T.J. COLE SAID:
I re-read Clint Hill's statement of 30th November 1963 today. He said the following regarding Kennedy's head wound:
"As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lying in the seat."
He described the head wound just like the doctors and nurses at Parkland described it. Weird.
JOHN McADAMS SAID:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clinthill.htm
JOHN CANAL SAID:
Gee John [McAdams], when was that video made? Ya think he had an opportunity to see copies of the BOH photos before it was made? Ya think he was told that those photos were not taken when the body was first received? Hmmmm, I don't think so.
Therefore, at that point he undoubtedly felt his options were to: 1) imply that his much much "earlier" "right rear gaping hole" recollections were wrong or 2) to accuse the USG (who, at the time, was still paying him a handsome pension) of forging the photos. Talk about a no-brainer. LOL!
JOHN FIORENTINO SAID:
It's one thing to debate, and another to cast unfounded aspersions. Canal wants us to believe that the same man who flung himself over JFK and Jackie in an attempt to shield them with his own body, was NOW worried about his pension!
Come on John, get a grip.
[...]
Frankly, your never-ending mindless speculation is downright silly.
[...]
John [Canal] continues to make these nonsense claims about a BOH wound. The only problem with his scenario is that there are no FACTS to back it up.
Unless John believes the autopsy photos and X-rays are phonies. I don't think he does.
What he will now say is that when those photos were taken the autopsist stretched the scalp of JFK OVER the wound(s)?
That's all very interesting except for the fact that in the area John claims is a BOH wound...there is not the HINT of any lacerated scalp.
John fails to explain this major discrepancy. He doesn't explain it, because it has no explanation.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
John Canal will never be able to fully explain (logically and reasonably) the total lack of damage/fragmentation to the right-rear of JFK's head in this X-ray:
John Canal thinks a good-sized chunk of JFK's right-rear skull was fragmented (i.e., broken apart enough so as to cause loose pieces of skull to fall out of the right-rear part of JFK's head during the autopsy), despite the fact that absolutely NO extensive fragmentation can be seen in the above X-ray that could be considered ENOUGH fragmentation (or fracturing) of the RIGHT-REAR area of JFK's head to meet Mr. Canal's "BOH" requirements. It's not even close, in fact (as the above X-ray illustrates so very clearly).
There are no major fractures at the RIGHT-REAR of Kennedy's head that would (or should) cause any reasonable person examining that authenticated and unaltered X-ray to conclude that JFK had a great-big hole in the right-rear portion of his skull. It just simply is not there. Period.
Nor could Dr. Boswell (or anyone else) have placed loose pieces of JFK's skull back into the RIGHT-REAR area of President Kennedy's head.
Why?
Because of that pesky X-ray (again). That X-ray shows that no such "piecing back together" of JFK's head at the RIGHT-REAR could have possibly been performed....because the skull was not fractured enough in that region of the head for any such skull re-insertion activity to have occurred in the first place.
Dr. Boswell's ARRB testimony has been misinterpreted by John Canal (and probably others as well). If Boswell re-inserted any loose skull fragments into the head of the deceased President, it was certainly NOT at the FAR-RIGHT-REAR (occipital) area of his head.
Any such re-insertion of skull/bone fragments could only have occurred in the RIGHT/FRONT/TOP areas of Kennedy's cranium. And the above X-ray proves this fact beyond all possible reasonable doubt.
[2013 EDIT: And, of course, John Fiorentino is correct when he mentioned the lack of damage to JFK's scalp too. More on that here.]
David Von Pein
March 30, 2009
