Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

JFK: Which do you believe: the Parkland Doctor's sketch or the Photo?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-26-03 06:18 PM
Original message
Poll question: JFK: Which do you believe: the Parkland Doctor's sketch or the Photo?
Go to this thread. View post #68.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Which one do you believe?
1) the sketch
2) the photo
3) both
4) neither

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kcwayne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-26-03 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
1. Question
Edited on Wed Nov-26-03 07:02 PM by kcwayne
I have read some of the debate you had going with William Seger, and am not clear on your position on the Zapruder film, and especially your view of the frames from the Zapruder film.

The film and frames show Kennedy's head exploding in the frontal region of his head, and none of the frames I have see show similar blowout damage to the back of the head.

Putting the controversy of the autopsy statements aside for a moment, the Zapruder film does not support the idea of a massive blowout wound to the back of the head.

So are you saying the Zapruder film is a fake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-26-03 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Of course, I believe the Zapruder film, when viewed in motion, not just
Edited on Wed Nov-26-03 07:23 PM by TruthIsAll
a couple of stills.

And I disagree with your premise that the film does not show a massive exit wound. JFK is driven violently back and to the left. Pieces of his skull and brains fly in back of the limo. You can see Jackie reaching for them.

The best evidence is a combination of the Zapruder film and the Parkland doctors INITIAL renderings.

Let me turn your question around. Do you really suggets that the back of JFK's head as depicted in the photo is believable? I can't spot any wound. Can you? Even an entry wound would be apparent.

Consider this. If JFK was struck in the BACK of the head, would'nt the bullet have exited in the front? Would there not be massive damage to the front - to his face? Other autopsy photographs, not shown here, do not show any damage whatsoever to his face.

The film clearly points to a bullet striking the front right temple, causing massive damage to the rear upon exit, just as the sketch shows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Padraig18 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-26-03 07:24 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The X-rays show massive damage to his face.
Multiple linear fractures into the sinuses, etc, as well as the temple region. not all 'damage is visible to the naked eye.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. What massive X-ray damage? Look at the face.
If he was shot in the back of the head, where is the damage? I don't see it in the back or the front - in the photos.

I see it clearly in the back - as shown in the sketch.

What was the doctor's motive in presenting his sketch, in which he obviously depicts an exit wound in the back of the head? It could only have been to present what he and the others observed. Up close. With only doctors present. Remember, Oswald was not yet even a suspect.

What is the motive of those who took the photos?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kcwayne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-26-03 07:38 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. JFK's movement after being shot does not mean there was
Edited on Wed Nov-26-03 07:54 PM by kcwayne
a massive wound (as depicted in the drawing) to the back of the head, nor does tissue and bone landing on the back of the car. The way his skull was opened up, tissue exploded upward, as depicted in Zapruder. The car was moving at about 15 miles per hour, so the motion backwards of ejected tissue is aided largely by the speed of the car moving forward.

At any rate, the film does not show an explosive wound emanating from the back of the head, and as he leans over against Jackie, it looks undisturbed.

The autopsy photo is of too poor quality to make a judgement on. It does show a wound on the top right consistent with the wound obvious in Zapruder's film. But the quality of the photo (as renedered on the Internet) is too poor to be useful in analysis. Do you know of a source that has a rendering from the original negatives, or that even has the original negatives? Seeing that photo would be far more illuminating.

As to the bullet entering the back of the head, an exit from the face seems the most likely, especially since Kennedy's head was on a declination relative to a shot from the rear, because the street slopes downward away from the School Book Depository at the location where he was shot. But a shot hitting bone will deflect, so I don't think you can rule out completely that the shot could have entered from behind. The lack of a competent autoposy is a real problem here, as competent forensic pathologists could have shed alot more light on this evidence. I have major problems with that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-27-03 03:15 PM
Response to Original message
6. Parkland was THE trauma hospital in Dallas
Those people knew entrance from exit wounds.

The autopsy record is admittedly incomplete and shows evidence of tampering. For instance, some X-rays show damage which isn't supported by photographic evidence, and the Assassination Records Review Board found a 90-95% likelihood that two entirely different brains had been examined; brains which provided contradictory evidence as to the damage and the direction of the headshot. What's more, two federal agents who attended the autopsy told the ARRB that the autopsy photos of the back of the head were inaccurate, and that they recalled seeing a large defect in the right rear part of the skull. The agents suggested a flap of scalp was pulled over the right-rear defect before the photos were taken
(http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id126.htm ).

An interesting sidebar: do you know the story of Regis Blahut? He was the CIA liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations. In June 1978 Blahut was discovered to have broken into the safe containing the autopsy photos. Blahut's only comment to the press: "There are other things involved that are detrimental to other things."

About Zapruder, it's kinda odd how, when the Warren Commission published stills, the frames showing the fatal head shot were reversed. J Edgar Hoover, whose FBI reviewed the film for the commission, called the reversal "a printing error."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-30-03 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Kick to the BFEE's pants.
Kick for history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 10:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC