Subject: Aguilar's "Back of the Head" Witnesses - 16, 17, 18 Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 01:45:51 GMT From: jmcadams@primenet.com (John McAdams) Organization: Marquette University Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk Followup-To: alt.assassination.jfk Gary Aguilar claims to have examined the testimony of 46 witnesses to Kennedy's head wound, at both Parkland and Bethesda, and found that 44 of the 46 described the head wound as contradicting the photos and x-rays of the autopsy as they exist in the National Archives. Supposedly, these witnesses reported the massive defect to the president's head as including the back of the head. So does Gary have 44 "back of the head" witnesses? Let's take the autopsists as an example: The following quotes from Aguilar are taken from: http://www.assassinationweb.com/ag6.htm Let me warn the reader that Aguilar includes a lot of extraneous material, but I'm including it all so as not to be accused of "selectivity." -------------------------------------------- 22) J. THORNTON BOSWELL, MD, was the "Chief of Pathology of the Naval Hospital at the time of JFK's autopsy (while Humes was Director of Laboratories). Boswell appeared before the Warren Commission immediately after Humes had completed his testimony. He was not asked to give the precise location of the wounds, but as he had just sat through Humes testimony giving the information, Arlan Specter merely asked him for his assent: Specter: "And specifically, as to the points of entry and points of exit which have been testified to by Doctor Humes, do his views express yours as well? Boswell: "They do. Yes."(Warren Commission, Vol.2:377.) In an interview on 8/17/77 (which was released in 1993) the HSCA's Andy Purdy reported, "Dr. Boswell said the wound was fairly low in the back of the head and that the bone was completely gone above the entry wound. He said that during the autopsy, a piece of skull fragment was brought in which included a portion which corresponded to the missing half of the entry wound in the head." (HSCA rec # 180-10093-10430. Agency file # 002071, p. 6.) Purdy also reported, "Regarding the head wounds he said the entry hole was only approximately half in evidence, the other half being part of the skull fragment which was brought in."(IBID. p. 9--emphasis in original.) In Finck's autopsy notes he seemed to corroborate Boswell's account that only a portion of the entrance wound was visible on JFK's skull. He wrote, "Corresponding to that wound (the scalp wound), the skull shows the portion of a crater, the beveling of which is obvious on the internal aspect of the bone..." ("Finck's notes of the November 22, 1963, autopsy." In Breo DL. JFK's death, part III - Dr. Finck speaks out: 'two bullets, from the rear'. JAMA. 268:1752 - emphasis added) "Regarding the autopsy face sheet, Dr. Boswell said that the entry wound to the head, if not exactly accurate, may have been '...possibly off a little to the left.'". (IBID. p.11) It is especially significant that Boswell allowed that his face sheet entrance wound might have been off in the horizontal, but not in the vertical dimension. That is, the wound of entrance, which was contiguous with the skull defect, may have been slightly more to the right than he depicted in his contemporaneous drawing, but it was not in the higher location accepted by the HSCA. In an interview with Humes published in JAMA on May 27, 1992, Boswell repeated the claim that JFK's fatal entrance wound was to the right and just above the external occipital protuberance. ------------------------------------------------- Gary is pushing this because he wants to argue that the "large defect" extended all the way back to the entrance wound. This in fact is true. So if Gary can get the entrance wound down to the level of the EOP, he can argue that the "back" of Kennedy's head was blown out. --------------------------------------------------- Unexpectedly, author Gerald Posner reported to the Conyers Committee on 11-17-94, that both Drs. Boswell and Humes told him the President's skull wound was "in fact correctly placed 4 inches higher" (Hearing before the Legislation and National Security Subcommittee of the Committee on Government operations House of Representatives, November, 17, 1993, p. 112-113, Washington, D.C., 1994. U.S. Government Printing Office.) and not low in the skull where Boswell had previously placed it. This, of course was, if true, the first time that Boswell had ever made such a claim, and he specifically disallowed such a placement in near contemporaneous interviews he gave fellow physician and JAMA editor, George. D. Lundberg, MD. (The Journal of the American Medical Association - JAMA. May 27, 1992.) Inexplicably, Posner made no mention of these an astonishing revelations in his book, either in the original or the 'updated' paperback version released in August, 1994. On March 30, 1994, I called both Drs. Boswell and Humes and asked them about Posner's claims. Both denied to me, in recorded conversations, that they had changed their minds about the location of the President's skull wound entrance. Humes did speak to Posner, but Boswell told me flatly, and twice, that not only had he not changed his mind about the location of JFK's low skull wound, he'd never ever spoken with Posner. Therefore, as of 3/30/ 94 both Drs. Boswell and Humes believe JFK's skull entrance wound was low. I wrote Boswell that I had made his admission to me about Posner public in a letter to the editor of the Federal Bar News and Journal, and since that time, Boswell has refused to answer my calls or letters. ------------------------------------------------- This is a bit of a digression here, where Aguilar attacks Posner. Note that Aguilar reports that Boswell said he had not talked to Poser. However, Posner has phone records showing that he did indeed talk to Boswell. --------------------------------------------------- 23) JAMES J. HUMES, MD - JFK's chief autopsy pathologist, he wrote the autopsy summary which included the skull wound description, "There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions. In this region there is an actual absence of scalp and bone producing a defect which measures approximately 13 cm in greatest diameter..."(emphasis added) Much controversy regarding Humes subsequent statements has confused the simple autopsy description he wrote. This will be explored below. Nevertheless, a single skull defect involving parietal, temporal and occipital regions would involve, of necessity, the right rear quadrant of the skull. ------------------------------------------------- Note Gary's interpretation: "a single skull defect involving parietal, temporal and occipital regions would involve, of necessity, the right rear quadrant of the skull." Whatever the merits of Gary's *inferences* about this, Humes never said "right rear quadrant." --------------------------------------------------- 24) PIERRE A. FINCK, MD - the forensics specialist called in to assist Humes and Boswell with JFK's autopsy. In 1963 Finck was an Army lieutenant colonel and the chief of the Wound Ballistics Pathology Branch of the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. As reported in JAMA, Finck testified to the Warren Commission: "Rep. Ford: 'There has been complete unanimity (with Humes and Boswell who had just testified) on what you saw, what you did, and what you have reported?' Col. Finck: 'Yes.'" (Warren Commission, V.2:383, in: Breo D. JFK's death, part III. JAMA. 268:1752, October 7, 1992.) It is unfortunate for JAMA's reputation for scientific objectivity that while Breo was able to track down Finck's testimony from the Warren Commission volumes, he was unable to find any one of the five citations in the volumes that confirmed Crenshaw's participation - see above.) Finck was also asked by Arlan Specter, "Were you present here today and did you hear the entire testimony of Doctor Humes?" Finck; "Yes; I did." Specter: " And do you concur in Dr. Humes' statements and opinions regarding the point of entry C, point of exit D (referring to diagrams), and general angle on the flight of the missile?" Finck: "I certainly do." (Warren Commission. Vol 2:380) Finck, of course, also signed the autopsy report as well. Finck will be further explored below. In JAMA, Finck, in a written response to Breo's question, reported, "The FATAL WOUND (sic) - entry 25mm to the right of the external occipital protuberance and slightly above. After removal of the brain, the beveling of the internal table (of the skull) (sic) indicates this was a wound of entry." (Breo D. JFK's death, part III. JAMA. 268:1749. October 7, 1992) Finck denied to the HSCA Boswell's claim that only a portion of the entrance wound was visible on JFK's skull, and that the remainder of the entrance wound was found on a late- arriving fragment. Finck stated that the entire entrance wound was in the skull bone. However, by the time Finck arrived, the autopsy had been underway for approximately 30 minutes. By then some manipulations had been done to JFK's skull and the brain had been removed. So Finck did not see what Boswell and Humes saw before the skull manipulations. Nevertheless, Finck's notes on JFK's autopsy, later sent to his superior, General Joe Blumberg, suggested that Finck then shared Boswell's recollection of the entrance wound. He wrote, "Corresponding to that wound (the scalp wound), the skull shows the portion of a crater, the beveling of which is obvious on the internal aspect of the bone..." ("Finck's notes of the November 22, 1963, autopsy." In: Breo DL. JFK's death, part III - Dr. Finck speaks out: 'two bullets, from the rear'. JAMA. 268:1752 - emphasis added) Confusingly, Finck wrote Blumberg on 2/1/65 suggesting the crater in occipital bone was not incomplete. He wrote, "I examined (JFK's) wounds. The scalp of the back of he head shows a small laceration, 15X6mm. Corresponding to this lesion, I found a through-and through wound of the occipital bone, with a crater visible from the inside of he cranial cavity..." (In: Breo DL. JFK's death, part III - Dr. Finck speaks out: 'two bullets, from the rear'. JAMA. 268:1754.) ------------------------------------------------- It's not entirely clear what, among all this testimony, Aguilar considers to be proof that the autopsists are "back of the head" witnesses. But it appears that part of his argument depends on quotes such as the following: >In an interview on 8/17/77 (which was released in 1993) the >HSCA's Andy Purdy reported, "Dr. Boswell said the wound was >fairly low in the back of the head and that the bone was >completely gone above the entry wound. But the core of his argument seems to be that the entrance defect was on the back of the head, slightly above the External Occipital Protuberance, and that the massive area of missing scalp and bone was one continuous extent from the entrance wound to an outwardly beveled exit wound at the coronal suture. Since there is excellent evidence that the wound was indeed one continuous extent, and since the autopsists insisted that the entrance was near the EOP, it might seem perfectly reasonable to classify them as "back of the head" witnesses. The problem with this is that Gary has started with *some* of their testimony, and logically concluded that the "great defect" included the back of the head, but ignored *other* testimony that implies just the opposite. In short, what Gary is doing would be persuasive if witnesses were consistent in their testimony. But the autopsists haven't been. For example: 1. The official autopsy report says the head wound "measures 13 cm. in greatest diameter." WCR, p. 540. Since Gary seems to accept that the wound extended forward to about the coronal suture, that would put the posterior extent of the wound in the cowlick area. The autopsists repeated the 13 cm. figure in 1967, when they met at the National Archives and examined the photos and x-rays from the autopsy. See National Archives Record Number 179-30002-10344. 2. Drawings done for the Warren Commission don't show the defect on the back of the head. Rather they show the top right side blown out. See: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/shootft.htm 3. The most important issue is the authenticity of the autopsy photos and x-rays. They show the wound to be to the top of the head, from the coronal suture back to the cowlick area, on the right side. See: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dox2big.jpg Aguilar seems to be attempting to impeach the photos and x-rays with his "44 witnesses." If the autopsists really believe that the large defect entended down to the level of the EOP, do they therefore believe the autopsy photos and x-rays were forged? The problem Aguilar has is that the autopsists not only haven't said the photos and x-rays are forged, they have explicitly said they were *not.* Indeed, they said that "The photographs and x-rays corroborate our visual observations during the autopsy and conclusively support our medical opinion . . . . " See National Archives Record Number 179-30002-10344. The report they wrote describes the photos and x-rays in considerable detail, making it clear that they had examined them closely. Later, in the 1970s, all three autopsists were quizzed extensively by the Forensic Pathology Panel of the House Select Committee. Humes and Boswell met with the FPP on September 16, 1977. See 7 HSCA 243-265. Finck (along with Ebersole, the radiologist) met with the Panel on March 11, 1978. In both cases, the autopsists and the Panel extensively discussed the autopsy photos and x-rays. The autopsists never questioned the authenticity of the materials. Aguilar has no business trying to impeach the autopsy photos and x-rays with witnesses who explicitly said they were genuine! And while some of the autopsists' statements clearly imply that the large defect included the back of the head, others imply that it didn't. .John The Kennedy Assassination Home Page http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm