Autopsy Photos and X-rays

[Jerry Organ]

But according to the people who took the photos, we haven't seen the entire set.

So you agree that what we do have is authentic?

[Ray Mitcham]

So you agree that what we do have is authentic?

No.

[Jerry Organ]

No.

I'm halfway through "At the Cold Shoulder of History" part of which details James C. Jenkins' belief that the published autopsy photographs were not taken at Bethesda. Here's a fellow who was at the Bethesda autopsy and who has a photographic memory. Says he didn't give the JFK autopsy hardy any thought until receiving an interview request from the HSCA in 1977.

Now he's convinced there was an unattached brain sitting in the cranium when the body was brought in. I guess if he didn't witness firsthand Humes severing the brain stem. it must not have happened.

[Royell Storing]

No, it's always Kennedy. The HSCA did an extensive study on the authenticity of the Autopsy Photos and here is a few examples of their proof;

First of all they measured all the individual facial parts and by using photogrammetric rules they calculated the positions and distances between skin blemishes, creases, ears, eyes, neck, mouth, nose, chin etc.



For instance here's Kennedy's neck creases which line up from front to back.



And we also can see a random mark on Kennedy's back which is repeated in the top down photo.



When the entire set of autopsy photos is examined as a whole, like a jigsaw puzzle each photo has links in other photos.

Btw isn't getting some other guy and performing plastic surgery on him, then blowing his brains out a little extreme?

JohnM

    The discussion centered on the "Brylcreem Photo", and  you then post photos of everything But the Brylcream Photo. It's obvious why.  Is it possible that what you are innocently labeling a, "Random mark on Kennedy's back" = BULLET HOLE?

[John Iacoletti]

    The discussion centered on the "Brylcreem Photo", and  you then post photos of everything But the Brylcream Photo. It's obvious why.  Is it possible that what you are innocently labeling a, "Random mark on Kennedy's back" = BULLET HOLE?

And his evidence that the "random marks" are "the same" is left as an exercise for the reader.  Much like the magic rifle gouge.

[John Mytton]

    The discussion centered on the "Brylcreem Photo", and  you then post photos of everything But the Brylcream Photo. It's obvious why.  Is it possible that what you are innocently labeling a, "Random mark on Kennedy's back" = BULLET HOLE?

The discussion centered on the "Brylcreem Photo", and  you then post photos of everything But the Brylcream Photo. It's obvious why.

I have no idea what the Brylcreem/Brylcream Photo is, how about you post it for me then I can see it?

Is it possible that what you are innocently labeling a, "Random mark on Kennedy's back" = BULLET HOLE?

No, you can't even see the bullet hole in one of those photos, where do you guys come from?



JohnM

[John Mytton]

And his evidence that the "random marks" are "the same" is left as an exercise for the reader.  Much like the magic rifle gouge.

"magic rifle gouge" LOL!

JohnM

[Royell Storing]

And his evidence that the "random marks" are "the same" is left as an exercise for the reader.  Much like the magic rifle gouge.

    I like his Slam Dunk ID = a Wrinkle on the neck. Angela Lansbury sleuth work.