(PART 17)


>>> "Let's give the autopsy doctors a break..." <<<


Yes, let's. So, why won't you do so?

>>> "...They had no choice if they wanted to keep their careers intact. I can only try to imagine the stress they were under, especially given the fact they had no forensic experience." <<<

Pierre Finck had plenty of experience with gunshot victims. Why do you
ignore his presence at the autopsy? In fact, he was called in by
Humes and Boswell for pretty much that very reason...because of his
experience in that field.

BTW, was Dr. Boswell lying through his teeth when he said this at his
ARRB session in late February of 1996?.....

QUESTION -- "Are you aware of any person connected with the autopsy
who received any orders not to discuss any matters relating to the

DR. BOSWELL -- "No, because they blabbed from day one. Some of those
corpsmen did. And they made some terrible mistakes and statements."


>>> "People lie for all reasons, not all of them terrible. I don't think Nellie [Connally] saw much that day. I can't say I would either with bullets whizzing by my face. I think she was perhaps told what happened and it became reality for her. I'm not saying she was a rotten liar, just human." <<<

I think you're mixing up your terms (or definitions)....you're
confusing "lies" with "mistakes". They're certainly not the same
thing. But it seems as though many CTers want every single innocent
"mistake" to equal a "lie" when it comes to the JFK case. And that's
just silly.

And you're right, Nellie (like us all) was "human". And she merely
was mistaken (innocently so) when she said she thought her husband
and JFK were struck by different bullets.

If you'll examine the Zapruder Film closely (and the stabilized version
embedded below is the best copy of the film I have ever come across,
including the 1998 MPI Home Video digital version), and keep an eye on
Nellie Connally, you'll note that she wasn't even looking at JFK at the
critical bullet-striking moments in question.*

* = Disclaimer -- Granted, Nellie is partially screened out during
some of the key frames, but, IMO, it doesn't appear that Nellie is even
looking anywhere near JFK's direction at the critical moments in order
to definitely say that Kennedy was hit by a different bullet from the
one she thinks later hit her husband, Governor John Connally:

>>> "I don't need Nellie for this, as JBC said to the day he died he was hit with a separate bullet than JFK." <<<

Rob, you need to get some of the "Connally Facts" straight. John Connally
always maintained that he NEVER EVEN SAW KENNEDY after the
shooting began.

So how on Earth could he be certain of WHEN the President was hit by
the bullet that struck JFK in the back? In short...it's impossible.
JBC was one of THE WORST EYEwitnesses in Dealey Plaza, because he
readily admitted (on many different occasions) that he never saw the
murder victim (JFK) during the whole shooting timeline. (His bedside
"he slumped" remark notwithstanding.)

But even in that bedside interview with Martin Agronsky, Connally
didn't specifically say that he, himself, SAW Kennedy "slump".
He had to have gotten that info from his wife, based on EVERY
interview the Governor ever gave after he got out of the hospital.


>>> "I just think it would be humanly impossible to hold a hat when your wrist is broken." <<<

Don't believe every conspiracy kookbook you read concerning this matter.
Connally's RIGHT arm/hand goes flying skyward just after being hit by
Oswald's bullet #399 (as can be seen over and over again in the toggling
Zapruder Film clip provided below):

And as can be seen, the hand that goes flying up and down in the
space of just a very few Z-Film frames is the same RIGHT hand that
is holding Governor Connally's white Stetson hat.

The hat is still in Connally's RIGHT hand (the same one that has just
been hit by a bullet) several frames later on the Z-Film. And Nellie stated
that John C. held that hat in his hand all the way to Parkland Hospital. (And
I kind of doubt that he SWITCHED hat-holding hands after he was shot.)

The "He Couldn't Have Held His Hat" argument brought up continuously
by CTers is just another of the many pieces of piecemeal chaff that
conspiracists love to toss up against the wall in the desperate hope that
some of these things will stick and (somehow) prove the conspiracy they
so desperately want to prove. Unfortunately for those conspiracists, none
of that chaff seems to stick to the "CT wall" at all.

>>> "I know not to believe you, Posner, Bugman/you and Specter. That is a good start." <<<

Yeah. Why dine on wheat, when a buffet of half-baked chaff is
available in the conspiracy dining room?

(Please don't ever ask me to eat dinner over at your house, Rob. I
hate my food half-baked.)

David Von Pein
October 2007