Dr. Mantik proves the left lateral x-ray is a copy?

[Gerry Down]

Dr. David Mantik has discovered that a "T" shape was scratched into the original left lateral x-ray of JFKs skull. However when this x-ray is viewed at NARA, there is no evidence of scratching around this letter "T". This is because the one at NARA is a copy of the original and therefore there would be no evidence of scratching on the copy, but only the original. In other words, the x-ray at NARA is a copy of the original, with the original no where in sight.

This is problematic because the HSCA said all these x-rays were originals. 

Dr. Mantik talks about this at 1 hour in on this video:

[Gerry Down]

I knew about this. There is so much tampered with evidence by the government in this case there will be thousands of threads if each instance is written about separately here.

There are thousands of claimed tampering of evidence. Most of those don't hold up though. This appears to be scientific proof that at least one x-ray is indeed a copy with the original no where in sight.

The interesting thing here is if you locate the real left lateral x-ray, there could be other stuff located there too - like lost autopsy photos and more of the skull x-rays. Dr Ebersole said there were 5 or 6 skull x-rays taken at the autopsy yet there are only 3 at NARA.

[Gerry Down]

So out of curiosity what incidences of tampering are not legit to you? Maybe list a few off the top of your head.

What about the 3mm object that shows up on the skull X ray after not being observed during autopsy?

All the autopsy stuff looks legit except for the issue that is the subject of this thread.

[Tim Nickerson]

Dr. David Mantik has discovered that a "T" shape was scratched into the original left lateral x-ray of JFKs skull. However when this x-ray is viewed at NARA, there is no evidence of scratching around this letter "T". This is because the one at NARA is a copy of the original and therefore there would be no evidence of scratching on the copy, but only the original. In other words, the x-ray at NARA is a copy of the original, with the original no where in sight.

This is problematic because the HSCA said all these x-rays were originals. 

Dr. Mantik talks about this at 1 hour in on this video:

Mantik is a joke. He is not a radiologist. He's a Radiation Oncologist. He's still carrying on about a 6.5mm metal object that he thinks is seen in the rear of the skull in the AP X-ray. If you really want to get educated on the autopsy X-rays , I recommend reading Chapters 18 and 18b of Pat Speer's online book.

https://www.patspeer.com/chapter18x-rayspecs

https://www.patspeer.com/chapter-18b-more-fun-with-x-rays

[Gerry Down]

There was no 6.5 mm object on the outer table of the skull. The "6.5 mm" object seen in the AP X-ray is the 7 X 2 mm fragment removed by Humes.

Really? That's all the 6.5mm object is? But no doctor I've heard of in the case says this.

[Tim Nickerson]

Really? That's all the 6.5mm object is? But no doctor I've heard of in the case says this.

From the ARRB deposition of Dr. James Humes:

HUMES:  Two small irregularly-shaped fragments of metal are recovered. They measure 7 by 2 and 3 by 1. Well, that large one that you saw in that first AP view of the skull could be the 7-by-2 millimeter one that we handed over to the FBI.

[Tim Nickerson]

BTW, consider CE388, Rydberg's drawing of the Pathologists' interpretation of the x-rays. In that drawing, the only large fragment depicted is shown residing behind the right eye. That can't be the 7x2mm fragment, which the x-rays show to be resting against the inside of the frontal bone above (and arguably ahead of) the right eye. Curiously, the only large fragment that corresponds to the location of the fragment in the Rydberg diagram is the 6.5mm opacity seen in the AP x-ray. Not sure exactly how to interpret this in the larger scheme of things, but it is something that should bear on the discussion and I rarely, if ever, see brought up. 

Actually, it is the 7x2mm fragment in the Rydberg drawing. That fragment was just above and somewhat behind the President’s eye. The fragment seen imbedded in the frontal skull in the lateral view is much too high. It was never removed. The yellow arrow points to the 7 x 2 mm fragment.

[Jerry Freeman]

There are thousands of claimed tampering of evidence. Most of those don't hold up though.

Thousands? C'mon... dozens lets say. So that must mean a few tampering of evidence claims do hold up. Any at all equals a frame-up.