Death Deception, (The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald), Part IV By S.r. “Dusty” Rohde © November, 2016 *AUTHOR’S NOTE: Over two years ago, I pinned a post to my FB group “JFK Eviden…
Death Deception, (The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald), Part IV
By S.r. “Dusty” Rohde
© November, 2016
*AUTHOR’S NOTE: Over two years ago, I pinned a post to my FB group “JFK Evidence Detection” in which I basically informed everyone that JFK was hit by two head shots, that post is still pinned there today. In the post, I had discussed the assertion of two bullets hitting JFK in the head with Sherry Fiester, (in the post, in messages and on the phone). Back at that time, I made Sherry a promise that I would eventually provide the evidence for these two head shots. This was prior to Sherry publishing her book “Enemy of the Truth”. So, Sherry…this is me, keeping my promise. All of the evidence will not be in this article, but it will certainly be in the next.
In today’s article, what you will see is going to be highly controversial, I understand this and expect it. I myself questioned repeatedly what I’m about to show you. But regardless if you accept the images at face value, I ask you to read what is written, as it may be more important than what I show you.
I’ve been asked more than once, “Why don’t you write about something more current” (more current than JFK’s assassination)? To that I will say, what is more current than murder and corruption? What is more current than a right to a fair trial, or true justice? We see injustice done every day. When did honesty and integrity become dated or a thing delegated to the past? Were these issues any less important in 1963 as they are now? Do they matter less, just because time has passed? I don’t think so. I don’t submit to that ideology. If we as a people don’t hold these issues of value, then what are we? What is our future? I suppose many people feel that this case, the murder of JFK, cannot be solved and so, they move on. I believe in integrity, I believe Americans have the right to expect integrity from their own government. That integrity means transparency, truth and releasing the JFK files and not continuing the governments past complicity in framing Oswald. Today, the JFK research community will hopefully take a giant leap forward towards understanding events related the murder of John F. Kennedy.
I listen to people on both sides of the fence, commonly referred to as Lone Nutter’s and Conspiracy Theorists. This has often led to annoying people on either side. In this case, as with any case, opinions don’t count for much, evidence does. If people on either side present legitimate evidence, I make note of it, if not, I toss it, and it’s that simple. So, let’s see what that evidence really shows us.
One of the recent discoveries gave me pause to closely re-examine the Abraham Zapruder film of President John F. Kennedy’s fatal head wound, aka the “blowout” in Z313. For the past several years I’ve maintained a neutral position regarding any alteration of the Zapruder film. Or to be more accurate, I simply didn’t involve myself of going down that particular rabbit hole as I already had enough on my plate. Recent events have changed that.
This examination results in what appears to be the actual bullet caught on the Zapruder film. The frames pertaining to this possible bullet are frames Z310 through Z317. At first viewing, frame 311 caught my attention because there was a dark spot over Jackie Kennedy’s right sleeve. I asked myself what it could be…maybe a button? Then I also thought it might just be damage to the film, as is seen in other frames, but…I recognized it isn’t that kind of damage almost as fast as I had the thought. None the less, I played the film repeatedly in normal speed and many times frame by frame. Old films often have damage to them that show up looking sort of like dark water spots, I’ve seen this in old films dozens of times; that type of film damage is not unfamiliar to me. That type of damage in this film and other films pops up for a frame or two and vanishes, that isn’t what this dark spot does, and this is what got my attention , (you can view the film here) (36).
I went back to frame 311, and I advanced the film frame by frame many times and this is when I confirmed this spot wasn’t damage to the film…but that it was a possible bullet. Why a possible bullet? First because this possible bullet doesn’t just vanish after a couple of frames as film damage does. A possible “bullet” is different. I noticed four different aspects relative to this “bullet” that are a bit too uncanny to be coincidence. I’ll simply call these the “four T’s”. The four “T’s” are Transition, Timing, Trajectory and Testimony.
By “Transition” I mean that this “bullet” appears to be moving left to right in the film, it doesn’t simply appear and vanish, like other damaged spots in the film. This “bullet” is visible in four frames in the Zapruder film, and can be accounted for in six consecutive frames (See next image).
The images show that the bullet (outlined in red) appears to come into the top frame (310), moves to the right in the next frame (311), enters JFK’s head (312) and explodes out the side of JFK’s head (313), exits and reappears (frame 314) and passes in front of John Connally (frame 317). I cannot make out the “bullet” in frames 315 and 316, possibly because the background is too dark or possibly for another reason that I will get to in a minute.
The “Timing” of this possible bullet is impeccable. This possible bullet appears just at the right position and at the right timing of the head wound to have happened. I’ve enlarged the images to make it easier to see and numbered them in consecutive order.
You can watch the film for yourself, frame by frame (frames 310 through 317) at the link provided here (37). If you pause the film at frame 310, you can then move the film back or forth, one frame at a time by using your mouse and cursor. Be sure to note that the bullet has exited JFK’s head, or at least a good sized portion of said bullet. I should point out that each frame of the Zapruder film represents 1/20th of a second…1/20th!
Okay, if this is indeed a bullet, it demonstrates that this particular bullet was fired from behind the limo, as Gov. John Connally and his wife Nellie stated (37). Some might think, well, that proves Oswald guilty, and they would be very mistaken. Why?
There is another aspect of the bullet trajectory that is of vital importance. The trajectory of the bullet is very low, just as Arlen Specter had noticed and complained about at the very beginning of the WC hearings.
Now, by drawing a line from this possible bullet from frame 310 to frame 317 we can extrapolate the bullet trajectory (See next image).
The lower two images (shown above) are frames 310 and 317, the upper image is the bullet trajectory extrapolated from these two frames.
Is it coincidence that this possible bullet should transition left to right across the film, arrive at the exact necessary time, and match the precise wound trajectory given in autopsy testimony? No, I don’t think so.
Now, many of you may not choose to believe this is a bullet captured in the film, particularly the JFK Schills across America. But, I’m afraid I have bad news for you, news you can’t escape. Whether this is a bullet or not, it matches precisely the entry and exit points noted by Richard Lipsey, Dr. Boswell, Arlen Specter, and also alluded to in the Rydberg drawings and Humes autopsy report (even though he placed to wound too high), (represented by the yellow dots)! (See next image)
Meaning, the bullet that passed through JFK’s head from behind, had the same identical trajectory, hit’s the same windshield and the same trajectory traces back to the Dal-Tex building! Unless anyone can place Lee Harvey Oswald in the Dal-Tex building at the time this shot was fired, along with his rifle, Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill John F. Kennedy!
This possible bullet is headed straight to the back of JFK’s head, right towards the bottom of the hairline, as was testified to! So bullet or not, this is the true trajectory per the available evidence and demonstrated in previous articles in Death Deception.
This trajectory is far too low to originate from the Sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository! This is what they have been trying to hide and why they decided to erase J.J. Humes entry wound and move the entry wound up higher in JFK’s head. It makes no difference if anyone fired a shot from the TSBD, this bullet was not fired from the TSBD, the trajectory doesn’t line up. If the trajectory was much lower, it would be parallel to the same angle as the President’s limo, (see image below). Oswald did not fire this shot! The bullet trajectory is shown by the yellow line in the following image.
Need I point out that the bullet trajectory in the above image is not this trajectory shown from the sixth floor of the TSBD? (See next image).
Is it coincidence that this possible bullet should transition left to right across the film, arrive at the exact necessary time, and match the precise wound trajectory given in autopsy testimony? No, I don’t think so.
The bullet trajectory that strikes JFK in the back of the head traces to this area of the Dal-Tex building, most probably from the open window outlined in yellow (See next image).
*Note that the window is completely surrounded by the metal fire escape, effectively shielding it from easy view from above, below or either side.
Now, ask yourself, who was documented as having been in the Dal-Tex building at the time of the assassination? If you guessed Eugene Hale Brading, you would be correct. Brading was stopped as he came out of the Dal-Tex building by police and questioned (38). Brading gave police an alias instead of his real name as he had a lengthy rap sheet for various crimes. After being questioned, he was then released. The night prior to the assassination, on 21 November 1963, Brading and two other associates had rented three connecting rooms at the Cabana Hotel in Dallas (39). Bradings “associates” also went to Dealey Plaza with Brading, and one of those man’s names is Morgan Holbert Brown (See next image).
What is significant about Mr. Brown? When Morgan Brown saw Brading being detained, he fled Dealey Plaza, rushed back to the Cabana Hotel, grabbed his things and checked out. He was in a hurry to disappear.
This brings up a myth that needs to be destroyed. Sheriff Roger Craig is well known in part for stating he saw Oswald getting into a station wagon, on Elm Street. The station wagon was reported to be driven by a dark complected man. He said he tried to stop this individual because everyone else was running towards the grassy knoll…and these were the only two in a hurry to get away from it. (See next image)
There are better quality images of the man getting into the station wagon but I don’t currently have one. In any case, this one will do. For the last several months I’ve been trying to get information from Buell Wesley Frazier as to the exact clothes worn to work by Lee Harvey Oswald on the day of the assassination, to date I’ve been unsuccessful. There are two different
claims floating around on what Oswald wore. The first is that he wore a Blue jacket, white shirt and dark pants (37). The second is that he wore the Blue jacket, brownish shirt and dark pants (38). In either case, no one stated that Lee Harvey Oswald wore a business suit to work, which is exactly what this man getting into the station wagon is wearing. It is obvious to me, he is wearing a business suit and dress shoes. I’m about 99.9 percent certain, Oswald didn’t wear a suit that day, and it isn’t Oswald getting into this station wagon, but who might it be?
I’m going to very strongly suggest that this is none other than Mr. Morgan Holbert Brown rushing to make his escape out of Dealey Plaza, with the third unnamed associate of both Mr. Brown and Eugene Hale Brading! Mr. Brown may have looked very much like Lee Harvey Oswald, but I have no way of knowing, as I’ve been unable to find any photos of Mr. Brown, and in fact, very little information at all in searching the internet.
Now, I need to provide a little info to you that might be related to Eugene Brading, Morgan Brown and their dark complected associate. On the day of the assassination, Vicky Adams said in her testimony that she saw Jack Ruby at the TSBD just after the shots were fired and he was talking to a small dark complected man. Warren Reynolds, witness to the J.D. Tippit murder, who refused to accept and identify Oswald as the shooter, was himself then shot in the back of the head, by a small dark complected man (39). Another witness on the day of the assassination made a call to police that she saw three men in a station wagon, with a rifle and that they tried to stop her, but she drove around them. I don’t have her name at the moment, but I’ll update this later with her name and testimony. It is my opinion, that all of these events involved one or all of these same three men.
I should also point out the following. According to Chauncey Marvin Holt, Morgan and Melvin Brown were top agents working for Phillip Twombly, under the direction of William King Harvey. Both Mr. Harvey and his wife loathed JFK (See video below) and Mr. Harvey was well connected with organized crime members, specifically Johnny Rosseli.
According to past posts by Robert “Tosh” Plumlee, he stated that he was a part of a team that was sent to Dealey Plaza, in Dallas to abort the assassination. As I recall, he stated that Johnny Roselli flew to Dallas on the same plane with the rest of the team, and after arriving in Dallas, Mr. Plumlee stated he doesn’t know where Roselli went as Roselli did not go with them.
Mr. Plumless went on to mention that he and a “Sergio’s” position in Dealey Plaza was at the South Knoll. I’ve asked a couple of times if Mr. Plumlee could give us Sergio’s last name, but he declined. The most probable “Sergio” I can think of, is Sergio Aracha Smith. The same Sergio Aracha Smith that Jim Garrison attempted to extradite to New Orleans during his investigation/trial of Clay Shaw, and which was successfully blocked by none other than Gov. John Connally.
In the book “History Will Prove Us Right” (meaning Oswald was the Lone Assassin) by Howard P. Willens he made a notation from the Warren Commission’s final “determination”.
That determination was “- “In the absence of any credible evidence regarding another shooter, another weapon, another cartridge, or another bullet, an effective defense would be difficult, because there was no such evidence.”(40)
The only thing that History is going to “prove” is that the Warren Commission permitted fraud, perjury, libel, slander and defamation of character to take place across America. There was and is in fact considerable evidence to prove all of this. There was a good deal of credible evidence regarding another shooter(s), another weapon and the frame up of Oswald.
Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill President John F. Kennedy.
There is one other issue I want to address before ending this segment of Death Deception. For the last several years Danny Vasquez has repeatedly posted information relating to the fact that in his view the Zapruder film has been altered. As I mentioned, up to now, that is a rabbit hole I have avoided going down. But in the process of examining evidence that I have presented to you in this article, I discovered something related to the Zapruder film that shouldn’t exist. So, I’m going to show you the very first image I used in this article again (See next image).
I deliberately left out frames 315 and 316 from this collage of images. I want you to look at frame 314 and then the next image 317. Look at how much of a gap there is between these two “bullets”. That gap exists because I removed those two frames. In frames 310, 311, 312, and 313 the movement of this “bullet” can be accounted for in a regular timed sequence…meaning it moves in approximately the same distance from frame to frame. Then notice that from frame 313 to frame 314 this space jumps, and is much wider than the previous frames, it shouldn’t be. What it shows me is that there is a frame missing between frame 313 and 314, just as there is two frames missing between 314 and 317. But, I did not remove any frames between frames 313 and 314 which means somebody else did. Now who might that be?
Now, why would anyone…anyone at all need to splice a perfectly good, brand new film, like the Zapruder film unless they were trying to manipulate the film? I mean it makes no sense to splice a perfectly good film. The truth is, I discovered that frames were missing even without knowing of Hoover’s manipulation of the Z-film.
In previous articles, I noted that two large skull fragments were blown off of JFK’s head and yet neither is visible in any frame of the Zapruder film. These skull fragments are moving without a doubt much slower than the “bullet”…and they don’t show up?
I reviewed the Nix film frame by frame, back and forth several times for comparison purposes. I found a single frame that it appears to be a large skull fragment and some smaller ones (around the time of the head shot)…one frame and only one frame.
Then I was reminded of Newton’s Third Law, “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction”. In other words, “what goes up, must come down”, very much like tossing a ball up into the air, it doesn’t just keep going up, and it doesn’t disappear. Living on Earth, with Earth’s atmosphere, all objects are subject to Earth’s gravity. So, any skull fragments flying up in the air, have to come back down…yet this is visible nowhere in the Z-film! We know the fragments were knocked off of JFK’s head, particularly the Harper fragment which when blown off, flew out of the car and landed on the side of Elm Street. This information alone tells you that without question, frames are missing and not just from the Z-film, but from the Nix film as well. For this reason, I’m afraid we may never see the originals of either film. Releasing these two original films would reveal not only that there was a frontal and back shot to JFK’s head, they would also show the complicity of our government in framing Oswald, the fraud and perjury committed and would make them accountable for their actions. Expecting the release of these films is very much like it was trying to get our government to admit to using Agent Orange during Vietnam.
With that, I will wish you all a Happy Thanksgiving, the next article won’t be until after Thanksgiving, in which I will thoroughly demonstrate the evidence of two shots to JFK’s head, a frontal shot from the South Knoll and the back of head shot from the Dal-Tex building…Dusty.
Death Deception, (The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald), Part III.
By S.r. “Dusty” Rohde
© November, 2016
Before I go into this next article, I would like to supply some personal background. A few years ago, I created the Facebook Group “JFK ALTERED AUTOPSY IMAGES”. In that time, I’ve spent personally, hundreds of hours examining the autopsy photos, X-ray’s, testimonies and everything related to the Autopsy. This includes hundreds of dialogues with dozens of people on the various evidence, including eye witness accounts. This is not something that was started a week ago. On that note, anyone interested in purchasing copies of the autopsy images may do so by contacting Walt Brown, prolific and long time JFK researcher in his own right.
After seeing that J.J. Humes deliberately committed both fraud and perjury in representing JFK’s back wounds during the WC Hearings, things take a very different turn during the HSCA hearings. Whoever is behind the concentrated effort to frame Oswald decides to escalate their combined efforts.
I mentioned that the Ida Dox drawings also misrepresented JFK’s wounds, particularly the back wounds, but also the head wounds (You can view the Dox drawings here), (31). Look at Dox’s drawing of the single back wound (below), the same back wound as the Rydberg drawings, same omission of the other three back wounds. One difference is that there is a small cropped image from the actual autopsy photograph included with her drawing, (showing again, only the single wound to JFK’s back). You can read Ida Dox’s HSCA testimony here (32). Reading Dox’s testimony, you can see that she had free access to JFK’s autopsy images, X-rays and doctor’s testimonies . . . everything. She was certainly a great deal more aware of the actual wounds than Rydberg ever was. At this point, I can’t imagine why she opted to recreate the same false back wound representations. At first, it doesn’t make any sense. Ida Dox testified that she used “tracing paper” and placed the paper “directly on the photograph, then all the details were carefully traced” (33). Umm, say what? Ida Dox goes into elaborate explanations on how she traced the photographs of JFK’s wound. She expounds on her exquisite attention to detail, on how many times she made reference to the photos and on and on. Let’s see, you saw four wounds, and “carefully” tracing every detail you end up with one wound? I think Ida Dox and I have a very different idea of what carefully tracing “all” of the details means. If Ida Dox traced every detail, then how in the hell did “Image A” devolve into “Image B” (See Below)? Why is Ida Dox promoting Humes original deception?
It’s very obvious that Ida Dox didn’t copy every detail of JFK’s back wounds. The strange thing is Ida included the body fluid seepage tracks in her drawing…which came from the true entry wound and the lowest fragment exit wound. Didn’t anyone from the HSCA notice these tracks? Didn’t they think to ask her what they were? Or why, if they came from the fake entry wound…why are they spread so wide and so far below the wound she drew (Apparently not)?
Towards the end of Ida Dox’s HSCA testimony she is asked a specific question, and Ms. Dox very smoothly evades the answer.
“Mr. Purdy. Ms. Dox, prior to today, did you have the opportunity to review the enlargements of your drawings to insure that they are accurate?”
“Ms. Dox. Yes I did, I looked at them very, very carefully and they are my drawings except that they are photographically enlarged. They haven’t been altered in any way.” (34)
Ida Dox gives a very clever answer but completely avoids answering the question that she was asked. The question was, “are the drawings accurate”. Do the drawings correctly represent the actual wounds to JFK’s body? How did Ida Dox answer that specific question? She didn’t.
Ida also makes what some might refer to as a little “Freudian slip”. She points out that her drawings weren’t “altered” in any way, but naturally avoids mentioning she altered the photo of JFK’s wounds in her drawings.
Now, I’m asking myself, “Ida, Ida, Ida . . . what are you doing and why are you doing it? I mean, the image she draws is another fraudulent representation of JFK’s wounds. AND she has free access to all of the photos, X-rays and doctors testimonies. My instincts begin to tell me something is going on here that I’m not seeing. I mean, in the first place, the HSCA had the Rydberg drawings, why did they need Dox to redraw what he already had? More importantly, why is she drawing the wound in the same way as Rydberg after viewing the evidence? Then it hits me, clear as a bell and I’m thinking to myself “Oh, you sneaky bastards”. I suddenly realize what Ida Dox is doing and what is being done to poor J.J. Humes. During the HSCA and ARRB hearings, Humes is going to be thrown under the bus, (not that he doesn’t deserve it to some degree). He’s caught in a “catch 22”, damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t; he’s trapped, with no good way out.
One thing I should point out, the probable reason they didn’t re-use the Rydberg drawings is because by this time Harold “skip” Rydberg was trying to get access to the autopsy images to correct his original drawings. That request was denied. Rydberg wasn’t interested in creating more fraudulent drawings; he wanted to fix the ones he already made. So…a new artist became necessary, an artist who I will suggest was willfully complicit to committing fraud and perjury.
I had to read J.J. Humes testimonies (WC, HSCA and ARRB) many times before I noticed what “they” were up to (“they” being the ones orchestrating the frame up of Oswald). This is where we discover that J.J. Humes wasn’t committing this fraud on his own. During the HSCA trial, this is the first time that autopsy images were presented to any of the witnesses, particularly the Parkland Hospital staff and J.J. Humes. It is during the HSCA hearings that “they” decide to escalate the framing of Oswald. Rather than feed us from a bucket of bullshit one spoonful at a time, they decide to trade the spoon for a shovel. Somebody paid attention to Arlen Specters complaints about the bullet trajectory to the back of JFK’s head being too low and difficult to assert the shot came from the TSBD. I will suggest “they” also know a dirty little secret that hasn’t been revealed to this day, but it will be forthcoming tomorrow, on the 22nd of November, in the next article. I know what “they” knew.
It is very important that you understand something related to the autopsy photos. The photos, at the time of the WC hearings, had been under complete control by employees of our government and no one else, remember that. The photos were never seen by anyone in the Warren Commission during their hearings. Only many years later during the HSCA would the images suddenly become available…well, at least the ones selected by “them”. Some autopsy photos to this day have not been seen.
During the HSCA hearings, the escalation of the framing of Oswald becomes a two pronged attack. The first attack is to make the back of head wound (low in the neck at the bottom of the hairline) identified by Humes, Lipsey, Arlen Specter, the autopsy report and the Rydberg drawings to vanish! How do “they” accomplish this task? Well, the job was done so poorly that it would be comical if not for the seriousness of the tragic events that transpired. So, rather than say that this image was manipulated or altered, I will simply say that this image has been “Redacted” (See below).
Does it remind you of anything? Who’s so fond of “redacting” documents by using their black magic markers? Our government is, the same people who had total control of the autopsy images (See next image).
Those crazy guys and their magic markers work wonders! While I call the image redacted, some people…say a lawyer, would be more inclined to give it the term “M.O.” or “Modus Operandi”.
Do you see the bullet entry wound low in the back of the head near the hairline anyplace in the previous image? Nope…”poof”, the wound is all gone. Now, what possible motive would anyone have to make this wound disappear? If you’re trying to frame Oswald, why erase the bullet wound? Guess what? J.J. Humes just began his slide down the slippery slope…(I hear the bus coming). “They” just traded their spoon for the shovel, hoping Americans are hungry. “They” are preparing to move the bullet wound low in the back of the neck up to the top part of the back of the head. “They” also have to stick to the “three shots fired” scenario, so…in adding a new wound, it became necessary to make Humes entry wound disappear. In hiding the lower head wound and creating a new one, they threw Humes under the bus and he is left to fend for himself in the HSCA and ARRB hearings. “They” know that Humes has no choice but to go along with the newest deception, that or destroy his career, possibly risk his life, destroy his image to all of his former students, to his wife and children and possibly risk losing his family. J.J. Humes decides to bite the bullet and remain silent, all while the HSCA and the ARRB portray him as an incompetent buffoon. Humes becomes frustrated, irritated, hostile, defensive and remorseful through the hearings. He’s being made a fool and there is nothing he can do except sacrifice everything in his life or sit back and take it. His silence is ensured.
The next step in escalating the framing of Oswald is to make the back of head blow out (seen by over 20 witnesses) also disappear. Many of the witnesses were Parkland Hospital staff and the disappearance of the back of head blowout caused a great deal of stress and disbelief among them. The following image shows some of the witnesses showing where they saw the back of head blowout.
(Witnesses above: Beverly Oliver, Phillip Willis, Marilyn Willis, Ed Hoffman, Dr. Robert McClelland, Dr Paul Peters, Dr Kenneth Salyer, Dr Charles Carrico, Dr. Richard Dulaney, Dr. Ronald Jones, Nurse Aubrey Bell, Theran Ward, Aubrey Rike, Frank O’neill, Jerrod Custer, Paul O’Conner and Floyd Riebe)
None of the autopsy images presented to the HSCA or the ARRB show this blowout in the back of the head, yet all of these witnesses insist it was there. Let me explain something, a complete intact photo of the back of JFK’s head after the assassination was and is a virtual IMPOSSIBILITY without manipulation or alteration! Yet, that is precisely what was shown to witnesses during the HSCA hearings. How was this photo “IMPOSSIBLE”? Very simple, two large fragments were blown off of JFK’s head when he was shot. One of those fragments was found in the President’s limo on the floor by the Secret Service the night of the assassination. However, the second fragment, commonly called the “Harper” fragment (after the person who found it) was not discovered until after the autopsy (35) AND the work by the morticians had been completed AND after JFK’s body had been removed from Bethesda for funeral services. The morticians testified they packed JFK’s empty brain cavity with Plaster of Paris, sewed rubber onto the back of his neck, and then applied the necessary make-up to complete their work (36). The morticians finished around 5am Saturday morning per J.J. Humes testimonies. The Harper fragment would not even be found for several hours later on Elm St. on Saturday, in Dealey Plaza. The assassination and autopsy took place on Friday the previous day. The morticians noted that they could not close the entire back of the skull, due to the missing bone fragment. The Harper fragment is not a small fragment either (See next image).
This fragment is nearly three inches wide and about two and a half inches tall. This fragment was noted as being from the Occipital region per J.J. Humes (37). The Occipital region of the skull is the back of the head. One of the images presented during the HSCA hearings is the following image (See Below). Note the large white oblong oval white area under the hair, in the same general area as where all of the Parkland witnesses claimed they saw the blowout (Where the white arrow is pointing).
As I said, this image is a virtual IMPOSSIBILITY without manipulation or alteration due to the fragment missing when the morticians were finished, and JFK’s body had left Bethesda hospital (Before the Harper fragment even arrived)! Yet, here it is, a photo with JFK’s skull complete and intact. To emphasize the point, see the next image to compare where the witnesses state the blowout was located, and where the white oblong spot shows up on JFK’s head. The drawings of the skulls were circled by different medical witnesses as to the approximation to where the blowout was located.
J. Thorton Boswell was one of the autopsy surgeons who worked on the autopsy with J.J. Humes. Harry Livingston had questioned Dr. Boswell on this particular wound and wrote about it in his book, “High Treason 2”.
Livingston: “The men—I was at Joseph Gawler’s funeral home the other day and Joe Hagen, the president, and his cosmetologist and so on described to me reassembling his (JFK’s) head at the end and they stated that when they had finished there was still an area in the back of the head just in the occipital-parietal area probably three inches across, that there was not enough scalp to cover that. But nobody could see it because the head was on the pillow—“
Livingston: “And that’s the way you remember it”?
Livingston: “That there was no scalp there”?
Livingston: “And that was basically the area where the large defect was”.
Boswell: “Well, that defect was a lot larger—do you mean in the skull”?
Livingston: “Yes. That area of missing scalp was in the center of a larger defect”.
Boswell: “Well, no, it was more posterior than the defect in the scalp…”
As Boswell stated, “more posterior in the skull”. Posterior meaning in the back of the head, as witnesses show and stated in their testimonies. Dr. Boswell would go on to say in the same chapter that the bullet entry wound to the back of JFK’s skull (per the Bethesda autopsy report) was below this larger wound. So, the autopsy doctor agrees with the witnesses, including the morticians from Gawler’s Funeral Home who prepped JFK for funeral services. Dr. Boswell also agreed that this area of missing scalp/bone fragment was approximately 3 inches long, which just happens to be the approximate width of the Harper fragment. A fragment noted to have come from the posterior of JFK’s skull. Whoever touched up this photo, obviously went to some lengths to cover up the oblong white spot, but was not entirely successful. The white spot is the Plaster of Paris the morticians used to pack JFK’s empty brain cavity, as they stated. This same Plaster of Paris can also be seen in one of JFK’s X-rays.
So the first part in escalating the framing of Oswald was to make J.J. Humes back of head “entry” wound disappear. The second part was to make this blowout disappear. There were three very good reasons for this. The first was necessary, hiding the bullet wound low in the back of JFK’s head, because “they” are preparing to move the wound up toward the top of the back of the head. Second, since “they” allege only three shots were fired, “they” can’t just out of the blue add an extra bullet hole as that would make four shots, meaning a second shooter. Third, the large back of head blow out indicates an exit wound from a frontal head shot, also adding another shooter…none of these is what “they” want. “They” are attempting to stick to the 3 shot, Lone Assassin Theory”, whatever it takes. Yes, there was a frontal head shot, and I will get to that soon. Sherri Fiester has already discussed this shot at length in her book “Enemy of the Truth”. I highly recommend that you read it.
What I haven’t told you is that I know J.J. Humes and Ida Dox’s handler’s dirty little secret. I know why Ida Dox is moving the head wound up in her drawings. People were paying attention to Arlen Specter’s complaint that the bullet trajectory was too low to try and connect it to the TSBD. But there is a much bigger reason why “they” don’t want you looking too closely at the bullet wound low in the back of JFK’s head, a reason they made it vanish. Moving the head wound up in the back of JFK’s head isn’t just to continue the framing of Oswald by making the bullet trajectory a better match to the TSBD, it is to keep you from discovering what they’ve been desperate to hide. What might that be? The fact that the kill shot, the first fatal head shot…didn’t even come from the TSBD! Don’t believe it? Maybe what you see tomorrow will change your mind.If this fatal bullet didn’t come from the TSBD, Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy, it’s just that simple. This head shot from behind, hit a fraction of a a second before the head shot from the front…”Pow, Pow”…very close together, stay tuned, exposing the first dirty secret tomorrow.
DEATH DECEPTION, The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald (Part II) By S.r. “Dusty” Rohde © November, 2016 As we continue with Part II of Death Deception, I’m very pleased to be able to m…
DEATH DECEPTION, The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald (Part II)
By S.r. “Dusty” Rohde
© November, 2016
As we continue with Part II of Death Deception, I’m very pleased to be able to make the stunning revelation you will find in this article. It isn’t often researchers can find true “smoking guns” related to the assassination these days, but this is one of those times . . . enjoy.
In Part I of Death Deception, I stated that the Single Bullet Theory is about to go up in flames, so here we go.
Look close at the autopsy photo (Next image), there are actually four wounds on JFK’s back, not one as proclaimed by Chief Autopsy Surgeon J.J. Humes! Yet the Rydberg and Dox drawings both show the single wound, (19, 20). Ask yourself why Humes, or anyone else would deliberately leave out not one, not two, but three of JFK’s back wounds on these drawings? J.J. Humes couldn’t say he wasn’t aware of the four different wounds in JFK’s back, he helped perform the autopsy, he supervised it, and he also saw and handled the body for hours. Yet, strangely enough, the final autopsy report (below right) doesn’t show the four wounds to JFK’s back either! Is this why Humes burned his original autopsy report (21)? So he could make the other three wounds disappear? Did his original report include all four of the back wounds? Does anyone fault me for thinking that maybe Humes “integrity” and “seriousness” of presenting legitimate evidence isn’t what “Willens” claimed it to be? Wouldn’t the deliberate falsification on an autopsy report fall under the heading of “fraud” . . . or at the very least raise some serious red flags? I don’t know, I’m not a lawyer but apparently Arlen Specter thought so.
By now, some people are probably wondering how I know J.J. Humes “entry wound” was in fact an exit wound and not an entry wound. The answer is found in the evidence, of course. Two pieces of evidence will prove the alleged bullet entry point asserted by Humes is an exit wound. The pieces of evidence are the autopsy photograph of the back, and JFK’s jacket. One day, for reasons I don’t recall, I decided to use the computer to overlay JFK’s jacket over his body. When I did this, I got a fairly big surprise. I had made the mistake, that so many others have made in taking Humes word about the back “entry” wound as fact, silly me, (never make assumptions). First of all let’s be clear about something. There was and is only one single bullet hole in the back of JFK’s jacket, not two, not three, not four. There were four wounds to the back and only one hole in the jacket, four actual wounds versus only one wound per J.J. Humes “official” autopsy report. (See Below)
In the next image the little tiny white spec at the back end of the white arrow is the bullet hole through the back of JFK’s jacket. I’m going to mark the bullet hole with a brighter white spot so it makes things easier to see. Then I will also place a red dot over one of the wounds on JFK’s back. Then I will enlarge the jacket to match JFK’s body size in the autopsy photo. I will also have to rotate the image of JFK’s jacket so that it matches the angle of the autopsy photo and position the jacket to fit the body. The purpose now is to merge the two images to see if Humes alleged bullet entry point matches up with the entry hole in Kennedy’s jacket. If Humes is correct with his alleged “entry” wound, the white dot should fall directly over J.J. Humes alleged entry wound, (next image).
Uh oh, guess what? With the jacket resized and aligned over JFK’s body, the hole in the jacket lines up perfectly with the wound shown with the red arrows (Seen below), and NOT with Humes alleged “entry” wound! J.J. Humes “entry” wound claims turns out to be a lie, and again, not an accidental one.
The white entry wound dot on the jacket and the red dot of this back wound have blended to become the pink spot. The entry wound, as described by Richard Lipsey is a “round hole”, as is the wound indicated by the red dot. There is only one entry hole in JFK’s jacket, which means, Humes alleged “entry” wound is actually an EXIT wound! This of course means, the SBT is based upon a possible two exit wounds and no entry wound (if in fact the frontal neck wound was an exit wound), proof positive the SBT is BS. The actual bullet entry wound is about 1 ¾ inches farther down than Humes exit wound (a wound over 3 inches farther down than originally proclaimed by Humes), and what does that mean? It means the SBT theory is going out the window.
Humes said that the Bethesda doctors didn’t explore his alleged “neck” wound (22), which would be hard to do, since it didn’t exist in the first place, at least in the back of the neck. Humes also stated that he and the other doctors were unaware of the bullet wound to the front of the neck, due to the incision made by the Parkland doctors for the tracheotomy (23). How utterly convenient is that?
In Richard Lipsey’s testimony, he says that the bullet to the back was deflected downward and then explains how the doctors spent a good deal of time trying to trace this bullet and never did find it, before they gave up (which agrees with Humes testimony) (24). According to these testimonies, if the bullet never left the body, then there was no “Pristine Bullet” that exited JFK. This is the point where Humes claims this caused him to call the Parkland Hospital and when he first heard about the frontal neck wound (25). It was from this point that Humes decided the bullet had to exit the front of JFK’s neck (26).
I don’t think this is precisely accurate though; at least it’s not what the evidence indicates. We now know where the real “entry” wound was in JFK’s back (versus Humes erroneous entry wound), and this presents a new problem. There are still four other wounds (three in JFK’s back and one at the front of his neck that need explaining (See next image).
Of the three remaining wounds on JFK’s back, note that one is almost directly to the left of the actual entry wound, one is up and left and the third is almost straight up and slightly left from the entry wound, keep that in mind.
There are two different possibilities that might account for these four remaining wounds. One possibility is that there was a shot from the front that hit JFK’s throat and exited the back with three fragments. According to FBI testimony, the tear in the front of the shirt, and damage to the tie indicated this was an exit wound (27). The FBI also claimed the tie was “grazed” and yet, looking at the tie, we see what looks to be a very obvious “through and through” hole (28). I say that because in the following image, we are looking at the very front of the tie, and not a side view. Since the bullet wasn’t travelling sideways….this isn’t a “graze”.
So, a frontal throat shot can not be entirely ruled out. However, according to the autopsy X-rays, there were no holes through any of the vertebra (if you can trust the X-rays). Two of the fragment wounds are almost directly over the spine and these fragments surely would have penetrated vertebra to exit JFK’s back. This damage would also have shown up on JFK’s X-rays, it doesn’t. There would also be problems with the bullet trajectory. A bullet from the front would have to have come from almost directly in front of JFK. The trajectory would have been low, low enough to hit the windshield and would have to miss Gov. Connally and the Secret Service agent in the front passenger seat to hit JFK. This would also add an extra shot fired, over and above the three allegedly fired from the TSBD. So, while this possible shot can’t be ruled out entirely, it does seem very improbable due to the known evidence.
Personally, I’m going to stick to “Occam’s Razor” on this one. If the front of the neck wound was an exit wound (as evidence suggests), it means the wound to JFK’s back fragmented into five pieces, which also happens to destroy the “Pristine Bullet” and associated SBT theory. These fragments are far too large to have left any bullet in “Pristine” condition. This also would mean the so called “Pristine Bullet” never touched JFK. If the bullet entering JFK’s back fragmented it would also explain why the Bethesda doctors were unable to find the bullet. It would be much harder to find a smaller fragment versus a full undamaged bullet. The evidence indicates this bullet entered JFK’s back and fragmented. One fragment deflected downward (inside the body), three of the five fragments deflected upward and three (possibly four) of the five deflected to the left. A frontal neck exit wound trajectory is consistent with the fragment trajectories in JFK’s back (moving up and to the left). Apparently, none of the fragments exiting JFK’s back penetrated his shirt or his jacket. In any case, whether there was a frontal shot to the neck, or whether the shot to the back fragmented, there was no “Pristine Bullet” involved and no SBT.
While I’m on the subject of the “Pristine Bullet”, I need to point something else out. The ongoing claims related to the “Pristine Bullet” state that the wound to Gov. John Connally’s leg was a shallow wound that didn’t penetrate muscle tissue and the bullet must have fallen out of his leg in the hospital. This is another lie. If we look at the medical report on John Connally, it shows that the fragment that was left in Connally’s body was in fact lodged in the bone (Next image)! In the medical training I’ve had, muscle surrounds bone. This is why they didn’t remove the fragment. The wound was not a shallow wound.
You have now discovered that J.J. Humes willfully committed both fraud and perjury during the Warren Commission Hearings. The sole purpose of these acts was to help frame Lee Harvey Oswald. The Single Bullet Theory was a complete lie as is the “Pristine” bullet theory. John Kennedy’s necktie was not grazed, a bullet or fragment passed directly through the tie. This is still just the tip of the iceberg, from here it just keeps getting worse.
Some people may wonder why 2nd Lt. Richard Lipsey waited for slightly over 15 years to give testimony to the HSCA in 1978. This is because as he states, he was made to sign a “non-disclosure” agreement that was to be in effect for “X” number of years.
For anyone not familiar with a “non-disclosure” agreement, these types of agreements are not unusual when subject material is deemed classified or top secret, which our government doesn’t want immediately released. I’ve had to sign a non-disclosure agreement myself when I decided to return to the United States after working on top secret projects for our government while overseas for years. This includes a “debriefing”, in my case by two government agents. This also includes reading several documents and signing the non-disclosure agreement, which lasts for however many years they deem necessary to protect national security.
Being curious by nature, when the agents slid the non-disclosure agreement in front of me and told me to sign, I jokingly asked, “and if I don’t sign it”? Both agents immediately gave me a look that said “curiosity killed the cat”, they were not remotely amused. I really did want to know what would happen if somebody doesn’t sign, but not that bad, LOL.
A non-disclosure agreement means a person is not allowed to transfer information, in any format about anything they saw or heard pertaining to the mission or assignment. After the looks I got from the agents, I didn’t bother to ask them if that included the Russian spy ship, code name “Brand X”. Brand X was a spy ship that showed up like clockwork anytime a mission was under way. I didn’t ask if it included the Greenpeace ship “Rainbow Warrior” that entered our restricted area; the ship was blown up by French frogmen a day and a half later, killing the crew. I took a boat out to talk to the crew before it was blown up. I asked them if they realized they had entered a restricted area and if they had heard from our government yet. The crew told me they hadn’t been approached by anyone in security or by our government. I was pretty surprised that they weren’t immediately contacted and escorted out of the area. I figured it was only a matter of time and they were begging for trouble. Little did I know they would be dead less than two days later, problem solved? Technically, these events were not directly related to the mission, but this is where the term “don’t ask, don’t tell” comes into play. You don’t ask, and you don’t talk about any of it, unless you want some potentially very serious trouble. In any case, Lipsey’s explanation of why he didn’t testify during the WC investigation due to his non-disclosure agreement rings true.
I bring up non-disclosure agreements because I suspect that everyone involved with the autopsy was made to sign them (except Humes). I can’t swear to this, but I’m about 99% certain. If this is true, then J.J. Humes would have no doubt been aware of this. He knew that no one would be able to discuss anything about the autopsy. He knew that the autopsy images were likely never to surface. So, he also knew that in filing a false autopsy report and giving false evidence to the Warren Commission he was likely not going to be caught any time soon. Humes also had no idea that by 2016 personal computers and associated technology and potential would be as common as a clock.
The HSCA was far more benevolent to Mr. Humes than I can be, they chalked up all of the errors and omissions on the autopsy report by Humes as due to his inexperience. If that is true, why did Humes choose the highest of the four back wounds to note on the autopsy report? If he wasn’t trying to create a false trajectory, why did he use the highest exit wound as opposed to the actual entrance wound to represent? Why did he choose to hide the remaining three wounds to JFK’s back on the autopsy report and in the Rydberg drawings? Why did he burn his original autopsy report? Why did Humes not confess to these errors, after all the years his work was done? All of this manipulation was done because of inexperience? Bullshit! Even a high school dropout with no experience could have done a better job of an honest autopsy report. Even a blind man would have known there were four wounds on JFK’s back. This wasn’t inexperience; it was deliberate manipulation and omission of the autopsy evidence! That’s fraud. Lee Harvey Oswald was libeled, slandered and accused based partly upon that fraud.
J.J. Humes gave testimony to the Assassination Record Review Board (AARB). Humes said “The one disturbing thing I would not like to see widely publicized any more today than I would in 1963 were the photographs that we made, which were very, very repulsive” (29). He doesn’t mention that the photos would also expose his fraud in JFK’s autopsy report. In page 111 of his ARRB testimony, Humes commits perjury, he says “A. Well, we looked at this wound in the upper part of his neck” (referring to the fictitious wound in the back of JFK’s neck) (30). There was NO wound in the back of JFK’s neck, period. On page 229 of this same testimony, the ARRB itself questions Humes on whether he was “pressured” or “encouraged” in any way to have the Rydberg drawings misrepresent the wounds (31). Even the ARRB knew Humes wasn’t telling the truth.
This ends part II of Death Deception. What’s coming next? See J.J. Humes get thrown under the bus by the HSCA and Ida Dox commit fraud and perjury.
19. Rydberg Drawing, (CE385), https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_385.pdf
20. Dox Drawing, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JFK_posterior_back_wound.jpg
21. CE397, Humes Destruction of Autopsy Report, page 48, http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_397.pdf
27. FBI Frazier description of JFK clothing, http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/frazr2.htm
28. FBI Frazier description of JFK Tie, page 7, http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/frazr2.htm
(Framing Lee Harvey Oswald)
By S.R. “Dusty” Rohde
© November, 2016
I would like to make special thanks to Gayle Nix-Jackson, Michael Doherty and Ted Rubenstein, all of who helped trigger the paths that led to the discoveries in the upcoming articles. Also, a special thanks to Linda Giovanna Zambanini for listening and constant help with my requests.
For 53 years, a battle has been raging between two groups. The groups are the “Lone Nutters” (LNer’s) and “Conspiracy Theorists” (CTer’s). These two groups have opposing viewpoints on whether President John F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, or by others who successfully committed a Government coup in America.
President John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963 in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas. Lee Harvey Oswald, the person branded as JFK’s assassin was himself assassinated two days later while in police protective custody, by Carousel Club owner Jack Ruby. Jack Ruby was bosom buddies with a large portion of the Dallas Police employees and had numerous ties to organized crime.
Having researched the JFK assassination for years, I long ago discovered there is a mountain of misinformation in existence related to this case. This misinformation comes from both sides of the fence, meaning from “LNer’s” and “CTer’s”. Much of this misinformation has been deliberate, and some accidental. None of this false information has benefitted a resolution to the assassination case; all of false information is misleading and cripples any understanding of what took place on that fateful day. The Warren Commission itself deliberately presented false evidence related to JFK’s wounds. Hoover’s FBI withheld evidence and continues to do so even today. The CIA continues to refuse the release of their records on the assassination. Witnesses were granted immunity for testifying, whose records were promptly sealed. Was all of this deception to protect Lee Harvey Oswald, the alleged “Lone Assassin”, and a man already murdered? I don’t think so. If Lee was so guilty and a “lone assassin”, why all this drama?
My tasks or goals in this Chapter are twofold. The first task is to present you, the reader, with fact based (including corrected) evidence. The second task is to help provide a clear and accurate understanding of that evidence. If I succeed in these two goals, I have little doubt that what really happened in Dallas will begin to become alarmingly clear to you.
The youngest President in American history was murdered on 22 November, 1963 . . . but it was not Lee Harvey Oswald who killed him. Three men died that weekend, Kennedy, Oswald and Dallas Police patrolman, J.D. Tippit. A fourth man was seriously wounded, Governor John Connally. None of them deserved their fate.
Lee Harvey Oswald was quickly branded a “Communist”, a “Lone Nut” and the “Lone Assassin”. Oswald was blamed for the injuries to Kennedy, Connally and Tippit, but those allegations aren’t true. Sadly, Lee’s former wife (Marina Oswald), his mother Marguerite, his two daughters (June and Rachel) and his brother (Robert) would all have to carry the burden of Lee’s alleged guilt for 53 years.
After hundreds and thousands of hours examining the evidence, I hope what I reveal here today sinks in. I hope that finally Americans will begin to grasp the depth of deception involving these murders, with greater perception than ever before. This isn’t the end of evidence proving the framing of Oswald, it’s the beginning.
S.R. “Dusty” Rohde
(Framing Lee Harvey Oswald)
The Warren Commission was the investigative body (of JFK’s assassination) appointed by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, headed by Chief Justice Earl Warren. Johnson was sworn in as President at Love Field on Air Force One, in Dallas, Texas, shortly after JFK was assassinated. Howard P. Willens was one of three members who made up the WC’s “Supervisory staff”. In Willens book “History Will Prove Us Right” he states, “I was witness to the thoroughness, seriousness, and integrity with which the Warren Commission approached its task” (1). To this I must object. Willens also proclaimed “criticism of our work is seriously misguided” (2). By Willens definition, I’m misguided. In my defense I can only say “at least I didn’t deliberately deceive the American public”, the Warren Commission and House Select Committee on Assassinations did. Obviously, I’m going to have to justify that statement. As far as “thoroughness” by the WC goes, I’ll only mention that in the JFK Research community, the Warren Commission’s work is commonly referred to as The Warren Omissions. This is primarily due to the considerable amount of evidence that wasn’t looked into, witnesses who weren’t questioned and so on and so forth. The label has a good deal of validity, but that isn’t the area I want to cover in this article. I’m more interested in examining the WC’s integrity and their alleged seriousness. In other words, did the WC tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Did the “House Select Committee on Assassinations” (HSCA)? The answer is no. Parkland hospital staff (in Dallas) originally worked on JFK and John Connally immediately after they were wounded in Dealey Plaza. Several members of the Parkland staff were later called as witnesses during the WC hearings. These Parkland staff members were deliberately shown false images (with artist’s drawings) representing JFK’s head and back wounds (3). These images were a collection of misleading drawings alleged to represent JFK’s wounds. Artist Harold “Skip” Rydberg was commissioned by the WC to perform their necessary work (4). Artist Ida Dox was later commissioned in 1978 by the HSCA to create more artist renderings of JFK’s wounds. The Ida Dox drawings also give false representations of JFK’s wounds, but in this case, Ida Dox is responsible for any false representations of JFK’s wounds. This is because Ida Dox had access to the JFK autopsy images, X-rays and previous witness testimonies from the WC hearings; she referenced them often (5). The Parkland Hospital staff would again be called to give testimonies by the HSCA in 1978, only this time, they would be shown new drawings and altered photographs depicting fake or disappearing wounds. My contention is that the false wound representations were done through two different artist’s renderings, one artist who knew when they created the images that they were false, and one artist who did not. The deception didn’t stop there though. The deception grew from fraudulent drawings to altered photographic deceptions presented to the Parkland Hospital witnesses, (in the HSCA hearings). The photos would shock and confuse them, what the images showed, were not the wounds to JFK’s body these witnesses saw or remembered.
Before I show the medical evidence that was misrepresented and how, I want you to become familiar with this statement made by Arlen Specter to the WC staff. Arlen Specter, as assistant counsel for the Warren Commission was the creator of the “Single Bullet Theory” (6) which involved the use of the “Pristine” bullet (7). While his theory is in error (demonstrated in this article, I have to give Mr. Specter credit for the following statement. This statement was sent by Arlen Specter to Mr. J. Lee Rankin, “general counsel” of the Warren Commission. I quote, “The Commission should determine with certainty that there are no major variations between the films and the artist’s drawings,–Commission exhibits Nos. 385, 386 and 388 were made from the recollections of the autopsy surgeons as told to the artist. Someday someone may compare the films and the artist drawings and find a significant error which might substantially affect the essential testimony and the Commissions conclusions” (8). This statement by Mr. Specter was very prophetic, because that “someday” is today, here and now. The Warren Commission staff should have listened to Mr. Specter. I would suggest that Mr. Specter knew that the artistic renderings were not accurate and attempted to warn the WC away from their intended use. Mr. Specter was attempting to prevent the WC members from future embarrassment, but his words fell on deaf ears.
In the case of Harold “Skip” Rydberg, his drawings of the wounds to JFK were not deliberately misrepresented by his own doing. Mr. Rydberg was instructed by J.J. Humes as to where to place the wounds in the drawings (9). At the time of the drawings, Rydberg had never seen any of the actual photographs of the wounds or the body itself, he was totally dependent upon J.J. Humes to give accurate descriptions of JFK’s wounds (10). J.J. Humes, as Chief Autopsy Surgeon was certainly very familiar with JFK’s wounds and their locations. The responsibility for any errors in the artist renderings falls directly on Humes shoulders as the originator of the errors in wound locations. You can damn well bet that Humes knew better, he knew where the entry wounds were, but falsely identified them, through Rydberg. What I’m saying is, point-blank, Commander Humes with full knowledge and intent was the creator of the fraudulent wound locations and identification. The question we have to ask ourselves is why would Humes do this? Why would Humes risk his rank and his career to attempt fraud? It’s true that Humes could have done this of his own volition, but the risk of being caught would have been considerable. This option, while possible, doesn’t seem very probable. The only plausible reason I can think of, is that somebody higher up the chain ordered him to do so. Humes wasn’t asked to sign a non-disclosure agreement, but committing fraud would insure his silence. Others involved in the autopsy were made to sign non-disclosure agreements or told not to talk about the autopsy by government officials. Humes knew these people wouldn’t be talking for a good long while. Humes was also aware that the autopsy images were most likely never to be released, as this was against his wishes and allegedly those of Attorney General Robert Kennedy and the Kennedy family. Humes had no idea that many years later the HSCA would be formed to begin a new investigation into JFK’s assassination or that some of the autopsy images would become available. Had the images not surfaced of JFK’s wounds, few people would ever know the true extent of JFK’s wounds or the deliberate deceptions committed by Humes and Ida Dox during the WC and HSCA hearings.
So, rather than simply talk about the wound misrepresentations and deceptions, I am going to show them to you. The Rydberg images are WC exhibits CE385, CE386 and CE388 (11), (12).
The three images shown above are the drawings of JFK’s wounds created by Harold Rydberg, according to the wound descriptions given to him by J.J. Humes.
I’m going to address the errors in wound placement on the center image (CE 386) first, as this directly shows the false depictions of CE 385 and CE 388. Both entry wounds in CE 386 are in the wrong positions, both wounds are shown higher than they actually were and this was no accident. To verify that these wounds are located inaccurately; I’m going to refer to testimony given by 2nd Lt. Richard Lipsey during the HSCA hearings. Lt. Lipsey was present during the majority of JFK’s autopsy at Bethesda Hospital (13). Lipsey was ordered by Generel Wehle to stay with the body at all times. 2nd Lt. Richard Lipsey was aide to General Wehle, who was in charge of funeral arrangements and related events. Mr. Lipsey’s reference to this particular wound is the one where he discusses a bullet entering “low in the back of the head” and or “high up in the neck”, but “in the hair-line” and terminates in the “blowout”. Lipsey’s testimony can be heard at this link (14). You can also read Lipsey’s testimony transcribed at this link (15).
Mr. Lipsey states specifically that the entry wound to the back of JFK’s head was “in the hair line”, meaning where JFK’s hair ends at the bottom edge, in the back of the neck. He also states that this entry wound was a “round hole”. So, while the Rydberg drawing in CE 386 shows the round entry wound, it is placed too high. Arlen Spector also states “none of the doctors at Parkland Hospital in Dallas observed the hole in the President’s back or the small hole in the lower portion of his head” (16). Whether or not the Parkland hospital staff saw the back wound or small entry wound to JFK’s head is not important. What matters is that here, Arlen Specter is also referring to the same bullet entry wound noted by Mr. Lipsey. Arlen Specter noted specific objections related to the Rydberg drawings, “The artists drawing prepared at Bethesda (CE Nos. 385 and 386) shows a slight angle of declination. It is hard, if not impossible, to explain such a slight angle of decline” (17) . . . referring to the necessary angle of trajectory to prove the shot came from the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). From here, things go from bad to worse. This is because when Arlen Specter made these observations, he had never seen JFK’s body or the Autopsy photographs (18). If we correct the wound locations, (moving them lower to the correct positions), this then lessens the angle of declination to an even great degree!
At this point, I’ve corrected JFK’s head (entry) wound location and you can see how dramatically this changes the wound trajectory (see next image).
If Specter thought it would be hard to explain such a low angle of declination with the wounds in the false locations, it becomes vastly more difficult from the corrected locations! Here is your first major clue that something wasn’t right in the house of deception. Of course, as I said, Arlen Specter had no idea the actual wounds were lower than what were shown in the Rydberg drawings, had he known he would have stared in disbelief, knowing he would be expected to prove this shot came for the sixth floor of the TSBD.
(*Authors note: I don’t want you to think the trajectory shown in the image above is the exact trajectory, it isn’t, but it is very close).
The neck wound depicted in the Rydberg drawings creates a far bigger problem than the head wound. In the first place, here again, the wound is shown far above the actual wound location. In the Rydberg drawings, the second wound is shown actually in JFK’s neck, which it wasn’t. J.J. Humes had to know this wound wasn’t in JFK’s neck. How could he not? The only reason in moving this wound up from its actual location was for the sole purpose of creating a false downward bullet trajectory (shown in CE 385) and attempting to create a trajectory that would be a closer match to the sixth floor snipers nest. Correcting the wound location per the JFK autopsy images, we would arrive with a new trajectory (See next image).
Now remember, Arlen Specter had doubts about proving the shots came from the TSBD from their false entry point locations. As seen in the image above, the alleged entry point, per J.J. Humes was up in the neck. The actual wound Humes refers to is below the shoulder line by about an inch and a half. Specter would certainly have a much harder time proving the shots were from the TSBD from the new corrected entry points and resulting trajectories, but . . . things still get much, much worse, as if they aren’t bad enough already.
Arlen Specter developed the “Single Bullet Theory”, (that a single bullet passed through JFK and Governor John Connally), based on fictitious wound locations and false trajectories. But there is something else that Mr. Specter didn’t know. Not only did J.J. Humes misrepresent the wound locations, he falsely identified a fragment “Exit” wound as an entry wound! The alleged “entry” wound presented by J.J. Humes, isn’t an entry wound at all, it’s an EXIT wound! The entire Single Bullet Theory and associated trajectory is based on two exit wounds! Folks, the SBT is about to go up in flames.
Don’t believe it? You will, after you see the next edition tomorrow….stay tuned for a shocker!
- “History Will Prove Us Right”, by Howard P. Willens, page 12.
- “History Will Prove Us Right”, by Howard P. Willens, page 12.
- Medical Testimonies, Warren Commission, Vol
- ARRB Testimony of James Joseph Humes, page 227, http://assassinationofjfk.net/for-the-sake-of-historical-accuracy/
- HSCA Testimony of Ida Dox, page 147, http://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_Vol1_0076a.htm
- “Single Bullet Theory”, https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Single_Bullet_Theory.html
- “Pristine Bullet”, (CE 399) http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0038a.htm
- JFK Exhibit No. 11, HSCA, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=83&search=Arlan_Spector#relPageId=98&tab=page
- ARRB Testimony of James Joseph Humes, page 229, http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/humesa.htm
- Statement by Harold “Skip” Rydberg, http://assassinationofjfk.net/for-the-sake-of-historical-accuracy/
- Rydberg Drawings, (CE385, CE386), https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_385.pdf
- Rydberg Drawing, (CE388), https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pdf/WH16_CE_388.pdf
- Lipsey Doc
- Lipsey, Richard A., Video Testimony, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9UZz07eNMc
- Lipsey, Richard A., HSCA Testimony, http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/med_testimony/Lipsey_1-18-78/HSCA-Lipsey.htm
- JFK Exhibit No. 11, HSCA, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=83&search=Arlan_Spector#relPageId=99&tab=page
- JFK Exhibit No. 11, HSCA, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=83&search=Arlan_Spector#relPageId=99&tab=page
- JFK Exhibit No. 11, HSCA, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=83&search=Arlan_Spector#relPageId=99&tab=page
●ATTENTION ALL HANDS● ALL-NEW NEW PT.98 IS UP. CLICK HERE TO LISTEN/DOWNLOAD FREE:http://www.spreaker.com/user/7338953
IN THIS EPISODE~ Chris Gallop will spend some time with us & tell us about his event coming up this week, Thursday November 17th, “The JFK Symposium & Luncheon 2016”, featuring a bevy of Notable Speakers, in Mansfield, Tx.
Plus Garland Brown is here to tell us about “JFK: Fifty Plus Three”, a symposium for the public by Garland and his high school students that features presentations by students, examining Evidence For Conspiracy in the Assassination. Also, we’ll get Garland’s take on the recently resurfaced “Oswald/Walker Film”.
JOIN THE CONVERSATION!