JACQUELINE KENNEDY'S TESTIMONY:
A MISSED OPPORTUNITY?


REGARDING THE "DELETED" PORTIONS
OF JACQUELINE KENNEDY'S 1964
WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY:



A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID:

What did she [Jackie Kennedy] say [about President Kennedy's head wounds]?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Nothing that can possibly be used as ironclad "Proof Of Conspiracy",
that's for sure.

Here's a look at Mrs. Jacqueline Kennedy's previously deleted testimony
concerning President Kennedy's wounds:

"I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --
I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could
see,
you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull
on. ....
I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like
that, and
I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at
the top."

Jackie Kennedy's deleted [see 5 H 180] (but now available) comments
above don't really add up to very much. But a small portion of that
testimony could easily lead to the notion that the "FRONT" part of JFK's
head was missing:

"From the front there was nothing."

But, then too, to be fair, her very next words could possibly indicate
just the opposite:

"But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold
his hair on, and his skull on."

What are we supposed to make of ALL of that? A rear head wound? Or a
front/side ("from the front") head wound?

I have no idea. And neither does anybody else, given JUST those rather
ambiguous and murky comments about the location of the wounds --
because she doesn't spell out exactly WHERE on the President's head
the wounds were.

So, her previously deleted comments are pretty much worthless with
respect to definitively being able to say THE WOUNDS WERE HERE AND
HERE.

I think J. Lee Rankin of the Warren Commission, who questioned Mrs.
Kennedy on June 5, 1964, missed a huge opportunity (or at the very
least a POSSIBLE huge/golden opportunity) to find out more information
from the BEST HEAD-WOUND WITNESS OF THEM ALL (Jacqueline
Kennedy), when Rankin (evidently) never asked Jackie this point-blank
question:

"Where were the head wounds, Mrs. Kennedy? Front? Back? Side? Where?"

Too bad.

I do think, however, that Jackie's "trying to hold his hair on" testimony
could possibly (but not provably, of course) be a hint as to why the
Parkland personnel saw no Front/Right/Parietal exit wound in President
Kennedy's head while JFK was at Parkland Hospital on November 22, 1963.

It's possible that Jackie simply CLOSED UP the hinged "flap" on the right
side of JFK's head, which can easily be seen in some of the autopsy
photographs, such as the one below:



If that occurred, it's possible the large parietal (right side/front) hole
was not visible to the Parkland people when JFK was in the emergency
room.

Food for thought anyhow.

David Von Pein
March 2007

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (MARCH 29, 2007)


=================================================


A RELATED DISCUSSION:


A CONSPIRACY THEORIST SAID:

Just where in the course of things do you think the "Arlen mob" thinks Jackie was referring to when she said JFK just had a "puzzled" expression like he might have a "slight headache"? That wouldn't be my thought if someone had their fists balled up under their chin and their elbows sticking straight out.


DVP SAID:

That's not a bad "conspiracy" type of thought (which could lead someone
toward thinking that Jackie was seeing her husband after he had been shot
but BEFORE he raised his arms up)....UNTIL, that is, you read all of Mrs.
Jacqueline Kennedy's Warren Commission testimony in this "headache"
regard. Let's have a gander:

"And all I remember is seeing my husband, he had this sort of quizzical
look on his face, and his hand was up, it must have been his left hand.
And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull
and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked
as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood
or anything." -- Jacqueline Kennedy; June 5, 1964

Via the above comments made by Jackie Kennedy, it's not possible to
SEPARATE the "quizzical" reference from the "arm-raising" timeline,
because Mrs. Kennedy says she's seeing those things IN TANDEM -- i.e.,
Jackie's "quizzical look" and "his hand was up" observations are happening
at the very same time, per her testimony:

"He had this sort of quizzical look on his face, and his hand was up." -- JBK

Of course, as with any witness testimony, Jackie's account of events
must be handled with the usual granules of salt, because a portion of
her testimony is certainly not spot-on (to-the-second) accurate, and
that is this portion:

"And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull
and I remember it was flesh colored." -- JBK

Via the Zapruder Film, we can easily see that the above "just as I
turned and looked at him" timeline of Jackie seeing "a piece of his
skull" cannot be precisely accurate, because Mrs. Kennedy is certainly
looking at JFK several seconds before the head shot.

So, people will make of her testimony what they will. Jackie's words
can probably be turned into "conspiracy" in some manner by the rabid
conspiracy mongers of the world. And, of course, some conspiracists
have tried to do just exactly that.

But when examining her very brief Warren Commission testimony
transcript, a reasonable person certainly cannot (objectively) come
away from such a reading exercise with the following mindset:

"Jackie Kennedy's testimony fully supports a conspiracy, because she
saw her husband positively reacting to being hit by a bullet ("quizzical
look") well before JFK's arms ever begin to rise toward his throat and
mouth ("his hand was up")."

There is no way anyone can support the above type of argument,
because of what I mentioned earlier (i.e., Jackie said she saw those
two things occurring simultaneous to one another).

When reading Jackie's all-too-short testimony, I am always reminded
of a supreme opportunity that was missed by the Warren Commission.
Jackie should have been asked (in a tactful fashion):

"Mrs. Kennedy, do you think you could tell us, if you can recall,
where on the President's head you observed his wounds?"*

In retrospect, it's a shame that J. Lee Rankin of the Warren Commission
didn't ask that very question I posed above. Because Mrs. Kennedy was
undoubtedly one the very best eyewitnesses (if not THE best) to JFK's
head wounds, since she was cradling his head in her lap during the
entire drive to Parkland Hospital....and also given this portion of her
finally-released-to-the-public testimony:

"I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --
I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could
see,
you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull
on. ....
I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like
that, and
I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at
the top."

Those above comments were only revealed to the public after the
outcry over the fact that the originally released document showing
Mrs. Kennedy's testimony had those passages regarding JFK's head
wounds deleted (adding only more fuel to the already-hot "It Must Be
A Conspiracy" fire).

* = So, I suppose it is possible that Mr. Rankin did, in fact, ask Jackie
the important "Where were the head wounds located?" question. But it
doesn't show up in the truncated transcript here.

But if Mr. Rankin did not ask that question, it was, indeed, a key
opportunity missed, due to Jackie's (literally) hands-on observations
of JFK's wounds within seconds of the fatal shot striking the President.

David Von Pein
March 2007

LINK TO ORIGINAL POST (MARCH 28, 2007)