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