(PART 999)


[An article] DVP should see:

[Quoting from the above-linked article by Douglas P. Horne:]

"A helicopter was definitely sent to Andrews AFB to pick up President Kennedy’s body:

In November of 1996, David Lifton gave a remarkable presentation at the JFK Lancer conference in Dallas, in which he played a video interview he had just conducted with the former Marine Corps pilot of a military helicopter sent to Andrews AFB to pick up President Kennedy’s body and transport it to Bethesda Naval Hospital. Anyone interested can watch and listen to the video of this interview by obtaining the DVD disc from the 1996 Lancer conference titled: “Medical Evidence.”

Summarizing, the former Marine pilot was a member of the “HMX” helicopter squadron based in Quantico, VA and Anacostia, Maryland. This squadron provided 24-hour, seven days per week “hot team” standby service for the President and high level, VIP Federal officials. Normally they were on duty for 48 hours at a time, and then off duty for the next 48 hours.

Lifton’s witness (whose identity he protected) stated in the videotaped interview that he was about to go home and enjoy a rare day off on November 22, 1963 when he was called into a special, surreptitious briefing at the Anacostia base where he was working that day.

He was ordered to take a helicopter to Andrews AFB, and to be as unobtrusive as possible (including not using the lights on his helo), to await the arrival of Air Force One, and to take President Kennedy’s body to Bethesda Naval Hospital. He was ordered to use a VIP helicopter, and was told that others would load the body onto his helicopter. His call sign for this mission was to be “Nighthawk One.” He was told to stay out of public view; to taxi up to the tail of Air Force One after it had landed; and to stay out of the lights as much as possible.

The pilot of “Nighthawk One” landed on the west taxiway at Andrews just prior to sunset (he remembered the orange sky) and parked his helicopter behind some trees near the passenger terminal. He kept the engines running, but turned the rotors off. As soon as he saw Air Force One land, he spun his rotors up again.

He then taxied out to Air Force One in the darkness, and stopped about 100 feet from AF1 on the right rear side of SAM 26000—on the starboard aft quarter of the airplane. He could see “Army 1” (the helicopter LBJ used that night to go to the White House) parked in the lighted area of the tarmac “where the action was,” and noted that the entire port side of Air Force One was illuminated by the television lights.

He saw a large casket coming down on the scissors lift from the port aft door, then saw the casket loaded into the Navy ambulance and saw Jackie Kennedy get into the ambulance. At this point he realized that either the plans had changed since he was given his mission, or he had merely been a backup, and no one had told him about the ambulance. As soon as he saw the Dallas casket put into the Navy ambulance, he taxied away into the darkness, requested clearance, and flew his helicopter to Quantico, Virginia.

Undoubtedly, “Nighthawk One’s” mission had been requested by Gerald Behn at “Crown,” the one official who had insisted throughout the Air Force One conversations on the Clifton tapes that JFK’s autopsy be conducted at Bethesda, and that his body be moved by helicopter.

The obvious questions, in view of “Nighthawk One’s” departure without President Kennedy’s body onboard, are: (1) Who changed the plan? How did this happen? and (2) How did JFK’s body get to Bethesda Naval Hospital, if “Nighthawk One” did not take it there?"

[End Horne Quote.]


The original plan was, indeed, to transport JFK's casket to Bethesda via helicopter, as we can hear on the Air Force One tapes (excerpts provided below). But the plan was changed prior to AF1 landing at Andrews Air Force Base, due (no doubt) to the fact that somebody realized the difficulty there would be if they tried to jam JFK's very heavy and cumbersome casket onto a helicopter. So an ambulance/hearse was used instead.

There's certainly nothing conspiratorial or sinister about that change in plans whatsoever. In fact, it was a very sensible and prudent change that almost certainly had to be made.

And the answer to the #2 question above is quite simple --- President Kennedy's body got to Bethesda by way of the gray Navy ambulance. Millions of people watching television saw the casket being placed into that ambulance. (Why was that second question even asked?) ~shrug~

Below are excerpts from the AF1 radio transmissions concerning the "chopper" and the later realization by members of the Kennedy party aboard Air Force One that ground transportation would be needed to replace the chopper:

Also see....


Mr. Gaal,

You have to excuse your adversary. Apparently the sum total of his investigative skills begins and ends with skimming Bugliosi for quotes or videos. The sum total of his knowledge of ballistics and anatomy and physiology derives from what his "heroes" have written on the subjects, and not from any actual research of his own from unbiased sources. [Guess he might now call Gray's Anatomy textbook an equally biased text.] He would, in my opinion, rather "educate" himself from the works of his heroes than actually explore, via unbiased outside sources, whether the conclusions his heroes propose are actually anatomical[ly] and physiological[ly] possible.

But continue to engage him in this fashion. He'll continue to ridicule your posts without doing any independent investigation, and this will degrade into a farce rather than a discussion...which is what he seems to crave.

"Vince said it, I believe it..." That's called faith, not proof.


You're funny, Mark. You act as if Vince Bugliosi never provided a single source for anything he wrote in his 7-pound JFK book.

Do you think he just made up stuff out of the clear blue sky, sans any sources or verification whatsoever?

And this is a howler....

"...unbiased outside sources..."

The above three words are particularly humorous after reading Steven Gaal's posts in this thread in which he quoted Douglas P. Horne at length.

Is Doug Horne what you'd consider an "unbiased source", Mark? Or David Lifton?

What a laugh.


Did I suggest Horne? Did I suggest Lifton?


No, but Steven Gaal sure has done so in this thread. And you told Steven to "continue to engage him [DVP] in this fashion. He'll continue to ridicule your posts without doing any independent investigation". That's where I got Horne/Lifton. Apparently Steven Gaal considers those two fantasy promoters to be really good (unbiased?) sources. Especially Horne.

BTW, Mark, do you think you know more than the 9 forensic pathologists who studied the JFK case for the HSCA? Those nine doctors (all of them without exception) concluded that a bullet definitely DID pass through the upper body of John F. Kennedy.

Were all nine of those physicians (in addition to Humes, Boswell, and Finck, who all concluded the same thing) complete boobs? Were they all totally unfamiliar with the structure and the anatomy of the human body? And, therefore, do you think that each of those 12 doctors, counting the autopsists, could represent the "he" in the following sentence you wrote on August 15th?....

"He would, in my opinion, rather "educate" himself from the works of his heroes than actually explore, via unbiased outside sources, whether the conclusions his heroes propose are actually anatomical[ly] and physiological[ly] possible." -- Mark Knight; 8/15/15

In other words, I guess I'm supposed to swallow the notion that all three of JFK's autopsy doctors plus all NINE members of the HSCA's Forensic Pathology Panel really had no clue at all as to the question of whether a bullet really could have made its way cleanly through the upper back and neck regions of President Kennedy's body on November 22, 1963. Evidently, per Mark Knight, all twelve of those guys were just winging it (or they were all just flat-out lying).

And, by the way, I was a "lone assassin" believer long before Vincent Bugliosi's JFK book was published in 2007, as this 2003 Internet forum post (and many other pre-2007 posts like it) vividly proves. And via that provable chronology of my "Lone Assassin" beliefs, it means the following foolish comment can be placed into the "Mark Knight Doesn't Know What The Hell He's Talking About" file cabinet....

“ "Vince said it, I believe it." That's called faith, not proof. ” -- Mark Knight


So this is what the SBT has boiled down to at this late date.... you old cherry picker, you!


Well, David Healy, don't you think the conclusions reached by a forensic panel assigned to evaluate the JFK medical evidence should carry at least a TAD bit of weight? Or should we just toss aside and deem invalid all of the work and the evaluation of the autopsy photos and X-rays that was done by the nine members of the HSCA's FPP?

Excerpts from Dr. Michael Baden's HSCA testimony....

Dr. BADEN - The autopsy report concludes that there was a gunshot perforation of entrance in the right upper back and that the exit wound was in the front of the neck.

Mr. KLEIN - Doctor, on the basis of the foregoing evidence, photos and X-rays taken at the autopsy, the examination of the President's clothing, the reports of radiologists, interviews of the surgeons who attended the President at Parkland Hospital, and the autopsy report, did the panel unanimously conclude that a bullet entered the upper right back of the President and exited from the front of his neck?

Dr. BADEN - Every member of the panel so concluded.


Dr. BADEN - ...Part of the single bullet concept incorporates all the consistencies; all the evidence is certainly consistent with a single bullet, but this conclusion becomes more persuasive because of absence of any reasonable alternative of any scientific merit apart from specuation. It is possible, it is within the realm of possibility to me but very unlikely, that a second bullet could have done damage lined up just as the first bullet. There is no evidence for it, and we are persuaded beyond a reasonable medical certainty against this speculation.


Mr. KLEIN - Doctor, you have also testified that the panel unanimously concluded that a bullet entered the President's upper right back and exited from the front of his neck. Did the panel reach a conclusion as to whether the same bullet which entered the President's upper right back could have then exited from the front of his neck and struck Governor Connally and caused the wounds that he received?

Dr. BADEN - Yes; the panel concluded, based on the enlarged nature of the entrance perforation in the Governor's back, that the bullet was wobbling when it struck him and had to have struck something before striking the Governor; that this entrance perforation of the Governor's back could have resulted from a missile that had come through the neck of the President on the basis of the autopsy findings alone; that in taking other evidence into consideration, such as the position of the President and the position of the Governor in the car, the findings are entirely consistent with a single bullet exiting the front of the President's neck and re-entering in the back of the Governor.


Dr. BADEN - The X-rays show, first, that there is no missile present in the body [of President Kennedy] at the time the X-rays were taken. This X-ray, No. 9, was taken before the autopsy, this one, No. 8, during the autopsy. Further, there is evidence of injury to the right of the neck with air and gas shadows, in the right side of the neck and an irregularity of one of the spines, a portion of one spine of the President; that is, the first thoracic vertebra which is also apparent on the blow-up and which the panel, and in consultation with the radiology experts, concluded represents a fracture-type injury to that vertebra.

Mr. KLEIN - Are those X-rays consistent with the bullet having passed through the President's body?

Dr. BADEN - Yes, sir. They are consistent with the bullet passing through and no longer being present.


Mr. Von Pein, have you ever read Dr Finck's HSCA testimony about the back wound? Finck, as you well know, was chief of wound ballistics pathology for the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology.

Finck claimed that he attempted to use a metal probe in the back wound, but was unable to find the bullet track. He then testified that he ordered x-rays of the chest cavity in order to try to determine where the bullet went.

Yet the x-ray technician who took those x-rays testified that, when he took the x-rays of the chest, they showed an empty cavity because the lungs and other internal organs had already been removed. Now, it would appear to a logical person that if there had been a bullet track within the internal organs, removing the organs would also remove the evidence of a bullet track.

Now...are you also familiar with the Warren Commission testimony of Dr. Marion Jenkins? Dr. Jenkins testified that, because of "the obvious physical characteristics of a pneumothorax," doctors in Trauma Room 1 "put in a closed chest drainage tube."

Do you even know what a pneumothorax is? [THIS is where the copy of Gray's Anatomy would most likely be more beneficial than anything Mr. Bugliosi ever wrote.]

I would suggest you STOP right here and right now, and look up the definition of the term and then look up the primary causes of a pneumothorax. [Hint: Bullets passing between strap muscles in the neck are not listed as a cause for a pneumothorax.]

THIS is why I recommend educating yourself on exactly what the doctors were saying.

Since the most likely cause of a pneumothorax in a gunshot victim would be a bullet or bone fragment puncturing a lung, it would have been nice for the bullet wound pathologist, Dr. Finck, to have had the lungs still in the chest cavity to examine. This might have helped him determine with a better degree of certainty the path of the bullet.

But according to the x-ray technician who took the chest x-rays when Dr. Finck ordered them--and the reason he ordered them, according to Finck's HSCA testimony, was to try to locate a bullet in the chest cavity, if it was still there--the lungs had already been removed at the time of the x-rays.

And there is NO testimony on file that I can find that states that the lungs were thoroughly examined...at least to the degree that a bullet wound pathologist would have examined them.


It might not be in any of the doctors' testimony, but information about an examination of the lungs is in the autopsy report itself (on page 542 of the Warren Report).

There is also the following Warren Commission testimony provided by Dr. Humes [at 2 H 363] (emphasis is my own)....

"In attempting to relate findings within the President's body to this wound which we had observed low in his neck, we then opened his chest cavity, and we very carefully examined the lining of his chest cavity and both of his lungs. We found that there was, in fact, no defect in the pleural lining of the President's chest. It was completely intact." -- Dr. James J. Humes

Plus, Mark, if you're suggesting that the bullet that entered JFK's upper back did not exit his body and, instead, ranged downward into his chest and lodged there --- then that must surely mean you think another bullet entered Kennedy's throat and did the same thing that the back wound bullet did --- it stopped dead in its tracks and then disappeared (despite the nearly complete lack of injury inside JFK's body that would indicate that ANY bullet, much less TWO of them, could have just stopped its forward movement through the President's body on its own).

Do you really believe TWO bullets behaved in this strange "Stopped Dead In Their Tracks" manner on 11/22/63? And then BOTH bullets vanished without a trace? Is that a reasonable conclusion to reach?

When we get right down to fundamental basics and common sense, isn't the best solution to this bullet "mystery"--by far--the conclusion reached by the autopsy doctors and by the Warren Commission and by the HSCA --- i.e., one bullet entered JFK's upper back and exited his throat?


David, why would you have Connally turned to his right when he said he had turned to his left when he was hit by the bullet?



In nearly every post-assassination interview he ever gave, Governor Connally said he was in the process of turning back to his left after turning to his right when he felt the bullet hit him. He was, however, still in a "turned to the right" posture when he was hit.


And could you explain how a bullet could go through the position shown in Bugliosi's sketch without hitting JFK's spine?


Well, Ray, via the autopsy photos, we know where the TWO bullet holes are located in the upper back and throat of President Kennedy. And we know that no bullets were found in JFK's whole body.

TWO bullet holes. But NO bullets. And minimal damage in JFK's neck and back. Plus a bullet hole in the UPPER BACK of Governor Connally. Plus the simultaneous reactions of both victims visible in the Zapruder Film. Don't those facts suggest something pretty obvious? They sure do to me.

Plus, I'd like to know how the members of "The Bullet Had No Choice But To Hit JFK's Spine And/Or Vertebra" club can explain to me how THEY can reconcile a rifle bullet entering the bullet hole shown in the autopsy picture below and yet somehow not have that bullet hit the vertebra that those CTers insist was in the direct flight path of the bullet?

Seems to me the CTers who belong to that club should be asking themselves how the bullet missed the vertebrae, and not just asking LNers. For how could (or why would) any bullet stop all of its forward motion after penetrating JFK's back just an inch or two?

And then those same conspiracy theorists can explain how (and why) a SECOND such missile managed to do the exact same thing on the other side of the President's body --- with the throat bullet also missing the spine and/or vertebrae and also only going into Kennedy's body a very short distance.

The Single-Bullet Theory bullet is far less "magical" than those two crazy miracle missiles that the conspiracists have invented.


Well, you are wrong. They do not react at the same time. Connally reacts after JFK raised his hands towards his throat.


Oh, really? Maybe you need to take another look then.

Just keep staring at this Zapruder Film clip [and these too] and then try to tell me that these two men aren't reacting at the exact same moment in time....


What crazy miracle missiles has anybody apart from Specter invented?


The two CTer-invented vanishing ones that I talked about in an earlier post.


I note you have no comment about Connally and his turn.


Quoting John Connally (emphasis is DVP's):

"I heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. I instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come from over my right shoulder, so I turned to look back over my right shoulder...So I looked, failing to see him, I was turning to look back over my left shoulder into the back seat, but I never got that far in my turn. I got about in the position I am in now facing you, looking a little bit to the left of center, and then I felt like someone had hit me in the back." -- John B. Connally; Warren Commission Testimony

[End Connally Quotes.]


But we can see in the Zapruder Film that Connally was not looking straight ahead, nor was he facing slightly to his left when he was shot. He was still turned slightly to his RIGHT when he was hit. And the best examination of this was done by Dale Myers, whose computer animation was keyed directly to the Z-Film itself. And this is one of the frames from Myers' animation that shows Connally turned to his right at Z225:


No, David. You think he was still turned to his right, but he wasn't hit then, so your comments are incorrect. He knows when he was hit. You don't.


What is Connally doing here, Ray? Could he be "reacting" to a bullet injury? This clip ends at Z225:


Yes, he could well be reacting to a bullet, but one being fired and not being hit.


So, even though he HASN'T yet been hit (according to you)---but he WILL be getting hit in the right wrist in just another couple of seconds---it's just a coincidence that Connally raises his right arm very quickly at Z226?

IOW -- Do you think the "arm/hat flip" was caused merely by John Connally HEARING the sound of a gunshot?


In case you haven't noticed, your film clip here is also rotating around its y-axis (where 'y' is UP).


But you'll be happy to know that it's snowing in the mountains.


Ray [Mitcham], Dave [Healy]:

If you keep on feeding the troll, then you allow him [DVP] to keep up this exhibition of nonsense which was already discredited by James [Gordon], just a few weeks ago.


"Discredited by James"? Oh brother, that's a laugh.

The CTer excuses and SBT denials are truly a sight to behold in that discussion here at The Education Forum a few months ago. It's one of my very favorite pages to revisit (this one here), because like no other discussion I can think of, it exemplifies the truly desperate status of the Anti-SBT crowd.

David Von Pein
August 13-19, 2015