What if? - the tracheometry wasnt undertaken?

[ChristophMessner]

Thom, Bruce Brycheck and James Files pointed out here on the forum some time ago, that there was no shot from the front through the windshield, cause the bullet would have deflected.I believe that a shot from the front through the windshield would have be too risky for any shooter to hit somebody else than JFK. The fact, that the throat entry wound had no exit anywhere else, is almost proof in my eyes, that it was a shrapnel wound. Another question is: to where did the first headshot bullet from behind desappear? Obviously exited through the right temple or above ear area. But does that match the trajectory back to TSBD or DalTex then? Chris

[mike oneill]

I have to say that ive always sat on the fence when it comes to the David Lifton theory. Certainly, he points out some possibilities and sure enough the Dallas/Bethesda differences are significant for any researcher. I know that David Lifton believes there was enough time on the aircraft to modify the body - but i'm not sure about that myself. And this is why - there needed to be time to study the body first of all and decide a strategy of what alterations needed to be done to make everything look like a rear assassination AS WELL AS undertaking the alterations themselves. Theres much more to this scenario than just simply cutting the throat wider and bevelling the skull bones on the aircraft.In reality someone would have to find all the holes in the body, and then decide which ones could line up front to back (just like joining the dots) then undertake the appropriate alterations.I just have doubts that both these elements (deciding the strategy AND doing the alterations) could have been done in the time available.Think about this - on the day, Kennedy could have been hit by lots more shots than he actually was because some missed and it would then have been a major issue to decide which ones needed reversing/enlarging etc. The conspirators couldnt have preplanned how many hits/misses were actually going to be present on the body.I hold the view that there was just too much to be decided and then undertaken in just a few minutes in the aircraftMikeO

[ThomZajac]

You make some excellent points, Mike, and you have Cyril Wecht in your camp on the issue of timing. I'll look for David Lifton's response to Wecht's assertion (which I came upon the other night), and I'll post it if I'm successful.But for me, here's the thing; it ultimately boils down to the evidence. On this regard I think it is provable beyond any reasonable doubt that the body did not arrive in the same condition as when it left Parkland. JFK's body arrived in a different coffin (provable), and if different wrappings (provable). The clearest evidence that the body itself was altered is the expanded throat wound (provable), and the fact that JFK left Parkland with much if not most of his brains still in his head, and arrived with virtually no brains at all (provable).That is overwhelming and conclusive evidence that the body was altered. It's proof.Now, on the other hand, you have logic; you don't think there was enough time to do this. Well, logic tells us a hummingbird can't fly. But it does. And so that means that there is something amiss in our logic.Had the plan been from the beginning- and I think it was- to gain control of the president's body and alter it to support him having been struck from only behind, then all the mechanisms would have been in place to do this quickly as possible. Think of how long it might take you to change a tire if you suffered a blowout on the way home from work. Now think of how long it takes to change four tires and fill the tank with gas at the Daytona 500. Logic also tells us that if you jump out of a plane without a parachute that you will very likely die. But that is not the case if that plane is parked on the ground. Logic tells you a man can't pull a rabbit out of a hat.My point is that the logic you use is based upon an incomplete or incorrect understanding of the actual realities, For various 'reasons.' Air Force One waited on the tarmac for HOURS before taking off and returning to Washington. I can't prove that JFK's body was snatched away at Parkland or on the tarmac, but think it must have been. I don't claim to know how the alterations were done, who performed them and where. But I do know beyond any reasonable doubt that JFK's body was altered between Parkland and Bethesda, even though logic may strongly suggest that there simply wasn't enough time.

[mike oneill]

Good Evening ThomIts been a cold wet Saturday here in England and because of that, ive spent the day rereading (again) the relevant Air Force One Chapters from Manchesters Book "Death of a President" and whilst i understand what you are saying about the apparent obvious alterations on the body missmatching and defying logic - I have to conclude again that i just dont see any way at all that any thing devious of this nature could have been done on Air Force 1.Just too many people on board to witness the events and just no opportunities available in my view.Something else has always bothered me about this entire alteration issue - and its this, - if post assassination body alterations truly were going to be part of the strategy to frame Oswald, WHY WAS THIS PART OF THE PLAN UNDERTAKEN SO BADLY?The alterations were undertaken in such an amateurish/botched way - surely the planners would have known it was essential to undertake any required alterations in a convincing surgical manner so to avoid being discovered and noticed afterwards during the autopsy etc.If the throat wound was indeed opened up to make it look liike an exit wound WHY OH WHY didnt those perpetrators realise that there had to be a reasonably placed input wound and bullet pathway starting in the rear neck to ensure it looked like a genuine bullet path - just joining the dots really!!!They would have been crazy to assume that no one would find it strange or suspicious that the back entry was 5 inches away from where it should be!If i had been involved in those alterations i would have been equiped with a 9 inch engineering punch and i would have punched an input wound through the back of the neck to line up with the the "altered" front neck wound. How on earth could the perpertators have forgotten to do this?This is why after all these years i still struggle to believe in the alteration theories - if it was undertaken - why on earth was it done so badly!!MikeO

[ThomZajac]

Hi Mike. It's sunny and cool here in the Santa Cruz Mountains, and I will soon be off to take advantage, so if you respond to this, please know that it may be a while before I can respond to your response.Again, you pose good questions. Again, they are logical questions.In my view, you are using these perfectly logical questions to dismiss conclusive physical evidence. Metaphorically, you are showing me the charts and schematics for why the hummingbird hovering at the feeder in the window can't possibly be hovering at the feeder in the window. I will attempt to answer your questions, but I'd first like to ask you how you explain the evidence of alteration; the expanded neck wound upon arrival at Bethesda, the absence of the brain at Bethesda, and the arrival of JFK's body at Bethesda in a different coffin and in different wrappings than when the body left Parkland (there is additional evidence as well, but I'll limit myself to these for the moment). You're asking me to explain how there could have been enough time to make these alterations- fair enough. Please explain to me why the evidence I've sited is not conclusive evidence proving that the body was altered.You wrote-"Good Evening ThomIts been a cold wet Saturday here in England and because of that, ive spent the day rereading (again) the relevant Air Force One Chapters from Manchesters Book "Death of a President" and whilst i understand what you are saying about the apparent obvious alterations on the body missmatching and defying logic - I have to conclude again that i just dont see any way at all that any thing devious of this nature could have been done on Air Force 1."Why do you assume that JFK's body was on Air Force One and that the alterations would have to had been performed there? JFK's coffin was left unguarded during the swearing in ceremony- when LBJ insisted that everyone come to the front of the plane- and the body could have been snatched there, put on another plane at Love Field and flown to Washington HOURS before Air Force touched down. As I mentioned before, Air Force One sat on the tarmac/runway for hours after the arrival of LBJ and JFK's body, and no good reason has ever been given for that.Why was it done so badly? Again, I can only speculate. It would seem time played a factor. And it would seem that the frontal shot with a frangible bullet that left a massive exit wound in the back of the head was not part of the original plan, and that this greatly complicated/compromised the alteration plans. Why not create an entry wound in the back of the neck to line up with the 'exit' wound in the front of the throat? Good question. I don't know. But I do know that the throat wound WAS enlarged between Parkland and Bethesda. I mean, can that reasonably be denied?Again, I don't claim to know precisely how it was done, where it was done, or when it was done. But to me, the evidence is overwhelming and absolute proof that it was done. I'd be very interested in knowing how you explain the discrepancies in the condition of JFK's body as it left Parkland and how it arrived at Bethesda.By the way, David Lifton will be releasing "Final Charade' this fall, and he promises more details regarding when and where the alterations took place. We should have great deal to discuss then!

[mike oneill]

Have a good afternoon ThomI was 9 years old when i sat in front of the TV on that Friday (early Evening here in England) with my parents getting the news flashes about the assassination and the events of that evening significantly affected my life to this day. I guess i became an assassination student from that very day.I can still remember the small black and white TV we had - colour TV didnt become common place over here until 1965!!!!Within my life time, i have just one wish, and its this - America one day has a President strong enough and courageous enough to actually say the words and admit that "Yes there was an assassination conspiracy originating within the Government at that time and this present Government is no longer prepared to deny that". I believe America and the World itself is now strong enough to hear such words - tell the World the truth so we can all move forwards.You know, Its interesting how we are discussing these body discrepancy issues right now. Sure enough, the Parkland body appears somewhat different to the Bethesda one, and clearly we are in the very position David Lifton must have been in 20 years ago. He realised something happened to the body - but when/where? He would have considered these very issues and possibilitiies just like we are now.But I cant accept and dont agree with his conclusion it happened on the plane during the swearing in ceremony with Judge Sara Hughes - but i do concede something must have happened somewhere.I will watch out for his latest book and will be interested to find out more about where he now believes the alterations were made.You mention the brain - and i have some strong beliefs about this. In my view Mr O'Connor has inadvertantly spread a lot of miss information over the years. Im convinced when he said "the brain was gone" after he looked in the skull cavity, i believe what he was simply trying to say was the gunshots had blasted much of the brain away. But many people have assumed he was saying that the brain was "gone" eg physically removed by surgery for example. I dont believe there is anything sinister involving this brain issue at all. Just simply a misunderstanding of what he was sayingMikeO

[ThomZajac]

Hey, Mike, it looks like we are the same age. I agree with so much of what you've written that I feel awkward focusing on where we disagree.Nevertheless-You wrote-"But I cant accept and dont agree with his conclusion it happened on the plane during the swearing in ceremony with Judge Sara Hughes - but i do concede something must have happened somewhere." Is there any possible innocent explanation for that something? Seems to me that it would had to have been sinister. (By 'it' if you are referring to the alterations, that is not what I meant. I meant I think the body could have been taken then. But I concede I don't know where or when.)Additionally, I could not possibly disagree with you more about Paul O'Connor's account regarding the brain. He said the body arrived at Bethesda with virtually no brain. JFK's corpse had left Parkland with no less than half a brain. The fact that the brain has officially been lost or misplaced is about as damning as it gets, in my opinion.Lastly, while I share your desire to see a president announce that JFK was killed as the result of a conspiracy, I'd go farther; I'd like to hear a president say that on November 22, 1963 the United States of America suffered a coup d'etat.Maybe on 12/21/12?

[mike oneill]

Hi ThomWell, we might have to agree to disagree on this brain issue - but let me explain my logic and beliefs. Im hoping you will understand my reasoning although perhaps not agreeing with it!Its always been clear to me that Paul OConnor has tended to over generalize important issues during some interviews over the years - quite innocently i believe - but researchers have tended to "pick up" on some words he has used and got a different understanding of what Paul was actually meaning to say.I dont believe Paul has always fully understood the importance of selecting the correct words when under interview.I remember at college many years ago having to clarify the exact meaning and differences between words such as "Much/Most" or "should/must". In some of our daily conversations the differences in definition are negligable but sometimes they are miles apart! Clearly, "Most" has a completely different meaning to "much". I believe Paul has made errors of this nature over the years and not understood the consequences - especially when researchers have wanted to hear what they want to hear!For example, In Matson Laws recent book on page 36 Paul said " looking in the cranium, it was completely empty. No brains" but on page 38 he says "there was hardly any brain matter left". These are somewhat different statements and can be interpreted in different ways.Over the years, ive always believed Paul was simply trying to say that much (or most) of the brain had been blasted away - and nothing more sinister or significant than that. This is exactly what you might have expected to see after the shots to the head. But other students of the assassination who choose to focus on his words "completely empty" might want to conclude the brain had been surgically removed by conspirators prior to the autopsy - and i just dont believe Paul was meaning to impart that.But in any event, i still dont believe anything sinister occurred with the brain prior to the autopsy for the following 2 additional reasons- James Jenkins the other autopsy assisstant working together with Paul has always said THERE WAS a brain and HE HELPED to put it in the bucket of formaldehyde after its removal- the autopsy photographs looking into the cranium (the "clip" picture especially) clearly shows lots of mashed up brain material inside the skull. No way are you seeing an empty cranium. as suggested by Paul O'Connor.Best regardsMikeO

[ThomZajac]

"Morning Mike. Thanks for the thoughtful post. I agree that we simply disagree whether or not sinister forces were at play between Parkland and Bethesda. I too noticed that O'Connor interchanged ''completely' with a few words less absolute. Ultimately, in the mock trial he said all the brain matter left in JFK's head would easily fit inside of one closed hand. That amount would have clearly been far less brain matter than the body possessed when it left Parkland. As for Jenkins, who said he weighed the brain, I must admit I am foggy on this aspect and will have to do some research.I joined the forum in May, Below was my first post-"Greetings! I am new to the forum and this is my inaugural post. I am a long-time researcher, and I am coming out of a bit of hibernation so it may take me a while to knock off the rust- please bear with my lapses in the meantime.I have always felt that JFK's missing brains have received much less attention than they deserve, and I am glad to see the issue being discussed here. When a homicide has been committed, and the cause of death was a gunshot to the head, the single most important piece of evidence in that case is the victim's brains. That the single most important piece of evidence in the JFK assassination is missing speaks volumes!Bethesda autopsy technician Paul O'Connor (who I find to be a very credible witness) has stated on numerous occasions that when JFK arrived at Bethesda there were no brains to be removed, and that he had never before seen such a thing. Obviously JFK had suffered a massive head wound in Dallas, but such a wound would not explain the COMPLETE loss of brains.I cannot help but conclude that the conspirators, knowing that examination of the brains would indicate a shot from the front (among other things) removed the brains before the body arrived at Bethesda. My memory is bit foggy on some of the details of David Lifton's 'Best Evidence,' but I believe he refers to autopsy drawings/notes that indicate to surgery in the top of the head area, which probably would have been necessary in order to remove the brains.Many, including notable researcher/writer David Talbot, make the mistake of swallowing the story that the brains were turned over to RFK, but this tidbit was not offered until after RFK had been assassinated as well.My guess is that the brains were either disposed of, or that they are now a 'trophy.' (Skull & Bones?)Bottom line though; When the most important piece of evidence disappears there is every reason to believe sinister forces were/are at work."I guess, Mike,that our differences ultimately boil down to 'how up did the conspiracy to kill the president and cover it up go'? My conclusion is that it went all the way to the top of our 'known government' (Johnson,Dulles & Co, Hoover and Sullivan), and then BEYOND to the 'shadow government' (bankers such as Rockefeller & the federal reserve- owners of the main stream media). My guess is that you've concluded that it was a 'rogue' operation from within the government somewhere. But that is just a guess, and I'd be curios to know.Thanks again for the excellent posts.Thom

[mike oneill]

ThomYes - i believe we can both agree that a misplaced brain doesnt help the "non conspiracy" camp very much at all does it!!??.Yes im convinced some sinister dark forces are involved in this particular matter somewhere.We all lose keys, credit cards etc every day - but most people dont lose displaced brains post autopsy very often - thats for sure!!Rather suspicious? Yes indeed!James Jenkins said the brain (remains of brain) was still in the bucket soaking in formaldehyde at 9.00 am the next morning - and after that the trail starts to go cold.Perhaps Finck, Humes or Boswell practised cannibalism.That could explain it pure and simpleBest RegardsMikeO