JFK Assassination Autopsy Details Revealed After 55 Years

Cheerful Spring

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Those are just guesses and speculation.

Again, you believe a theory with little or no evidence
Yet you require absurd level of detail and evidence to believe another theory

Double standards

Not really Hoover wrote memos about Oswald years before the killing of Kennedy. For the head of the FBI to be interested in one lone guy in New Orleans during the early 60s is curious, to say the least.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

And the evidence that the HSCA couldnt find a link to Oswald being in Mexico.

I did already.

Where is it? Is it in the 300 pages the HSCA dedicated to Mexico where they said he was definately there?

Cheerful Spring

It explains why the FBI and CIA did not want the JFK files to be released in full and unredacted. They probably expected all
US Presidents to keep the files classified forever in the archive.

The Nal

Where do the HSCA say Oswald wasnt in Mexico?

Who had Ruby killed before?

Evidence for both please.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Where is it? Is it in the 300 pages the HSCA dedicated to Mexico where they said he was definately there?

That not what HSCA investigative reporter said on this video. He went to Mexico and could not verify Oswald ever visited Mexico. Do you think he's lying?

Jesus even the photographs HSCA had don't show Oswald they show two different men.

HSCA is still believing Oswald travelled there based on old information.

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

No attempt to counter the logic
No attempt to read the thread where I addressed this question

All of which reinforces my points about debating with conspiracy theorists

Im sorry I didnt know you addressed my specific question regarding Jenkins ... could you point me to the relevant post ?

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Those are just guesses and speculation.

Again, you believe a theory with little or no evidence
Yet you require absurd level of detail and evidence to believe another theory

Double standards

You should have thought of that when asking for theories with evidence when you created the wtc7 thread

Pot kettle and a lot of hypocrisy displayed by you

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Where do the HSCA say Oswald wasnt in Mexico?

Edwin Lopez believes he was in Mexico but there no evidence he visited the Cuban Embassy and Soviet Embassy. He interviewed Embassy staff and they all described a different man. Silva Duran would not say if Oswald signed that visa application in front of her. She also described a different man very strange.

Cheerful Spring

The Mexico trip was a setup. You can not see it any other way. Oswald was going to take the fall as a lone nut with communist leanings.

Cheerful Spring

Edwin Lopez the HSCA own investigative reporter also believes Lee was an operative for intelligence agency the CIA.

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

Im sorry I didnt know you addressed my specific question regarding Jenkins ... could you point me to the relevant post ?

You should have thought of that when asking for theories with evidence when you created the wtc7 thread

Pot kettle and a lot of hypocrisy displayed by you

Dragging in another thread, not bothering to read the thread/replies, being pedantic

Perhaps instead of "getting petty and snide" with my comments you should address them or ignore them

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Dragging in another thread, not bothering to read the thread/replies, being pedantic

Perhaps instead of "getting petty and snide" with my comments you should address them or ignore them

uHHHH i asked you a very simple yes or no question you said you answered I asked where .... you couldn't be bothered telling ... stop being obtuse.

Me dragging in another thread is only to point out your hypocrisy


Was Jenkins lying ? .... simple question I asked for the 5th time now .... why is it so tough answering simple questions in a discussion ...not only on this thread

Dohnjoe

weisses wrote: »

uHHHH i asked you a very simple yes or no question you said you answered I asked where .... you couldn't be bothered telling ... stop being obtuse.

Me dragging in another thread is only to point out your hypocrisy

Getting personal or emotional about the subject is a bit silly

Was Jenkins lying ? .... simple question I asked for the 5th time now .... why is it so tough answering simple questions in a discussion ...not only on this thread

I don't know

weisses

Dohnjoe wrote: »

I don't know

Thank you ...

So he could be telling the truth as well when He said the head wound he witnessed could not have resulted from a gunshot from behind. It was would only result from a gunshot from the right front. ?

The Nal

weisses wrote: »

Thank you ...

So he could be telling the truth as well when He said the head wound he witnessed could not have resulted from a gunshot from behind. It was would only result from a gunshot from the right front. ?

Is it not impossible for a bullet entering from the right front to make an exit wound in the right front? Would the exit wound from a shot from the front right not be at the back left?

No one can explain this to me.

The other thing no one can explain is how the people standing right beside and in front of this gunman didn't hear a high powered rifle going off within feet of them. None of them noticed.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

That not what HSCA investigative reporter said on this video. He went to Mexico and could not verify Oswald ever visited Mexico. Do you think he's lying?

Jesus even the photographs HSCA had don't show Oswald they show two different men.

HSCA is still believing Oswald travelled there based on old information.

What old information?

You didn't watch all of that clip you posted did you? He gets torn apart by Bugliosi.

And then theres this gem at 7 mins 35.

Bugliosi - "Can you tell the jury if you think Oswald was in Mexico City at all in late September of 63?"

Lopez - "Oh I think he was yes".

Oh deary me!

Do you even know what you're posting?

Also, wheres the Ruby hitman evidence?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Is it not impossible for a bullet entering from the right front to make an exit wound in the right front? Would the exit wound from a shot from the front right not be at the back left?

No one can explain this to me.

The other thing no one can explain is how the people standing right beside and in front of this gunman didn't hear a high powered rifle going off within feet of them. None of them noticed.

It depends on the bullet used by the gunman at the grassy knoll. It could have been explosive round and that shatters on impact.

Nal you posting false information. The police officer who drove his motorcycle to the grassy knoll did so because a woman said a man was shooting behind the bushes. When he got there he was confronted by a man who flashed a secret service badge. He was adamant in his testimony it was a secret service badge and no other.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

What old information?

You didn't watch all of that clip you posted did you? He gets torn apart by Bugliosi.

And then theres this gem at 7 mins 35.

Bugliosi - "Can you tell the jury if you think Oswald was in Mexico City at all in late September of 63?"

Lopez - "Oh I think he was yes".

Do you even know what you're posting?

I already revealed he said that in a previous post. Did you just ignore that?

Torn apart by Bugliosi, what part most of missed that.

The claim is Oswald visited the Cuban and Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. Can you provide photographs of this visit? I have provided evidence you have not.

weisses

The Nal wrote: »

Is it not impossible for a bullet entering from the right front to make an exit wound in the right front? Would the exit wound from a shot from the front right not be at the back left?

No one can explain this to me.

The other thing no one can explain is how the people standing right beside and in front of this gunman didn't hear a high powered rifle going off within feet of them. None of them noticed.

All i know is what the guy said when he investigated Kennedy which is that the wound he saw does not correlate with a shot from the back but came from the front right

He was the pathologist on scene who did the work on Kennedy If you believe him there was another shooter .....

Tipsy McSwagger

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The organisers of this coup. Hoover was likely involved, and politicians who wanted rid of Kennedy. Something this big you need the FBI to cover the investigation later.

Likely, obviously, probably, you’re full of horse****.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Dtp1979 wrote: »

I don’t know much about the history but he was obviously shot twice?

Yeah, It looks like the first bullet hits him the throut. You can see him leaning over choking in the seconds before the fatal headshot.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I already revealed he said that in a previous post. Did you just ignore that?

Torn apart by Bugliosi, what part most of missed that.

The claim is Oswald visited the Cuban and Soviet Embassy in Mexico City. Can you provide photographs of this visit? I have provided evidence you have not.

You provide evidence for nothing. I'm still waiting on the evidence that Ruby was a mob hitman as you claimed. Where is it?

Also still waiting on evidence for the autopsy photos failing a key authenticity test and how were they misrepresented in the HSCA report as you claimed. Where is that evidence?

Oswald was in Mexico and met with Sylvia Duran in the Cuban embassy, Valery Kostikov and two others in the Russian embassy and he stayed in room 18 in the Hotel del Comercio from September 27th to October 1st. This was all confirmed by Marina, the hotel clerk and we know he was there because he signed the guestbook. Proven as his signature. All confirmed by the HSCA.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

. The HSCA own investigative team found no evidence he visited Mexico city.

This is amazing. You claim (lie) about this. The HSCA concluded the exact opposite. He was there. There 318 opages about it.

Read this.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP10M00666R000503450002-3.pdf

He initially wanted to hijack an airplane and have Marina hold off the passengers with a gun to get to Cuba. She begged him to find a legal way to get to Cuba which is when he thought of going through Mexico.

If you believe in a conspiracy you are defending Oswald. Why don't you read up about the man you defend so vigorously? You don't seem to know anything about him.

Cheerful Spring

Wesley Frazier demonstrates what the bag Oswald carried looked like. Conclusive for me Oswald did not carry a gun that day in the bag. Some new evidence also presented that the rifle was switched out in this video.

The good stuff starts at 4 minutes in.

The Carcano rifle was 36 inches in length. The Warren commission states the rifle was 40 inches. You have to watch the video to understand why that significant.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The Carcano rifle was 36 inches in length.

Another lie/misinformation/lazy research. I can't tell which is which at this stage as you've been wrong so many times.

No it was not. It was 40.2 inches long. Model 91/38. Kleins carried an older model that was 36 inches and hadn't changed their ad. Oswald ordered a "36 inch 6.5 Italian carbine" rifle and received a 40.2 inch rifle. He was shipped the new model.

By April 63 they had changed the ad. See page 55 of the American Rifleman magazine from April of 63.

40-inch 6.5 Italian Carbine -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope)

The same price Oswald paid for his.



It was also disassembled in the package. A disassembled 91/38 model Carcano fits in that bag.

Frazier glanced at the package for a second. Easily could've been mistaken.

Mr. FRAZIER. Well, I will be frank with you, I didn't pay much
attention to the package because like I say before and after he
told me that it was curtain rods and I didn't pay any attention
to it, and he never had lied to me before so I never did have any
reason to doubt his word.

Mr. BALL. Did it appear to you there was some, more than just
paper he vas carrying, some kind of a weight he was carrying?

Mr. FRAZIER. Well, yes, sir; I say, because one reason I know
that because I worked in a department store before and I had
uncrated curtain rods when they come in, and I know if you have
seen when they come straight from the factory you know how they
can bundle them up and put them in there pretty compact, so he
told me it was curtain rods so I didn't think any more about the
package whatsoever.

Fraziers sister Linnie Randle saw Oswald with the package and said "it could have been a rifle".

Oswalds gun was missing from the Paines garage, his handprint was on it, no one found curtain rods.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

You provide evidence for nothing. I'm still waiting on the evidence that Ruby was a mob hitman as you claimed. Where is it?

Also still waiting on evidence for the autopsy photos failing a key authenticity test and how were they misrepresented in the HSCA report as you claimed. Where is that evidence?

Oswald was in Mexico and met with Sylvia Duran in the Cuban embassy, Valery Kostikov and two others in the Russian embassy and he stayed in room 18 in the Hotel del Comercio from September 27th to October 1st. This was all confirmed by Marina, the hotel clerk and we know he was there because he signed the guestbook. Proven as his signature. All confirmed by the HSCA.



This is amazing. You claim (lie) about this. The HSCA concluded the exact opposite. He was there. There 318 opages about it.

Read this.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP10M00666R000503450002-3.pdf

He initially wanted to hijack an airplane and have Marina hold off the passengers with a gun to get to Cuba. She begged him to find a legal way to get to Cuba which is when he thought of going through Mexico.

If you believe in a conspiracy you are defending Oswald. Why don't you read up about the man you defend so vigorously? You don't seem to know anything about him.

True evidence maybe not. It obvious though this was not Ruby first kill.

There circumstantial evidence to believe it

https://web.archive.org/web/20150405010141/http://www.highlandstoday.com/

hi/local-news/ap-woman-living-link-to-kennedy-assassination-oswald-murder-20150402/
https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKSruby.htm

These links detail the problems with JFK x rays and autopsy photographs.

https://history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong.htm

The HSCA also reported that its experts had authenticated the controversial autopsy pictures. Like its claim regarding the 26 autopsy witnesses, that wasn’t exactly true either. In a once-secret letter, the HSCA’s chief counsel Robert Blakey reported that tests by his experts had proved that JFK’s autopsy camera did not match Kennedy’s autopsy photos. Continuing the pattern set with Burkley and the inconvenient autopsy witnesses, that letter was similarly withheld from the gaze of the HSCA’s forensic experts and the public.

More information on this.

* Not all of the photos and X-rays taken at the autopsy remain in the
collection at the National Archives. ARRB interviews with autopsy
doctors, photographers, and X- ray technicians reveal that some
photographs and X-rays taken during the autopsy are missing from the
collection at the National Archives, and that some of the photographs
now in that collection were not taken during the autopsy.

Photos now in the
collection were taken with film that was not used by the autopsy
photographer, and that was not developed at the Naval Photographic
Center, where apparently the original autopsy photos were developed.


This likely the test that failed and was misrepresented
The Committee reported that the autopsy photographs were
authenticated, although it claimed that the Department of Defense "had
been unable to locate" the camera and lens that had been used at the
autopsy. HSCA files released in 1997, however, revealed that DOD had
indeed identified the camera and sent it to the Committee, but that the
Committee's photographic experts, rather than raising embarrassing
questions of authenticity, chose instead to conclude that the and lens had not been the one used to take the autopsy photographs


Silva Duran was questioned by Mr Lopez and she refused and would not say if Oswald signed that Visa application in front of her. She also could not identify Oswald was the man she met, she described a different man. Why would HSCA own investigative reporter lie? HSCA is a government body they are going to try to support the government position even if the evidence is suspicious.

weisses

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that the guy who actually did the autopsy is basically claiming there was another shooter ?

If he is to be believed the size of Oswalds gun is of no importance right ?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Another lie.

No it was not. It was 40.2 inches long. Model 91/38. Kleins carried an older model that was 36 inches and hadn't changed their ad. Oswald ordered a "36 inch 6.5 Italian carbine" rifle and received a 40.2 inch rifle. He was shipped the new model.

By April 63 they had changed the ad. See page 55 of the American Rifleman magazine from April of 63.

"40-inch 6.5 Italian Carbine -- $12.88 -- $19.95 (with scope)".

The same price Oswald paid for his.



It was also disassembled in the package. A disassembled 91/38 model Carcano fits in that bag.

Frazier glanced at the package for a second. Easily could've been mistaken.

Mr. FRAZIER. Well, I will be frank with you, I didn't pay much
attention to the package because like I say before and after he
told me that it was curtain rods and I didn't pay any attention
to it, and he never had lied to me before so I never did have any
reason to doubt his word.

Mr. BALL. Did it appear to you there was some, more than just
paper he vas carrying, some kind of a weight he was carrying?

Mr. FRAZIER. Well, yes, sir; I say, because one reason I know
that because I worked in a department store before and I had
uncrated curtain rods when they come in, and I know if you have
seen when they come straight from the factory you know how they
can bundle them up and put them in there pretty compact, so he
told me it was curtain rods so I didn't think any more about the
package whatsoever.

Fraziers sister Linnie Randle saw Oswald with the package and said "it could have been a rifle".

Oswalds gun was missing from the Paines garage, his handprint was on it, no one found curtain rods.

Show me a Carcano disassembled? I thought you can only remove the bolts and sights on this rifle?

I thought Oswald got the rifle in March 1963.

Can you provide a link to an archive of this magazine from this date? If was uploaded to the internet you have to look for signs of forgery and trickery.

Fraziers sister Linnie Randle saw Oswald with the package and said "it could have been a rifle". Link please

Cheerful Spring

weisses wrote: »

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that the guy who actually did the autopsy is basically claiming there was another shooter ?

If he is to be believed the size of Oswalds gun is of no importance right ?

JFK chief physician Rear Admiral George Gregory Burkley claimed there was a conspiracy also. He was never called to testify he was a witness to events.

Cheerful Spring

weisses wrote: »

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that the guy who actually did the autopsy is basically claiming there was another shooter ?

If he is to be believed the size of Oswalds gun is of no importance right ?

I would not agree with that because Warren Commission used Frazier evidence as proof Oswald brought a gun to the TSBD that day.

He demonstrated on video the package at 36 inches and 40 inches it was not same size package Frazier saw and he never wavered on that I don't believe.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Can you provide a link to an archive of this magazine from this date? If was uploaded to the internet you have to look for signs of forgery and trickery.

You go find it. Its all available. Try do some research, proper research, yourself for a change.

Forgery and trickery? How many people are in on this plot. The level of detail they've gone to is incredible.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Fraziers sister Linnie Randle saw Oswald with the package and said "it could have been a rifle". Link please

Detective Richard Stovall. Who searched the Paines and Fraziers houses.

She initially said it was 3 foot long. However like her brother, she only glanced at it. Clinging on to a brief glance by someone who admits they didn't pay much attention as proof of anything is just silly.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/randle.txt

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

True evidence maybe not. It obvious though this was not Ruby first kill.

There circumstantial evidence to believe it

https://web.archive.org/web/20150405010141/http://www.highlandstoday.com/

Maybe your worst post yet. Click on the link you posted. What is that exactly? Theres no mention of Jack Ruby or anything relating to the assassination. Do you even read the links you post? How many times have you been asked this?

Although you have confirmed theres no evidence that Ruby was a mob hitman and had killed anyone before as you claimed. Glad we cleared that one up.

weisses wrote: »

Isn't the elephant in the room the fact that the guy who actually did the autopsy is basically claiming there was another shooter ?

If he is to be believed the size of Oswalds gun is of no importance right ?

Who is "the guy"? Dr McClellend? He didn't do the autopsy. There was no autopsy done in Dallas.

The autopsy concluded that he was shot twice from the rear.

Basic questions still not answered

- how was the left side JFKs brain and skull not damaged at all with a shot from the front right?
- how did the people standing right beside the knoll shooter not hear him?

Can anyone answer?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

You go find it. Its all available. Try do some research, proper research, yourself for a change.

Forgery and trickery? How many people are in on this plot. The level of detail they've gone to is incredible.




Detective Richard Stovall. Who searched the Paines and Fraziers houses.

She initially said it was 3 foot long. However like her brother, she only glanced at it. Clinging on to a brief glance by someone who admits they didn't pay much attention as proof of anything is silly.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/randle.txt




Maybe your worst post yet. Click on the link you posted. What is that exactly? Theres no mention of Jack Ruby or anything relating to the assassination. Do you even read the links you post? How many times have you been asked this?

Although you have confirmed theres no evidence that Ruby was a mob hitman and had killed anyone before as you claimed. Glad we cleared that one up.

That some bad reporting.

ANDLE stated while at the Dallas Police Department on the
evening of November 22, 1963, officers of the Dallas Police Department
had exhibited to her some brown package paper, however she had not
been able to positively identify it as being identical with the
above-mentioned brown package, due to the fact she had only observed
the brown package from her residence window at a distance.

She saw it at a distance how far away? Did the FBI claim it was 3 inches long and not her? Frazier said Oswald held the end part on the palm of his hand and the top part was under the armpit. He even demonstrated what 36-inch package looks like, are you going to ignore that?

You can believe whatever you like researchers have found plenty of evidence Ruby was a mob figure.