Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: 11/22/63 Parkland Medical Reports, the Throat Wound, and the Large Head Wound  (Read 10977 times)

Offline Chris Bristow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 189
Advertisement


JohnM
It is always interesting to see how people draw very different conclusion by interrupting a visual image. What I see is that his hand definitely lands near the official wound location. But the circle he draws ends up in the same place his drawings and other demonstration have shown. When he finishes the circle his finger is nowhere near where it started. It seems like he may have touched his head then dragged his fingers to where he wanted to make the circle.
Try holding your hand 6 inches from your head and decide what part of the head you will touch. You may find that the place your finger lands is an inch or two away from where you thought it would land. 
« Last Edit: August 15, 2020, 05:12:52 AM by Chris Bristow »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Witnesses to the head wound should be using a good-sized mirror so they can close off a circle accurately
« Last Edit: August 15, 2020, 05:58:30 AM by Bill Chapman »

Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4267
It is always interesting to see how people draw very different conclusion by interrupting a visual image. What I see is that his hand definitely lands near the official wound location. But the circle he draws ends up in the same place his drawings and other demonstration have shown. When he finishes the circle his finger is nowhere near where it started. It seems like he may have touched his head then dragged his fingers to where he wanted to make the circle.
Try holding your hand 6 inches from your head and decide what part of the head you will touch. You may find that the place your finger lands is an inch or two away from where you thought it would land.

Quote
Try holding your hand 6 inches from your head and decide what part of the head you will touch. You may find that the place your finger lands is an inch or two away from where you thought it would land.

McClelland initially points to where his scalp meets his hairline and because I look at this point on myself virtually everyday, I have no trouble locating this position and there is no way that I'd miss this location by two inches, try it yourself. If you have no hair, close your eyes and point to the top of your ear, do you miss the top of your ear by even an inch?
Within context of when the GIF is taken, it's after McClelland is shown the official autopsy photos and he has no choice but to point to where the wounds front most extremity actually was, where he ends up is a subconscious attempt to save face and/or just a muscle memory trace of his usual deceptive location.

Look at the level of McClelland's ear in the GIF as compared to the level of the ear in his infamous drawing, which bears little resemblance to where he's actually pointing.





"I find no discrepancy between the wounds as they're shown very vividly in these photographs and what I remember very vividly"
Dr Robert McClelland from the NOVA JFK documentary.



JohnM
« Last Edit: August 15, 2020, 10:43:41 AM by John Mytton »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline John Mytton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4267
Sticks an arrow in his preferred location and ignores what the guy's hand is actually doing.

Are you claiming that McClelland's hand has entered the 4th dimension and is actually doing something else?
In the following still, McClelland is indicating the front edge of the wound which just happens to coincide with the autopsy photo below, Geez Louise, what are the chances!



My "preferred location" is reinforced by the actual autopsy photo's and the HSCA's medical panel's analysis.





JohnM
« Last Edit: August 15, 2020, 10:52:10 AM by John Mytton »

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6506
Are you claiming that McClelland's hand has entered the 4th dimension and is actually doing something else?
In the following still, McClelland is indicating the front edge of the wound which just happens to coincide with the autopsy photo below, Geez Louise, what are the chances!



My "preferred location" is reinforced by the actual autopsy photo's and the HSCA's medical panel's analysis.





JohnM

Lord Iacoletti the Belittler
« Last Edit: August 16, 2020, 06:45:50 AM by Bill Chapman »

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Chris Bristow

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 189
McClelland initially points to where his scalp meets his hairline and because I look at this point on myself virtually everyday, I have no trouble locating this position and there is no way that I'd miss this location by two inches, try it yourself. If you have no hair, close your eyes and point to the top of your ear, do you miss the top of your ear by even an inch?
Within context of when the GIF is taken, it's after McClelland is shown the official autopsy photos and he has no choice but to point to where the wounds front most extremity actually was, where he ends up is a subconscious attempt to save face and/or just a muscle memory trace of his usual deceptive location.

Look at the level of McClelland's ear in the GIF as compared to the level of the ear in his infamous drawing, which bears little resemblance to where he's actually pointing.





"I find no discrepancy between the wounds as they're shown very vividly in these photographs and what I remember very vividly"
Dr Robert McClelland from the NOVA JFK documentary.



JohnM

I find it easy to locate the top of the ear but with the skull I land an inch from where I intended. 
     

Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
Are you claiming that McClelland's hand has entered the 4th dimension and is actually doing something else?
In the following still, McClelland is indicating the front edge of the wound which just happens to coincide with the autopsy photo below, Geez Louise, what are the chances!

My "preferred location" is reinforced by the actual autopsy photo's and the HSCA's medical panel's analysis.

JohnM

"Geez Louise" is right: Do you think no one notices that McClelland's hand ends up in the back of his head? Or did you simply not notice this? This is just silly. You constantly pull this nonsense. You post silly GIFs that are either irrelevant or that refute your argument.

Do you just not care that McClelland told the WC, the ARRB, and anyone else who asked him, that the large wound was in the right occipital-parietal area, i.e., the right-rear part of the head?

In numerous interviews, McClelland made it clear that he believed the bullet entered from the front and exited the back of the head. Here are two of them that were video-taped:


(large head wound discussion starts at 33:13)

(large head wound discussion starts at 33:50)

"I find no discrepancy between the wounds as they're shown very vividly in these photographs and what I remember very vividly." Dr Robert McClelland from the NOVA JFK documentary.

Why do WC apologists always omit the fact that McClelland also said that one of the autopsy photos he saw at the National Archives showed a visible amount of bone missing from the occipital region? Funny how you guys leave out this key information.

Plus, we don't what autopsy photos McClelland was shown. Several Bethesda witnesses said they saw autopsy photos that showed a large wound in the back of the head. McClelland might have been shown some of those photos. Or, he might have been referring to F8, which shows a sizable amount of bone missing from the occiput.

There is also the fact, which you guys also never mention, that the Parkland doctors who viewed the autopsy photos at the National Archives in 1988 for the Nova documentary complained that Nova either misquoted or misinterpreted their comments:


Quote
For the 25th observance of the assassination (1988), four Parkland physicians (Robert McClelland, Richard Delaney, Paul Peters, and Marion Jenkins) traveled to the National Archives to view the autopsy materials. On leaving, they were asked by Nova if their recollections disagreed with the photographs. This time many investigators expected that they would disagree, but now another kind of surprise these physicians seemed to imply that they had seen no discrepancies. Nonetheless, on subsequent careful questioning, they later complained that the Nova program had either misquoted or misinterpreted their comments. (https://themantikview.com/pdf/The_Medical_Evidence_Decoded.pdf)



« Last Edit: August 17, 2020, 03:47:54 PM by Michael T. Griffith »

Offline Ray Mitcham

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 994









Plus, we don't what autopsy photos McClelland was shown.

We have only seen the "official" photos.



Quote
There is also the fact, which you guys also never mention, that the Parkland doctors who viewed the autopsy photos at the National Archives in 1988 for the Nova documentary complained that Nova either misquoted or misinterpreted their comments:[/size]

The people who took the "official" photos denied that they were the photos they took.

JFK Assassination Forum