JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS
(PART 854)


MICHAEL CHAMBERS SAID:

Where would you calculate the entrance/exit [in the X-ray of the right side of JFK's head]?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Below, I've marked where I believe the probable entrance wound is located. The exit wound is pretty self-evident:



The trajectory/angle of the bullet through JFK's head looks just about right to me to support the idea that that bullet originated from Oswald's gun on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building (based on the X-ray with my markings on it below).

Of course, it's not really fair to compare TOO closely the angle of the head shot with the angle of the "SBT" bullet through JFK's body, because those bullets were bound to perform in different ways due to the substances being struck by the bullets.

The bullet entering the back of the head struck hard bone without having hit anything else first. So that bullet is likely to deflect a little more from entry to exit. Whereas, the SBT bullet passed through the soft tissues of JFK's neck and upper back, striking no bone at all in Kennedy. Ergo, very little (if any) deflection before exiting his throat.




MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:

David,

X-ray technician Jerrol Custer is on public record saying that he did not take the X-ray you are using and that it does not show the wounds as he saw them.

Custer and and photographer Floyd Reibe are also on record saying that the autopsy photos do not show what they saw as well as that the photos now at the National Archives have been doctored.

Are they lying?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

No, of course they aren't lying. They're just wrong, that's all.

The photos exist in stereo pairs, which is virtually impossible to fake.

And you don't believe in the impossible, do you Martin?

In addition, that X-ray is also perfectly consistent with the Zapruder Film. And it's perfectly consistent with what the closest witnesses to JFK said about the location of the large wound in the President's head:










MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:

That's rich..... the man who actually took the X-rays denies he took the one you have used and you just say he's mistaken?

Really? Custer and Reibe both say the same thing. They are backed up by O'Connor and Gawler's embalming assistant, Tom Robinson, who worked on Kennedy's head for three hours. Have you seen the video where he shows where the wound was really located?

And you (who was not there) just simply say all these men (who all were there) are all mistaken...... very rich indeed. Too bad you only have your opinion and belief in the faked photos to support your claim. Not very convincing.

Nope.. I do not believe in the impossibe, but Custer and Reibe both denied having taken the autopsy photos that are now at the National Archives. With that in mind I do believe it is absolutely possible and can't be ruled out that the NA photos were taken of another head, which basically destroys your "stereo" argument.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Check the Zapruder Film, Martin. Where's the large exit wound located in the film?

And what about the witnesses pictured above? They were there too, witnessing the shooting. Are they all wrong when they each said the SIDE of JFK's head came off--not the BACK of his head?

You ridicule me for ignoring Riebe and Custer. But you have no choice but to ignore the witnesses pictured above, because none of them said the BACK of John Kennedy's head was blown out. They all put the large wound on the SIDE of the head--just exactly where the Zapruder Film shows the wound to be and just exactly where the autopsists said it was and exactly where the photos and X-rays confirm it to be.

Why ignore the BEST evidence, Martin? And by far the best evidence when it comes to determining the location of JFK's wounds is the autopsy pictures and X-rays. Are those ALL faked--stereoscopically? Not possible. Especially in 1963. And not even today.


MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:

Autopsy photos denied as being genuine by the men who are supposed to have taken them is...evidence of photos having been falsified.

IMO if this case had ever gone to trial, the combined testimony of these men alone would have blown the entire case for the prosecution.


JOHN MYTTON SAID.


MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:

Was there a massive hole in the front of JFK's head, as is shown in the X-ray or did Jerrol Custer simply tell the truth when he said that he had not taken that X-ray?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Of course there was a big hole toward the front of JFK's head (above and a little forward of the right ear)---just as the Zapruder Film so vividly proves.

And the three images below perfectly corroborate and support each other--to a tee. The large wound is in the exact same location in each image. The turned-sideways autopsy photo of JFK in the middle doesn't show the wound quite as extensively as the Zapruder Film frame or the X-ray--but that's because the scalp flap looks to be partially closed in that photo. But there is obviously major damage in the exact same area of the head where we also find major damage to the head in both the Zapruder Film and in the X-ray.....


CLICK TO ENLARGE:



MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:

Sorry David... but the Z-film proves nothing. You are just seeing something you want to see.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh, for Pete sake.

You can't see the large blow-out above President Kennedy's right ear in Zapruder frames 313-340, Martin?

If you can't see the right-frontal wound, you really need a new pair of glasses.


MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID:

But if there was a right-frontal wound, where is it in the so-called death stare photo?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The "death stare" picture is taken at an angle that makes it difficult to see the wound. Plus, it's quite possible that the scalp flaps are closed in that picture (as well as the other autopsy photo I posted earlier), which hides the extent of the large wound somewhat.

But let me ask you a question now, Martin.....

Since you obviously think that pretty much all of the X-rays and photos are fakes---and you think the "right-frontal" wound isn't visible in any of those pictures---then why didn't the photo-fakers paint in a right-front wound to match the Zapruder Film and the autopsy report?

You mean they faked the pictures, but DIDN'T put the wound in the right place?

Crazy.

David Von Pein
November 29, 2014
November 29, 2014