Stop With The Limo Stop

[Royell Storing]

No, Royell, I'm explaining how what the doctors at Parkland saw is consistent with the wound seen in the authenticated Z-film and the autopsy pics.
Jenkins description of the head wound is confirmed by the Z-film which is confirmed by the autopsy pics. Three main lines of evidence corroborating each other.
All you offer is your meaningless, unsupported opinion.
Who cares what you think, Royell?
If you want to discuss the evidence I've presented in the last few posts, that's fine.
If you just want to stamp your foot and insist that you're right, go for it.
Time after time you've refused to engage in serious debate because you have nothing to offer, only your insistence that you're right.

You're getting killed here.

Who by?
YOU??
 
That's like being attacked by a marshmallow.

    What exactly do you call ALL THAT SPACE you devoted to Jim Jenkins? He was at the Bethesda Autopsy of the STOLEN BODY.  You need to concentrate on: (1) Focus and (2) Discipline. Also, put some time in with your memory. 

[John Iacoletti]

Question, are the straps the same?

 

You can’t even prove the rifles are the same.

[John Iacoletti]

The bullet fragments found in the Limo

LOL

were an exclusive match to Oswald's rifle

LOL

The rifle with Oswald's prints

LOL

and 3 types of fibre that matched Oswald's arrest shirt

LOL

And don't forget that the relatively fresh prints on the rifle rest

LOL

And also don't forget that Oswald in flight

LOL

from the horrendous crime he just committed

LOL

went to his room and grabbed his revolver

LOL

and killed Officer Tippit

LOL

and when arrested tried to kill more policeman.

LOL

And you honestly are trying to defend this Double Murderer

LOL

Thank you for everything! Sincerely yours, John

[Dan O'meara]

    What exactly do you call ALL THAT SPACE you devoted to Jim Jenkins? He was at the Bethesda Autopsy of the STOLEN BODY.  You need to concentrate on: (1) Focus and (2) Discipline. Also, put some time in with your memory.

Just more nothingness.
You are so irrelevant it's a joke.
There is never any substance in anything you post.
Just meaningless drivel.
Honestly, why do you bother even posting anything?

Just for the record - Royell's best evidence for alteration of the Z-film has been dealt with. His piss-weak attempt to uphold his fantastical beliefs has been dashed.
Are there any other Alteration Fantasists out there who fancy their chances?
Come on down.

[Michael Welch]

Just more nothingness.
You are so irrelevant it's a joke.
There is never any substance in anything you post.
Just meaningless drivel.
Honestly, why do you bother even posting anything?

Just for the record - Royell's best evidence for alteration of the Z-film has been dealt with. His piss-weak attempt to uphold his fantastical beliefs has been dashed.
Are there any other Alteration Fantasists out there who fancy their chances?
Come on down.

Hi Dan, According to the Knudsens, anything that looks like this is fake.


Dr. John Ebersole in charge of X-Rays at the autopsy says "back of the head was missing."https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/audio/HSCA_Ebersole_R1S1.mp3
Why does your hand drawn red line not extend beyond the right ear??quote author=Dan O'meara link=topic=3832.msg152218#msg152218 date=1699553071]
You can't see behind JFK's right ear in the autopsy pics. Explain what you mean.

The autopsy pic is a view from above JFK's head,
The Z-film is a view of JFK's head in profile, a side view.
I get the impression you are being confused by these differing perspectives.
The massive head wound shown in the Z-film extends far behind the ear but it is on top of the head:



So when this injury is viewed from above it should correctly appear as if it is an injury that extends "behind the ear", as you put it.
Also, as John has already pointed out, gravity is dragging down JFK's hair and the matter escaping from his skull which gives a distorted perception of the injury which you don't seem to have taken into account.

Do me a favour Michael.
Rather than just blurting out your next irrelevant point, take a close look at the evidence being presented to you and take it from there.
[/quote]

Thank you for everything! Sincerely yours, Michael

[Royell Storing]

You can't see behind JFK's right ear in the autopsy pics. Explain what you mean.

The autopsy pic is a view from above JFK's head,
The Z-film is a view of JFK's head in profile, a side view.
I get the impression you are being confused by these differing perspectives.
The massive head wound shown in the Z-film extends far behind the ear but it is on top of the head:



So when this injury is viewed from above it should correctly appear as if it is an injury that extends "behind the ear", as you put it.
Also, as John has already pointed out, gravity is dragging down JFK's hair and the matter escaping from his skull which gives a distorted perception of the injury which you don't seem to have taken into account.

Do me a favour Michael.
Rather than just blurting out your next irrelevant point, take a close look at the evidence being presented to you and take it from there.

      Check out the audio HSCA Testimony of Dr John Ebersole on "YOU TUBE".  Ebersole was Active Chief Of Radiology at Bethesda on 11/22/63. Regarding the head of JFK, Ebersole details, "BACK of the head was MISSING, an irregular, messy wound". He was present when JFK's body was removed from the casket and remained there until about 3 AM. Ebersole's testimony is posted by "The JFK Theorist" and runs a little under 2hrs. It'a very informative/educational. 

[John Mytton]

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

LOL

Thank you for everything! Sincerely yours, John

Thanks John for confirming that you're still just a sad old Clown and your best effort of refutation is being reduced to maniacally laughing at every piece of rock solid evidence. 
After 60 years and hundreds of thousands of hours devoted to interviewing, researching, speculating and moronic observations and not one of you have come close to presenting a viable alternative to the the one man where ALL the evidence leads >>> Lee Harvey Oswald!
I truly feel sorry for you and all the time you've wasted searching for your mythical Holy Grail.
 
JohnM

[Dan O'meara]

Hi Dan, According to the Knudsens, anything that looks like this is fake.

Mr. PURDY - A photograph of the back of the President's head. Let me just ask you if that looks like one that you saw, or that matches your recollection. This is the back of the President's head here.
Mr. KNUDSEN - There again, I did not study it in detail. It seems to me that there was a little bit more of the piece of the skull hanging in one of the photographs. Here, this is it.
Mr. PURDY - Now we are referring to Photograph No. 37F, showing the top of the President's head. So it is your testimony here today that these photographs are not inconsistent with the ones that you saw?
Mr. KNUDSEN - No, not at all.

Dr. John Ebersole in charge of X-Rays at the autopsy says "back of the head was missing."https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/audio/HSCA_Ebersole_R1S1.mp3

Ebserole did not examine JFK's head and did not participate in the autopsy in any way.
Jenkins did both and in his interview gives a forensic analysis of the injuries he observed.
Who should we be listening to?
Ebersole's recollection of the procedure is almost non-existent, he has no recollection of the head being unwrapped, no recollection of Jenkins or O'Connor assisting and he remembers the neck wound as being sutured.
It must be remembered that Jenkins, who was intimately involved with the procedure, is no WC apologist. He is a CTer through-and-through. He believes the head was surgically altered before it's arrival at Bethesda and has zero reason to uphold the official narrative.
He reports that the whole side of JFK's head came away as they unwrapped it and that it was then put back again. Like the Parkland doctors, who also didn't examine the head wound, Ebersole saw the damage to the back of the head but was unaware the wound was far larger and that it accounted for most of the upper right portion of the skull.

Why does your hand drawn red line not extend beyond the right ear?

It's the orientation of the image.
If you were looking at JFK's head from directly above the red line would extend beyond the ear.
You're not reading my posts properly.

The autopsy pic is a view from above JFK's head,
The Z-film is a view of JFK's head in profile, a side view.
I get the impression you are being confused by these differing perspectives.
The massive head wound shown in the Z-film extends far behind the ear but it is on top of the head:



So when this injury is viewed from above it should correctly appear as if it is an injury that extends "behind the ear", as you put it.
Also, as John has already pointed out, gravity is dragging down JFK's hair and the matter escaping from his skull which gives a distorted perception of the injury which you don't seem to have taken into account.

Do me a favour Michael.
Rather than just blurting out your next irrelevant point, take a close look at the evidence being presented to you and take it from there.