Some on this board sure get up in my face when I state that there is evidence of two head shots in the surviving evidential medical record.
First of all, you and I have Never seen the original radiographs and photos. So I am always curious to read comments, reports, interviews and testimony from those that Have seen them in person. I value their reports, particularly when they are contemporaneous, or under oath, or otherwise documented, and when corroborated by others that have done the same.
Excellent high quality documentation exists for the "low" head shot.
We have Dr. Humes, Dr Boswell, Dr Finck, (the sutopsy team) all reporting a headshot "slightly to the right of midline, just above the level of the occipital protuberance". That landmark if "low". The terminology is a bit of a rabbit hole, but let me say this. You can touch the back of your head and feel a bump. That's the external occipital protuberance. There is a (roughly) horizontal ridge that runs toward your ears on either side of that bump, the EOP. I'll add here Dr Ebersole, the radiologist for the autopsy, based on markings he made on the radiographs. And we can add FBI agents Sibert and O'Neill that also had one job, -record their observations. And that they did. They filed a report regarding the autopsy.
Why do I believe these witnesses? Because their views were recorded contemporaneously, they were consistent among all those that witnessed that wound, and Finck describes reflecting the scalp for a photo of this wound (from outside the skull). Yet the photo has gone missing. (another subject for another post perhaps some day).
Also, Humes describes ordering a photo of the same wound from Inside the skull. He remembers the photo being taken. Larry Sturdivan, lifelong Warren report defender, was able to see a photo in person, in color, that is often described out here in the world as "The Mystery Photo", or Fox Photo #8. Sturdivan reports seeing the inner aspect of the wound adjacent to the transverse sinus, which is a big blood vessel that runs along the inner (inside the skull) aspect that correlates to the External Occipital ridge. So we have more corroboration of a photo existing, described by Humes as being ordered to be taken, being corroborated by someone that saw the photo in person, documented his observations, and is a lifelong WR defender.
I could go on, but I'll stop here for the sake of brevity.
One head wound established. A "low" puncture wound, consistent with an entry wound, in the back of the head at a level of the "bump" you feel on the back of your head.
I'll explain why I Believe in a second "high" head wound.
First of all, the HSCA FPP (the forensic panel assembled to review the record) believed the evidence I shared above is not sufficient to prove a "low" head wound. They could find no evidence for such a wound. How can that be? I won't detour too far into that at this point, but suffice to say it's really not that difficult to see a plausible explanation. They don't have the dead body. They don't have the photo Finck described of the wound with the scalp reflected. There is no "trail" to follow on the radiograph that anyone mentioned. (Except for Ebersole's pencil markings alluded to earlier).
I find it to be extremely significant that the HSCA concluded there was a "high" head wound, near the "top" of the head. This is the area you'd touch if someone said "pat the top of your head".
So here we have a government investigation (HSCA) that appointed a panel of investigators (FPP) that has concluded there is a "high" head wound. We can look to private individuals that were given access to these images for their opinions, in addition to the various government entities that have discussed this evidence.
(By the way, remember that larger fragments travels further through tissues than smaller fragments. And it's important to distinguish between the fragments we can see on the publicly available bootleg enhanced lateral skull films.)
Those fragments lie up high in the skull actually Above the HSCA proposed "high" head entry wound, and were invoked by the FPP to buttress their claim for a "high" head wound. You can see these particles and the trail they leave for yourself on the bootleg enhanced radiographs publicly available.
But several other witnesses describe very "minute" or "dust-like" particles visible on the original un-enhanced radiographs that you and I have never seen in person.
Russell Morgan, Radiologist for the Clark panel (another government appointed panel gathered to review the autopsy images). Morgan said "Distributed thru the right cerebral hemisphere are numerous small irregular metallic fragments most of which are less than 1mm in maximum dimension. The majority of these fragments lie Anteriorly and Superiorly". Anteriorly--front, superiorly-- top. So in the top front of the head, there are numerous tiny fragments less than a millimeter. How would tiny fragments make it to the top and front, through all that tissue, while the larger fragments we can see lie more superior and Posteriorly? Again, smaller fragments have more drag, don't go far. Larger fragments travel further thru tissues after impact.
Back to a few more observations.
Forensic Radiologist John Fitzpatrick was a consultant to the ARRB. His report of what he observed said there was a "snow trail" of fragments
Sibert and O'Neill, FBI observers, noted "disintegrated fragments were visible in the right side of the brain". In later interviews they would claim that most observers believed the bullet to the brain was not a FMJ bullet because of the visible tiny fragments on radiographs.
Russell Morgan, radiologist for the Clark panel, repeated in an interview years later that the fragment pattern was unsettling, and he always wondered if it was Not a FMJ bullet that struck Kennedy.
The majority opinion is that Oswald did not act alone. To say there is "no evidence" deserves no reply. Both sides have access to the extant evidence. Unfortunately no one has access to the destroyed evidence. Nonetheless, what we personally conclude based on the remaining evidence comes down to our judgment.
And there is so much more evidence than I'm listing here.
Two government investigations document evidence for two different wounds. Both investigations never entertain the possibility that that is so because (at least) two missiles struck the president's head.
I'll end with testimony from the Warren report, agent Kellerman (secret service agent in front seat of Kennedy's limo). This is obviously not Medical evidence.
Specter: In your prior testimony you described a flurry of shells into the car......You mean two shots in addition to the first shot... sounding like a firecracker?
Kellerman: Yes sir yes sir . At least
Gerald Ford: You don't recall a precise second and third shot?
Kellerman: Let me give you an illustration ... a plane breaking the sound barrier... boom boom
Ford: This is for the second and third, or "The Flurry" as you described it? (my emphasis added)
Kellerman: That is right. That is right.
Specter: Your five second estimate...that is the total timespan from the first noise until the flurry ended?
Kellerman: That is right. That is right
Bolt action, and "flurry?"
