JFK Assassination Autopsy Details Revealed After 55 Years

King Mob

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Dino evidence is from 2011, none of these researchers was aware of the deception.
...

He never said he believed 5 shots to the head. You still have not provided that quote.

Lol. Hypocrisy of the finest order.

Cheerful Spring

King Mob wrote: »

Lol. Hypocrisy of the finest order.

This not a nutjob, claiming the Zapruder film was altered.

Dino was head of the processing lab at CIA NPIC center. He still considered one of the world best imaging analysts.

Cheerful Spring

Brugioni has received numerous citations and commendations, including the CIA Intelligence Medal of Merit, the CIA Career Intelligence Medal and the prestigious U.S. Government Pioneer in Space Medal for his role in the development of satellite reconnaissance. He twice received the Sherman Kent Award, the CIA's top award for outstanding contributions to intelligence. However, he remains most proud of the commendation he received from President John F. Kennedy for contributions during the Cuban Missile Crisis. On April 13, 2005, he was inducted into the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency Hall of Fame.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dino_Brugioni

What he saying just confirms what other people saw at Parkland and Bethesda

Cheerful Spring

Mr. Brugioni thought the Zapruder Film in the National Archives today, and available to the public, has been altered from the version of the film he saw and worked with on November 23–24. The version he recalls had one or more frames than the version now available to the public. Additionally, he is adamant that the set of briefing boards available to the public in the National Archives is not the set that he and his team produced on November 23–24, 1963

In his Wiki bio the info above is provided.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dino_Brugioni

Cheerful Spring

The image below exposes the conspiracy even further. The top seven images are Doctors at Parkland. Bottom are Witnesses at Bethesda. Other key eyewitnesses saw the rear head wound, are not in this image. Clint Hill secret service agent who pushed Jackie Kennedy back into the car also saw a rear head wound.

The Nal

Brugioni, interviewed for the first time about it in 2009, at age 89. 45 years after the event. Where he initially said he started working on the film the day of the assassination.

https://vimeo.com/102327635

Near the start here, Horne says that the "real" head wound was low on the back of the head and was “blacked out” and that the wound on the side/top of JFK’s head was “painted on.” He also says that Brugioni saw the authentic “original” Z film.

If Brugioni saw the film before it was altered, he would’ve seen the “real” exit wound on the back of the head? Except he described a head wound exploding out the "top" of JFK’s head.

You believe Brugioni but not Zavada. Horne was the one who brought Zavada into the ARRB and when he proved the Zapruder film was authentic Horne accused him of "acting as a CIA agent" and an "intentional saboteur.". He also says he should retire from any further involvement in the debate over the film. lol.

Anybody stupid enough to believe that 3 shots I (and possibly 5!) hit JFK’s head cant be taken seriously.

Oh Jesus that stupid picture again? The real selective one and the one that includes Dr Carrico. But not Dr Perry. As it doesn't support the bias.

"side of the head".



Pathetic.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Brugioni, interviewed for the first time about it in 2009, at age 89. 45 years after the event. Where he initially said he started working on the film the day of the assassination.

https://vimeo.com/102327635

Near the start here, Horne says that the "real" head wound was low on the back of the head and was “blacked out” and that the wound on the side/top of JFK’s head was “painted on.” He also says that Brugioni saw the authentic “original” Z film.

If Brugioni saw the film before it was altered, he would’ve seen the “real” exit wound on the back of the head? Except he described a head wound exploding out the "top" of JFK’s head.

You believe Brugioni but not Zavada. Horne was the one who brought Zavada into the ARRB and when he proved the Zapruder film was authentic Horne accused him of "acting as a CIA agent" and an "intentional saboteur.". He also says he should retire from any further involvement in the debate over the film. lol.

Anybody stupid enough to believe that 3 shots I (and possibly 5!) hit JFK’s head cant be taken seriously.

The head wound was observed in the Parietal and Occipital lobe of the skull at Bethesda and Parkland behind the right ear. The head wound therefore extended from the top backside of the skull to the rear right side behind the ear.

In the Zapruder film, the wound is low in front of the ear near the Frontal lobe of the brain. Part of the damage also near the temporal lobe above the ear. There no head wound in the Parietal and Occipital on the Zapruder film.

He did not prove it was authentic he proved the altered copies were authentic and made in 1963. Zavada ignored Evidence and horne was right to go after him. He was told by Jameison Employees the copies they processed in Dallas in 1963, were not bracketed. The copies in the archive today are that a clear sign of fakery. Horne discusses what he got upset with Zavada in the interview and more in-depth so you should listen to it.

Cheerful Spring

This a good graphic to understand the head wound people actually saw and what shown on the Zapruder film.

Google image of the human brain.



Pink and red- Parietal lobe
Purple- Occiptal
Green- Temporal
Yellow and Orange- Frontal lobe.

This is the Zapruder movie head wound. Frame 335. You can see the wound is ahead of the right ear in the frontal lobe.

Cheerful Spring

JFK autopsy

This Dr Humes, Dr Finck and DR Bosley opinion.

The large and irregularly-shaped wound in the right side of the head (chiefly to the parietal bone, but also involving the temporal and occipital bone) is described as being about 13 centimetres (5.1 in) wide at the largest diameter

5.1 inches is a big hole in the back of the head.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

This is the Zapruder movie head wound. Frame 335. You can see the wound is ahead of the right ear in the frontal lobe.

Yes yes this is the third time we've been through this.

A large portion of the top of his head is missing. And theres damage to the back too. A huge wound. A large portion of his head is blown forward. Hair, scalp, bone, brain.

for every piece that is altered/removed, another piece needs to be altered/added.

How did they superimpose the car and curb back into the film? Its not possible.





How did they superimpose Jackies shoulder back into the film? Its not possible.

Cheerful Spring

We get a better look at what Bethesda doctors claim is when you look at this image.



https://socratic.org/questions/which-cranial-bone-or-bones-border-the-parietal-bones

The more I look at this the more I believe the JFK researchers and others did not pay enough attention to what the doctors actually said.

The Nal

Where could a shot have come from if the lower back was blown out?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Where could a shot have come from if the lower back was blown out?

What I truly puzzled by is the doctors at Bethesda confirmed a massive wound in the Parietal and Occipital area of the skull, behind the right ear.

It was 5 inches in diameter that a huge hole. The Autopsy photos can't be real then if the wound was 5 inches.

Plus we have a side profile of Kennedy's head (Autopsy photo) and we can see the hairline still intact in the back of the head.

What do you mean lower back blown out?

Cheerful Spring

Why is everyone saying they don't describe a rear head wound when they have done so?

In the Wiki page JFK autopsy.

The large and irregularly-shaped wound in the right side of the head (chiefly to the parietal bone, but also involving the temporal and occipital bone) is described as being about 13 centimetres (5.1 inches) wide at the largest diameter

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy

Cheerful Spring

So everyone at Bethesda and Parkland saw a head wound at the back of the head. Even the Bethesda doctors.

The autopsy photos, x rays and Zapruder film are clear fakes and a government conspiracy to hide the truth.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Plus we have a side profile of Kennedy's head (Autopsy photo) and we can see the hairline still intact in the back of the head.

No its folded back over. Theres a wound there too.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

So everyone at Bethesda and Parkland saw a head wound at the back of the head. Even the Bethesda doctors.
.

Thats not true., You know its not true. They saw the back of the head and the side. Whats your problem with fact?

You can see it here. An enormous head wound. Quite literally nearly blew his head off.



Answer the question. How did they superimpose Jackies shoulder back into the film?

Unless that can be answered accurately and definitively the entire theory is total bull****.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

No its folded back over. Theres a wound there too.



Thats not true., You know its not true. They saw the back of the head and the side. Whats your problem with fact?

You can see it here. An enormous head wound. Quite literally nearly blew his head off.



Answer the question. How did they superimpose Jackies shoulder back into the film?

It is true the red is the occipital bone. You find a wound in that black patch for me? The Bethesda doctors said the there was a head wound there.

Green area is the Parietal lobe/ bone. Again I don't see a hole in the head there?



Blue is the frontal lobe and Temporal lobe of the brain. None of the doctors describing a large wound there.

You can even see how ridiculous the wound looks when you blow it up and the overly black drawing patch to cover up the wound at the back of the head. For 1963 it was good work, today it obvious its an animation drawing.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It is true the red is the occipital bone. You find a wound in that black patch for me? The Bethesda doctors said the there was a head wound there.

Green area is the Parietal lobe/ bone. Again I don't see a hole in the head there?

Blue is the frontal lobe and Temporal lobe of the brain. None of the doctors describing a large wound there.

You can even see how ridiculous the wound looks when you blow it up and the overly black drawing patch to cover up the wound at the back of the head. For 1963 it was good work, today it obvious its an animation drawing.

No thats called a "shadow". The same shadows that are on Jackie (look at her hat) and Connally.

In the other pic I posted you can see the wound on the back of his head, below Jackies mouth.

Anyway, all this is irrelevant unless you can explain this: How did they superimpose Jackies shoulder back into the film?

Cheerful Spring

Explain this JFK Autopsy image for me then Nal? Do you not see there no damage to the Occipital bone behind the right ear? The top of the head (parietal lobe) is also intact you can see the hairline is untouched.



What you see is damage to the frontal lobe.

None of the Doctors said the head exploded at the frontal lobe. You go find one Doctor who said the head exploded in the front at frontal lobe.

The Autopsy images, X rays and Zapruder film are fakes designed to manipulate the public.

Cheerful Spring

This what the Bethesda doctors said
The large and irregularly-shaped wound in the right side of the head (chiefly to the parietal bone, but also involving the temporal and occipital bone) is described as being about 13 centimetres (5.1 inches) wide at the largest diameter.[1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy

Not a word about a large wound at the frontal lobe!

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

No thats called a "shadow". The same shadows that are on Jackie (look at her hat) and Connally.

In the other pic I posted you can see the wound on the back of his head, below Jackies mouth.

Anyway, all this is irrelevant unless you can explain this: How did they superimpose Jackies shoulder back into the film?

72 motion experts looked at all agreed it was animation draw in. When the documentary comes out will you accept the evidence and expertise?

His head is leaning forward and downwards, you just caught a glimpse of her shoulder. Kennedy's head was no longer forward looking and blocking the view.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

72 motion experts looked at all agreed it was animation draw in. When the documentary comes out will you accept the evidence and expertise?

His head is leaning forward and downwards, you just caught a glimpse of her shoulder. Kennedy's head was no longer forward looking and blocking the view.

Nope you can see her shoulder behind his head, through a curve (wound) where his head should've been.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Nope you can see her shoulder behind his head, through a curve (wound) where his head should've been.

What are you talking about?

Do you not see her hand behind the head, she nudges him as she about to jump up and try to escape. His head is forward and looking downwards. You can even see the entire hairline. There no curve head wound.

You seeing a glimpse of her right shoulder due to the position of his head at this time.

So nobody saw this frontal lobe wound at Parkland Hospital and Bethesda medical centre, but you still believe it?

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

What are you talking about?

That you can see Jackies shoulder because there a gap where part of his head should have been.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

So nobody saw this frontal lobe wound at Parkland Hospital and Bethesda medical centre, but you still believe it?

No, I don't believe you, because you're lying.

Lets examine shall we?

Humes, the chief pathologist (he was actually qualified as such at the time!) -

"It (the laceration) was situated approximately 2.5 cm. to the right of the midline, and extended from the tip of occipital lobe, which is the posterior portion of the brain, to the tip of the frontal lobe".

"The third obvious wound at the time of the examination was a huge defect over the right side of the skull. This defect involved both the scalp and the underlying skull, "

"we concluded that the large defect to the upper right side of the skull, in fact, would represent a wound of exit"

Dr Boswell:
Question: "as to the points of entry and points of exit which have been testified to by Doctor Humes, do his views express yours as well?

Boswell: "They do. Yes."

"The pathologists said the other bullet that hit Kennedy, the so-called magic bullet that also struck Texas Gov. John B. Connally, clearly hit Kennedy from behind because of the "scorching and splitting of the skin" as it entered the base of the president's neck"

So in short, there was a wound at the tip of the frontal lobe and the tip of the occiptal area. And everywhere in between. Including the scalp and hair that was loose and hanging off his head. A huge wound.

Your problem, is that you don't read raw data. You accept gathered data from any source that fits your agenda. This is quite clear as you don't seem to have read any books or watched any films on the topic. Even by people whos theories you believe. You don't have the attention span for it.

You clearly haven't read Humes or Boswells testimony or subsequent interviews (like this). You just post stupid pictures you nabbed off some website.

So tell us again how ALL the doctors in Dallas and at the autopsy only saw a huge wound at the back and "nobody saw this frontal lobe wound".

You're saying no one saw a frontal lobe wound yet a trained chimp could quickly and easily find out that the chief pathologist of the autopsy saw a frontal lobe wound. This information has been widely available for 56 years.

For fúcks sake.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

That you can see Jackies shoulder because there a gap where part of his head should have been.



No, I don't believe you, because you're lying.

Lets examine shall we?

Humes, the chief pathologist (he was actually qualified as such at the time!) -

"It (the laceration) was situated approximately 2.5 cm. to the right of the midline, and extended from the tip of occipital lobe, which is the posterior portion of the brain, to the tip of the frontal lobe".

"The third obvious wound at the time of the examination was a huge defect over the right side of the skull. This defect involved both the scalp and the underlying skull, "

"we concluded that the large defect to the upper right side of the skull, in fact, would represent a wound of exit"

Dr Boswell:
Question: "as to the points of entry and points of exit which have been testified to by Doctor Humes, do his views express yours as well?

Boswell: "They do. Yes."

"The pathologists said the other bullet that hit Kennedy, the so-called magic bullet that also struck Texas Gov. John B. Connally, clearly hit Kennedy from behind because of the "scorching and splitting of the skin" as it entered the base of the president's neck"

So in short, there was a wound at the tip of the frontal lobe and the tip of the occiptal area. And everywhere in between. Including the scalp and hair that was loose and hanging off his head. A huge wound.

Your problem, is that you don't read raw data. You accept gathered data from any source that fits your agenda. This is quite clear as you don't seem to have read any books or watched any films on the topic. Even by people whos theories you believe. You don't have the attention span for it.

You clearly haven't read Humes or Boswells testimony or subsequent interviews (like this). You just post stupid pictures you nabbed off some website.

So tell us again how ALL the doctors in Dallas and at the autopsy only saw a huge wound at the back and saw no wound further forward or higher.

Embarrassing even for you Nal. So a 2.5cm wound? Explain how that is the same wound described to be 5-inches in diameter?

Where did you pull that quote from, please post the source with context?

The occipital bone is at the back of the head. It not in front. Whoever you quoting clearly does not understand brain anatomy.

And there no occipital bone wound on the JFK autopsy photo. You clearly don't see what wrong with the visual medical evidence also.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Where did you pull that quote from, please post the source with context?

Humes and Boswells Warren commission testimonies. Which you clearly havent even read.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Humes and Boswells Warren commission testimonies. Which you clearly havent even read.

This is where the large defect in the head was and you clearly do not understand the implications.

What are you saying there were two huge hole defects in the head?

JFK Autopsy
The large and irregularly-shaped wound in the right side of the head (chiefly to the parietal bone, but also involving the temporal and occipital bone) is described as being about 13 centimetres (5.1 inches) wide at the largest diameter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy

Where in the autopsy notes does it mention a 5-inch hole in the frontal lobe?

So clearly that 5-inch wound is the point of exit.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Humes and Boswells Warren commission testimonies. Which you clearly havent even read.

You clearly have no clue what they even said.

We have the autopsy image of JFK head and there no wound behind the right ear. Are you going to explain that to us why that is, anytime soon?

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

This is where the large defect in the head was and you clearly do not understand the implications.

What are you saying there were two huge hole defects in the head?

JFK Autopsy
The large and irregularly-shaped wound in the right side of the head (chiefly to the parietal bone, but also involving the temporal and occipital bone) is described as being about 13 centimetres (5.1 in) wide at the largest diameter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_autopsy

Where in the autopsy notes does it mention a 5-inch hole in the frontal lobe?

You don't understand the difference between a laceration and a hole and a defect. You just go with "wound" or "hole".

You don't understand how there was a reconstruction of the scalp.

You don't understand that the skull is composed of two layers of bone.

Why don't you read their testimonies? Try, just try to study one topic thoroughly.

Instead, even though you have no theory of your own whatsoever, you believe a conspiracy involving (and this is a conservative list) LBJ, the Mafia, the CIA, the FBI, Cuban exiles, Life magazine, Kodak employees in Dallas, the Dallas Police, the Dallas District Attorney, the Secret Service, the autopsy doctors at Bethesda, Kennedy's own personal physician, the HSCA, Ford Motors, the Marine Corps, the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Cuba, the Soviet government, the KGB, the teamsters union, Ruth and Michael Paine, Lee Harvey Oswald Marina Oswald, Western Union, Jack Ruby and Abraham Zapruder. And lots and lots of others. Thousands of people.

Stand back and think about that. Have you any idea how utterly ridiculous this is?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

You don't understand the difference between a laceration and a hole and a defect. You just go with "wound" or "hole".

You don't understand how there was a reconstruction of the scalp.

You don't understand that the skull is composed of two layers of bone.

Why don't you read their testimonies? Try, just try to study one topic thoroughly.

Instead, even though you have no theory of your own whatsoever, you believe a conspiracy involving (and this is a conservative list) LBJ, the Mafia, the CIA, the FBI, Cuban exiles, Life magazine, Kodak employees in Dallas, the Dallas Police, the Dallas District Attorney, the Secret Service, the autopsy doctors at Bethesda, Kennedy's own personal physician, the HSCA, Ford Motors, the Marine Corps, the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Cuba, the Soviet government, the KGB, the teamsters union, Ruth and Michael Paine, Lee Harvey Oswald Marina Oswald, Western Union, Jack Ruby and Abraham Zapruder. And lots and lots of others. Thousands of people.

Stand back and think about that. Have you any idea how utterly ridiculous this is?

You are a ridiculous person and clearly are misrepresenting the autopsy findings.

I also presented the JFK Autopsy photo as evidence.

A clear photograph of no head wound behind the right ear. Find me a large hole on the Autopsy image.