowing me to present the basic 0:52 conclusions of my book in this 0:55 presentation the name of my presentation 0:58 is altered history 1:00 exposing deceit and deception in the JFK 1:02 assassination medical evidence well we 1:05 know from the review board's deposition Dr. Boswell and Dr. Humes reviewed the first draft of the JFK autopsy report at Bethesda (the original Autopsy Report), which was deemed unacceptable by Captain Canada, suggesting it contained a controversial three-hit scenario. 1:07 of Dr Boswell that Boswell and Humes met 1:10 at Bethesda Saturday late in the morning 1:13 and reviewed the first draft of the 1:14 autopsy report Dr Fink was not there I 1:18 think we know why he caused too much 1:20 trouble at the autopsy per John Stringer 1:23 that first draft however uh was reviewed 1:25 by Captain Canada this is the same 1:27 Captain Canada I've discussed earlier 1:30 uh he reviewed the first draft and 1:32 undoubtedly others did as well I'm sure 1:35 Admiral Galloway looked at it he was the 1:38 head of the entire complex probably 1:39 Captain Stover as well but in the letter 1:42 of transmitt for the existing autopsy 1:44 report it states that Captain Canada 1:46 reviewed the first draft someone 1:49 Saturday found that draft 1:52 unacceptable now it's always been my 1:55 assumption and it still is today that 1:57 the content of the first draft 2:00 was the three hit 2:02 scenario that Richard lipy recalls 2:04 hearing he recalls hearing it obviously 2:07 shortly after the FBI agents left the 2:09 morg and after the phone call with Dr 2:11 Humes he recalls hearing it probably at 2:13 about 11:30 or 2:15 11:45 and uh this was undoubtedly the 2:18 content of the first draft someone found 2:20 it unacceptable 2:22 Saturday we know from the work of the 2:26 hsca that Dr 2:28 Humes went home 2:31 Saturday afternoon and Saturday 2:33 afternoon and Saturday night he 2:35 struggled for for several hours and The autopsy report underwent multiple revisions, with the initial draft rejected due to conflicting accounts of the shots fired at President Kennedy and Governor Connelly, leading to a final version that changed the number of hits from three to two. Dr. Humes then burned the original Autopsy Report (along with his original autopsy notes). 2:37 rewrote the autopsy report and then by 2:40 his own admission he burned in his 2:43 fireplace the first draft on Sunday 2:45 morning I think I know why the 2:48 authorities at Bethesda rejected the 2:50 first draft of the autopsy report uh the 2:53 official story was that there were three 2:55 shots fired that 2:57 day and everybody knew that governor 3:00 Connelly had been 3:02 shot and everybody knew that President 3:04 Kennedy had been shot in the head and 3:06 shot in the back that's what the world 3:07 knew at that time so that's three shots 3:11 I think someone Saturday said 3:13 uhoh 3:16 uhoh Governor Connelly was shot too you 3:19 can't have all three shots hitting 3:21 President Kennedy I think that's what 3:22 happened on Saturday so the three shot 3:25 scenario was 3:27 rejected and Dr Humes wrote a another 3:30 version of the autopsy report as I said 3:31 Saturday night and he burned the first 3:33 draft on Sunday now let's talk about the 3:36 next version the next version is item 3:39 three on this 3:40 slide and it the scenario has gone from 3:43 three hits from behind back to two hits 3:46 so President 3:49 Kennedy who Humes announced late Friday 3:52 was hit by three shots and which he put 3:54 in the first draft it's now back to two The first signed version of the JFK autopsy report (the second version of the Autopsy Report), which was never returned to the government by the Kennedy family, contains crucial details that have been pieced together by Doug Horne. 3:58 hits and I think know the contents of 4:01 this first signed version I think I've 4:06 figured out what the contents 4:08 were of this second written version of 4:11 the autopsy report by the way this is 4:14 the signed version that the Kennedy 4:15 family never returned to the US 4:18 government this would be the signed 4:20 autopsy report signed by Dr Humes that 4:23 was mentioned in paragraph 9 of the Dr 4:25 Berkeley inventory in April 4:28 1965 which disappeared into the custody 4:31 of the Kennedy family and was never 4:32 returned to the government for whatever 4:34 reason so this first signed version I 4:37 believe said the following one shot to Dr. Humes suggested that JFK's throat wound resulted from a fragment of the headshot, attempting to reconcile conflicting accounts from Dallas doctors during the autopsy. 4:40 the Head a bullet from behind low in the 4:42 head exiting somewhere up here a shallow 4:45 back wound again shallow back wound that 4:48 did not exit the body and I believe it 4:51 said 4:53 that the wound in the throat was caused 4:57 by a fragment from the head shot 5:00 we have good evidence for believing that 5:03 that's how Dr Humes dealt with the wound 5:05 in the throat problem remember he talked 5:07 to Perry on Friday night he had to 5:09 explain this in some way because the 5:11 Dallas doctors had seen it and they were 5:13 going to be talking about it and 5:14 testifying about it eventually to 5:16 various investigations 5:18 so 5:21 uh the evidence we have that Dr Humes 5:24 tried to explain this away as a fragment 5:27 from the headshot coming out the front 5:29 of the neck 5:32 is from the chief counsel of the warrant 5:34 commission Jaye 5:36 Ranken and this is from an executive 5:39 session transcript which at the time is 5:41 classified top secret this executive 5:44 session transcript from January of 5:46 1964 is Ranken meeting with the 5:50 Commissioners I believe it was for the 5:52 first time and he's saying we have to 5:54 figure out how to deal with this throat 5:56 wound in so many words and he says 6:00 because it says here in the autopsy he 6:02 uses the word autopsy he doesn't say 6:04 autopsy report he says it says here in 6:06 the autopsy that the throat wound was 6:09 caused by a 6:13 fragment so what did he mean by that 6:15 well there were two newspaper stories in Two December 1963 newspaper stories suggested that JFK's throat wound was caused by a headshot fragment, indicating a manipulated narrative surrounding the autopsy report. 6:17 December of 1963 one in Philadelphia and 6:20 one in Washington and they both 6:22 mentioned that the throat wound in the 6:24 front of the neck was caused by a 6:26 fragment from the head shot so the 6:29 confluence 6:30 of these reports the two newspaper 6:32 stories which are an official leak of 6:34 some kind from somebody in the 6:36 government to the media they wanted the 6:38 public to believe 6:39 this 6:41 uh the Confluence of the two newspaper 6:43 stories that this hole in the neck was 6:46 caused by a fragment from the headshot 6:48 and Jay 6:50 Rankin's uh 6:53 comment in a private session of the 6:55 Warren Commission in January that it was 6:58 caused it was in the a tosy that it was 7:00 caused by a fragment that leads me to 7:02 this conclusion that the contents of the 7:04 first signed version were one shot in 7:06 the head from behind one shot in the 7:08 back shallow wound no Transit of the 7:10 body and a fragment from the head shot 7:13 caused this hole in the neck and I don't 7:15 think that autopsy report survived very 7:18 long for the following 7:19 reason shortly after Monday November The missing signed autopsy report likely didn't survive due to the government's focus on the Zapruder film, which revealed critical details about JFK's injuries. 7:23 25th now this report would have been the 7:26 one that was signed Sunday the missing 7:28 signed version in my view has to be the 7:31 autopsy report signed on Sunday the one 7:33 the doctors talk about in their 7:35 testimony it's the signed version we 7:37 don't have anymore and the reason I 7:39 think this didn't survive more than two 7:41 or three days is because everybody 7:44 started watching the zuder 7:46 film everybody in the government after 7:48 Monday after Monday the 25th copies of 7:51 the zuder film started to proliferate 7:54 the 7:55 FBI uh borrowed a copy from the secret 7:59 service and then they made second 8:00 generation copies from it and then uh 8:03 the Secret Service had its copies and 8:05 everybody was starting to watch the zilm 8:07 and the Z film clearly shows the 8:10 president reacting to a frontal stimulus 8:13 to a wound of some kind in his neck long 8:15 before the head shot long before the 8:18 head shot in fact he begins reacting to The JFK autopsy report has multiple conflicting versions, with the latest (the third version of the Autopsy Report) claiming a bullet transited the body in an implausible manner (the Single Bullet Theory), undermining its credibility. 8:20 the frontal stimulus in frame 225 when 8:23 the car emerges from behind the road 8:24 sign so uh that's why that autopsy 8:27 report didn't survive very 8:30 long and so the 8:34 final item on this slide here is the 8:37 autopsy report we have in evidence today 8:40 the extant autopsy report commission 8:41 exhibit 387 is also a two-hit 8:45 scenario this one however posits the one 8:48 shot to the Head from behind and a shot 8:52 in the back which suddenly miraculously 8:55 is said to have transited the body for 8:57 the very first time this is the very 8:58 first time this final version of the 9:00 autopsy conclusions the fourth version 9:03 of the conclusions the third written 9:05 version is the one that says a bullet in 9:08 the back transited the region of the 9:10 neck came out the front of the neck 9:11 creating this ENT this exit wound months 9:15 later ARL inspector and Dr Humes 9:19 together invented the single bullet 9:20 theory saying that that's the same 9:21 bullet that hit Governor Connelly but 9:24 initially uh this concept of a 9:26 transiting bullet that went through the 9:28 upper back somehow went through or 9:30 around the neck without damaging it and 9:32 then came out the front of the throat 9:34 that concept is first written down in 9:37 the third written version of the autopsy 9:40 report so there's no reason we should 9:42 have any confidence in it.'"

from 1995 COPA Conference, posted By Keven Hofeling. Very detailed description and video transcript pasted to: https://fullchan.net/?b7458505e8eea98e#BKtraRG265rvvZiEVuynXBUZTybxYVV7fyPzw53rk83B Vid posted here as a Follow-up to : https://rumble.com/v6qjzzg-probs-wautopsy-story-2-morgues-2-exams-in-bethesda-knudsen-photod-andy-purd.html Keven Hofeling comments: "Alluded to in the [above linked] video is the famous presentation that Dr. Gary Aguilar delivered to the 1995 COPA conference exposing the fraudulent concealment of the JFK back of the head wound evidence by the HSCA, a cover up that this interview of Andrew Purdy makes clear he continues to be engaged in. It is worthwhile for the sake of context to see the film footage of Andy Purdy's 1995 mea culpa in response to Dr. Aguilar's presentation, as well as the Aguilar presentation on the back of the head wound testimony from Bethesda witnesses that Purdy himself accumulated in HSCA depositions and interviews. Notice that in the Aguilar presentation many of the present-day critiques Purdy attempts to make of the evidence of probes and missing autopsy photographs was actually addressed and debunked by Aguilar's presentation and Purdy shamelessly recycles those arguments. I premise the video with Dr. Aguilar's description of the relevant events at the 1995 COPA conference from his comprehensive essay 'HOW FIVE INVESTIGATIONS INTO JFK’S MEDICAL/AUTOPSY EVIDENCE GOT IT WRONG,' by Gary L. Aguilar, MD and Kathy Cunningham, May 2003: https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_5.htm REGARDING THE HSCA MEDICAL COVER-UP BY DR. GARY AGUILAR "...Once-secret documents, made public in the 1990s, show that the HSCA misrepresented both what the autopsy witnesses told the Warren Commission as well as what they had told the HSCA. Rather than contradicting Parkland witnesses that there was a rear defect in JFK's skull, the suppressed interviews reveal that the Bethesda witnesses corroborated them. They not only described a rear defect to HSCA in writing and verbally, they also drew diagrams of a defect in the rear of Kennedy’s skull, which the HSCA had also suppressed.⁠ By falsely representing the data, including its own interviews, HSCA writers inaccurately portrayed autopsy witnesses as refuting the Dallas witnesses who in fact they had corroborated. (See Table 2) Had it not been for the Oliver Stone-inspired JFK Review Board, public access to these inconvenient interviews and diagrams, which had no national security value whatsoever, was to have been restricted for 50 years, until 2028.⁠ This stunning suppression of contradictory evidence, which as we shall see included withholding it from the very medical experts responsible for conducting the HSCA’s analyses of autopsy and other medical evidence, is by itself sufficient reason to call into question the HSCA’s entire medical position. But misstating and suppressing the nonsensitive assertions of its own witnesses was not all the HSCA did to impeach witness accounts of a gaping rearward wound in JFK’ skull....⁠ In 1995, HSCA counsel Purdy spoke at a public conference hosted by the Coalition on Political Assassinations (COPA) in Washington D.C. During his presentation, he explained that he had searched in vain for signs of conspiracy in JFK’s autopsy evidence. When these suppressed statements and diagrams depicting JFK’s rearward skull damage were projected in slide form before the entire audience, Purdy backed down. After all, his signature was plainly visible at the bottom of most of the documents.⁠ In retreat, he conceded he was “unhappy” the HSCA had reported, “All of those interviewed who attended the autopsy corroborated the general location of the wounds as depicted in the photographs; none had differing accounts... .” Purdy was quick to add, however, that he hadn’t written the statement, and that he didn’t know who had. ⁠ The report in which these HSCA misstatements appears is prefaced with the following statement: “Materials submitted for this report by the committee’s forensic pathology panel were compiled by HSCA staff members Donald A. Purdy, Jr. and T. Mark Flanagan.”[288]⁠ Perhaps Mr. Purdy’s denial is factual because neither Purdy nor Flanagan actually furnished the writer of the false passage with the damning interviews. If that is the case, however, the writer’s comment – “All of those interviewed who attended the autopsy corroborated …” – makes little sense.⁠ More enlightening about this episode, however, were the comments of HSCA forensic consultants, Michael Baden, MD and Cyril Wecht, MD, JD, who were also present with Purdy on the podium. Despite their positions as the HSCA’s medical consultants, neither Baden nor Wecht had ever seen this important autopsy evidence. Purdy hadn’t let his own autopsy experts know about any of these autopsy witnesses. ⁠That assumes, of course, that it was the lowly counsel Purdy who made the decision to keep key consultants in the dark, a decision so beyond his authority it seems unlikely he would have made it alone. In testimony before the ARRB, Purdy stated he in fact did not make that decision. Robert Blakey had.[289]⁠ So on the mystery of who authored the falsehoods about the autopsy witnesses, one must therefore not discount the possibility that chief counsel, Robert Blakey, might have played a role. Although Blakey specifically denied to author Aguilar writing this unfactual section of the report (as did perhaps the one other possible choice, Richard Billings), it is not impossible to imagine that Blakey might himself have written this section to help keep the lid securely fastened over the revelations of the autopsy witnesses he had apparently already hidden from his medical consultants...." ... Also interesting about the JFK: Enduring Secrets video with regard to Andrew Purdy were the biographical details presented about Purdy's extensive post HSCA work for the U.S. Government in the area of "cyber security," particularly considering that Purdy is self-admittedly not any kind of computer or internet expert per se. I am forced to ponder what role Purdy might have played in Professor Cass Sunstein's "Cognitive Infiltration of Conspiracy Social Media Groups" work as elucidated in the following video, and whether Purdy's present reappearance in the media might indicate some kind of effort to get ahead of the upcoming JFK records releases..." further discussion at https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31119-jeff-crudele-and-rick-russo-interview-hsca-legal-counsel-andy-purdy

*HSCA Senior Counsel ANDY PURDY Speaks After 30Y of Silence* With Jeff Crudelle, Rick Russo 1/29/25 - JFK The Enduring Secret Discussion at https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31119-jeff-crudele-and-rick-russo-interview-hsca-legal-counsel-andy-purdy/

Thorough Presentation & Q&A from PROJECT JFK's The Truth Series Vol3: In Search Of The Illusive Truth including his views on the Bethesda autopsy. Tons of info in this short talk. The Dr Jenkins he mentioned is Marion Jenkins, not Jim Jenkins from the Bethesda Naval Hospital (not the NIH but nearby) autopsy.

Only known video of Curtis from what I can gather but I haven't seen the Parkland Doctors movie. Larry Schnap mentioned this on the ed forum and I looked it up. Very difficult to download! But I got all three vids and I'll be posting more clips from them. The sound is this bad or worse in all of them that I've checked.