Six Seconds in Dallas-- Old book, a must read

[Royell Storing]

Their actual report stated: "During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. HUMES located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders".

"Below the shoulders". What does that mean? The shoulder line? The shoulder muscle mass? T6 level? Below the shoulder blade?

Humes had photographed and described the "back wound" as at the base of the back of the neck. C7 level.

The autopsy report concluded the bullet that entered the back then exited through the throat wound as seen in the photograph at autopsy: the base of the front of the neck. T1 level.

   Which "autopsy report" are you referencing? Would that be the "autopsy report" that Dr. Humes burned in his fireplace?

[Martin Weidmann]

Their actual report stated: "During the latter stages of this autopsy, Dr. HUMES located an opening which appeared to be a bullet hole which was below the shoulders".

"Below the shoulders". What does that mean? The shoulder line? The shoulder muscle mass? T6 level? Below the shoulder blade?

Humes had photographed and described the "back wound" as at the base of the back of the neck. C7 level.

The autopsy report concluded the bullet that entered the back then exited through the throat wound as seen in the photograph at autopsy: the base of the front of the neck. T1 level.

Do you expect FBI agents to be up to date with the right medical terms to describe what they saw?

The two men were present at the autopsy and drew for the HSCA the locations of the wounds they observed. And both drawings match!

What are you so afraid of that you instantly dismiss those observations by claiming without a shred of evidence that both men somehow were "under the influence of CT kooks"? You really must be upset that they were not saying what you wanted to hear from them. That may well be the reason also why Arlen Specter decided not to have both men testify after he had talked to them.....

[Nicholas Turner]

   Which "autopsy report" are you referencing? Would that be the "autopsy report" that Dr. Humes burned in his fireplace?

Is that the one that was covered in blood that Humes said he destroyed so it wouldn't get into the hands of 'ghouls'?

[Pat Speer]

There are some real whoppers on this thread.

To address two of them...
1) Several posts make out that Tink made a bundle off SSID. This is not true. Tink has made very little money off the JFK assassination. The profits from SSID--which was not a best-seller,--were eaten up by legal fees. He was at that time a college philosophy professor. Within a few years, however, he left academia, and the east coast, and moved to San Francisco to become a private investigator. He then wrote Gumshoe--a book on the life of a private eye--which did become a best-seller. For the last six years or so, for that matter, he's been working on a follow-up to SSID, which is entitled Last Second in Dallas.
2) Tink has always called it as he sees it. He does not go along to get along. He was inactive for many years, but got sucked back in as a response to those claiming the Zapruder film was altered. This led some (Jim Fetzer) to claim Tink was a secret LN, or some such thing. I remember Fetzer laying odds that Tink would come out on the 50th as a newly-converted LN. But the opposite is the truth. For the last 7 years or so, Tink has held that his earlier appraisal of the z-film was incorrect, and that the film does not show Kennedy's head go forward and then back, as he once claimed. No, he now says that it only goes back, and that all evidence points to a head shot from the front at frame 313. He's also grown close to Don Thomas, and has come to believe the dicta-belt recording proves 5 shots were fired, with at least one (I think he says two) from the knoll. As far as the exact sequence, and the authenticity of the single-bullet theory, etc, Tink has lost interest. He calls the book Last Second in Dallas for a reason, as the book will be devoted to the head shot, and only the head shot.

P.S. Tink showed me an early version of his new book on two occasions, and I've also looked through it at the house of another researcher, but I don't have a copy of it myself. So I may be mistaken about some of what will be in his new book. But I'm fairly certain the bulk of the book has not changed over the last few years.

[Michael Walton]

As I said before, JT got it right in his 60's book. It makes absolutely no sense that the shots were fired earlier. The Towner film shows no startled looks and swiveling heads and that's pretty far down into the procession. Even the other photos further down but before the first shots show everything is normal. Kennedy's swift turn to the right and a wave is nothing more than that - the women over there yelled for him and he looked that way and waved. You can see this not only in the Z film but in that other photo that shows his head from the back looking over at them (I'm sorry I cannot remember who took the photo).

I, too, call it as I see it. I know people want to try to make things all scientific or go by 100 different witness statements to compare and contrast to somehow try to prove that there were shots up earlier. Science is not always going to get you where you want to go though.

I made a video about this a while back.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7Hr9Lrku-Cxa3NqTEpScWNQZnc/view

Again, calling it as I see it. Like the two final shots spaced very close together (head shots) I believe there were other closely spaced shots for the throat and back. Remember - there is NO exit for the back shot but it did happen. The head bob for me is when this happens in the above video a split second after the throat shot hits.

It makes no sense for conspirators to go through all of this trouble to blame a patsy and set up a staged scene on the 6th floor and then allow their shooters to start firing early. They'd have to be the greatest - and then dumbest - conspirators of all time.

There's a movie on TMC called Executive Action.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070046/

As seen in this movie, which was made in 1973 and stars Burt Lancaster and Grandpa Walton, it's a pretty good movie that covers a lot of conspiracy ground. Amazingly, it didn't create the groundswell  that Stone's movie did 20 years later. It should have though because unlike Stone's Mister X plot, this one covers what the vast majority of folks think really happened as well as the logistics.

But back to this 6-second thing - there's a scene in the movie where there's a guy on a walkie-talkie giving commands on when to shoot. This, too, is why I don't believe that the shooters would have just started firing way up earlier. It makes no logical sense.

[Tim Nickerson]

Is that the one that was covered in blood that Humes said he destroyed so it wouldn't get into the hands of 'ghouls'?

There was the autopsy report and the supplemental autopsy report. Neither of the two were destroyed. There was never any other autopsy report on forensic pathological examination of the body of Kennedy.

[Tim Nickerson]

As I said before, JT got it right in his 60's book. It makes absolutely no sense that the shots were fired earlier.

JT got it wrong in his 60s book. Connally was always adamant that he was struck on the second shot. We can see both he and Kennedy reacting simultaneously at being hit just as Kennedy appears from behind the Stemmons Freeway sign.

[Nicholas Turner]

There was the autopsy report and the supplemental autopsy report. Neither of the two were destroyed. There was never any other autopsy report on forensic pathological examination of the body of Kennedy.

Indeed. He burnt some documents, his original notes, but not the report, I understand.