Dr. Malcolm Perry and the JFK head wound

[Gary Craig]

Article from Washington Evening Star, 27 Nov 1963, page A-5

Excerpts: 

"White House Won't Talk on Kennedy Autopsy" 

By the Associated Press

"The White House has so far declined to say whether an autopsy was performed on the body of President John F. Kennedy. 

The body was at the Bethesda Naval Hospital for approximately nine hours last Friday night and early Saturday morning. 

Civilian morticians were called to the hospital to prepare the body for burial. 

....

Doctors in Dallas who administered emergency treatment to the President said yesterday they do not know whether one or two

bullets had hit him.  However, Federal authorities seemed fairly certain it was two bullets. 

One Washington source said, "There is some doubt whether the fatal bullet was the second shot or third shot.  The first shot is

believed to have hit the President, but we're not sure about the second and third." 

Thus, he indicated, the first bullet to strike Mr. Kennedy might not have been fatal. 

One bullet struck Texas Gov. John Connally, wounding him. 

Dr. Kemp Clark, a brain surgeon who was summoned to the emergency room of the Dallas hospital where the President was taken after

the shooting, said in Dallas yesterday that a bullet did such massive damage to the right rear of the President's head that the

attending surgeons could not tell whether it had entered or come out of the head there. 

"A missile had gone in, or come out the back of his head, causing extensive lacerations and loss of brain tissue, " Dr. Clark said. 

Dr. Clark said he was unable to say whether the wound in the President's neck, below the Adam's apple, was due to the same bullet

that had coursed through the President's brain.  He said there could have been two bullets. 

Dr. Malcolm Perry of Dallas, who also treated the President after the shooting, had said on Friday that he was unable to determine

whether one or two bullets were involved." 

[end of article]

[Ray Mitcham]

I think the keyword here is " according to". Any reason why you take the interviewer, James Gochenaur's claim as gospel?  None of Gochenaur's claims can be substantiated, virtually nothing is known about the man, yet you swallow everything he says hook-line-an-sinker.

You mean the same way you swallow everything the Warren Omission said?

Seriously, why? For anyone interested, here's a link to Gochenaur's claims.  http://www.whokilledjfk.net/pressure_dr.htm

"Miller, who later worked and taught with Perry at the University of Washington School of Medicine in the 1970s, says Perry told him there were entry wounds from both behind and in front of Kennedy, contradicting what he told the commission under oath. Perry confided similar details to an Alaska doctor as well."

What has what Dr Miller said, got to do with Gochenaur?

[Denis Pointing]

You mean the same way you swallow everything the Warren Omission said?
"Miller, who later worked and taught with Perry at the University of Washington School of Medicine in the 1970s, says Perry told him there were entry wounds from both behind and in front of Kennedy, contradicting what he told the commission under oath. Perry confided similar details to an Alaska doctor as well."

What has what Dr Miller said, got to do with Gochenaur?

You obviously have no idea concerning my opinion of the WC, if you did you'd know that I've openly stated, many times, that I believe some members of the WC were working to an agender to find Oswald to be an LN. I've also stated many times that IMO, the WR was full of mistakes. Why presumptively state other members 'opinions' if you have no idea what they actually are? The link I provided shows the " University of Washington graduate student who interviewed Moore and eventually testified at government hearings." that you referred to was in fact Gochenaur, not Dr Miller.

[Ray Mitcham]

You obviously have no idea concerning my opinion of the WC, if you did you'd know that I've openly stated, many times, that I believe some members of the WC were working to an agender to find Oswald to be an LN. I've also stated many times that IMO, the WR was full of mistakes. Why presumptively state other members 'opinions' if you have no idea what they actually are? The link I provided shows the " University of Washington graduate student who interviewed Moore and eventually testified at government hearings." that you referred to was in fact Gochenaur, not Dr Miller.

I read your  Gochenaur link. And I asked you why you dismiss Dr Miller's comments.

[Denis Pointing]

I read your  Gochenaur link. And I asked you why you dismiss Dr Miller's comments.

Ray, It's not a case of off-handily dismissing it. I just don't see any reason to blindly accept it without any substantial proof to back it up, same with the Alaskan doctor. Until I see proof to the contrary I'm sticking to what Dr Perry said under oath. Is that unreasonable?

[Ray Mitcham]

Ray, It's not a case of off-handily dismissing it. I just don't see any reason to blindly accept it without any substantial proof to back it up, same with the Alaskan doctor. Until I see proof to the contrary I'm sticking to what Dr Perry said under oath. Is that unreasonable?

Strange that two different surgeons each said that Perry had told them that he had changed his mind and told the W.C. that it could've been an exit wound. But then you appear to only believe unsubantiated proof when it agrees with your position.

[Denis Pointing]

Strange that two different surgeons each said that Perry had told them that he had changed his mind and told the W.C. that it could've been an exit wound. But then you appear to only believe unsubstantiated proof when it agrees with your position.

And exactly what "unsubstantiated proof" do I believe in then Ray? You really think you know me that well, do you? Are you sure you're not just being over presumptuous again? You seem to have a bad habit of doing that. If it's just a petty argument you're after go pester someone else. If you can debate like a grown-up then carry on.

[Louis Earl]

Clint Hill:   Mr. Hill  --  The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.  This is testimony of Clint Hill .

So ... what happened to the "right rear portion of his head" that was lying in the rear seat?  Did anyone pick it up, take it into the ER?  Asking for a friend.