Electronic Assassinations 
Newsletter




Issue #1 "Case Closed or Posner Exposed?"



 



 

    
             
The Wandering Wounds

 by Millicent Cranor
        
   
     


[(c) 1994, All rights reserved; published in the Fourth Decade, Vol.1, #3,
March, 1994, revised November 1996].



      They should just move the Texas Book Depository Building to 
someplace in front of where Kennedy was assassinated. This would be easier 
than moving the wounds around to fit the story of a gunman from behind - and
having Gerald Posner explain it.




     Chapter 13 of Posner's book, Case Closed, is a squirming mass of 
contradictions that seems to have been put together by Beavis and Butthead, 
with the help of Slick Wiley. Before assuming they are the result of honest 
error, you should take a good look at some comments made by a key player, 
Dr. Marion ("Pepper") Jenkins, a former lieutenant commander in the Navy, 
and then Chairman of the Southwestern University Medical Schools' Department
of Anaesthesiology. Posner:




     "In his original report, [Robert] McClelland said there was a wound to 
the left temple, one that does not show up on any autopsy X-ray or 
photograph. This has caused some to charge that Kennedy was shot by a 
second gunman from another location at Dealey, and that the autopsy team 
either negligently or intentionally overlooked that wound."



 "I'll tell you 
how that happened, "Dr Jenkins explained to the author [Posner]. "When Bob 
McClelland came into the room, he asked me, 'Where are his wounds?' And at 
that time I was operating a breathing bag with my right hand, and was
trying to take the President's temporal pulse, and I had my finger on his 
left temple. Bob thought I pointed to the left temple as the wound." [1]



     What Posner doesn't tell you is that on two separate occasions, Dr. 
Jenkins himself asked about a left temple wound while testifying before the 
Warren Commission:





      I don't know whether this is right or not, but I thought 
      there was a wound on the left temporal area, right in the hairline 
      and right above the zygomatic process. [2]

      I asked you a little bit ago if there was a wound in the left temporal 
      area ... the left temporal could have been a point of entrance and 
      [the] exit [would have been] here (indicating) ... [3]


     
Here is another fascinating example of deception from Case Closed
:




      Although no one at Parkland saw JFK's back wound, Dr. Pepper Jenkins 
      later told John Lattimer that he had felt it with his finger when he  
      positioned the President's head and neck to facilitate the passage of 
      oxygen. [4]




     Why didn't Jenkins report this to the Warren Commission, to whom he 
swore to tell the whole truth?  




     The Dilemma



     The head presents a more complicated problem for Posner who explains, 
"some of the Parkland doctors who treated the President described a gaping 
wound in the rear of JFK's head ... If true, this not only contradicted the 
findings of the autopsy team but was evidence that the President was 
probably shot from the front ... [and] raised legitimate questions over the 
authenticity of the photographs of JFK's brain, which showed no such 
damage." [5]




     Their solution to the problem belongs in the Journal of lrreproducible 
Results. They say no one saw the back of the head -- then they "confirm"
that wound was there.




     No One Saw It



      We were trying to save the President, and no one had time to examine 
      the wounds Jenkins) [6]; We never had the opportunity to review his 
      wounds (Carrico) [7]; I don't think any of us got a good look at the 
      head wound (Perry) [8]; The President had quite thick hair, and there 
      was a lot of blood and tissue (Midgett) [9]; the President had a lot 
      of hair, and it was bloody and matted ... (Perry) [10]; He had such a 
      bushy head of hair, and blood and all in it, you couldn't tell what 
      was wound versus dried blood (Baxter) [11]; He had a big shock of hair 
      ... (Jenkins) [12].



     They Didn't See It - But They Know It Wasn't There

     

     Now that he has rendered the Parkland doctors unqualified to comment on 
the back of the head, Posner announces their confirmation of the autopsy,
 ... The Parkland physicians in their discussions with the author 
      [Posner] were almost unanimous in supporting the autopsy findings that 
      the massive exit wound was on the right side (parietal) ... not the 
      rear. (occipital) [13]




      I never even saw the back of his head. The wound was
      on the right side, not the back. (Baxter) [14]

      The autopsy photo, with the rear of the head intact and a protrusion 
      in the parietal region, is the way I remember it. I never did say 
      occipital.  (Jenkins) [15]



     The photo shows wet-looking, clean hair neatly combed over a head 
that seems normal in the back and side all the way to slightly in front of 
the right ear. And he did say "occipital."




     They Admit Kemp Clark Saw it



     Dr. William Kemp Clark, the Chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery, 
must have pulled aside the curtain of hair and gore, for he donned gloves 
[16] to examine the wound in order to make a decision to stop resuscitation. 
He found; 




      ... a large wound beginning in the right occiput extending into the 
      parietal region. Much of the skull appeared gone ... [17] (T)he loss of
cerebrellar(sic) tissue would probably been of minimal consequence in the
performance of his duties. The loss of the 
the right occipital and probably part of the right parietal lobes 
      would have been of specific importance. [18]



     What No One Else Saw




      The wound that I saw was a large gaping wound, located in the right 
      occipitoparietal area ... about 5 to 7 cm. in size, more or less 
      circular, with avulsions of the calvarium and scalp tissue ... 
      macerated cerebral and cerebellar tissues ... (Carrico) [19]; ... I 
      noticed that there was a large defect in the occiput ... It seemed 
      to me that in the right occipitalparietal area that there was a large 
      defect. There appeared to be bone loss and brain loss in this area...
      we saw the wound of entry in the throat and noted the large occipital 
      wound... (Peters) [20]; ... the right side of his head had been blown 
      off ... cerebellum was present ... (Baxter) [21]; There was a great laceration on the right side
      of the head (temporal and occipital), causing a great defect ... 
      (Jenkins) [22]; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized 
      it, was herniated from the wound, ... part of brain tissue on
      the drapes of the cart ...(Jenkins) [23]; I noted a large avulsive wound 
      of the right parietal occipital area, in which both scalp and portions
      of skull were absent, and there was severe laceration of underlying 
      brain tissue ... (Perry) [24]






     What Robert McClelland Didn't See




     Robert McClelland, an Assistant Professor of Surgery, is the 
revisionists' greatest obstacle: he refuses to alter his observations. 
His credentials are impeccable and he has no commercial investment in his 
opinion:




   
      As I took the position at the head of the table that l have already 
      described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position 
      that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the 
      right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It 
      had been shattered ... the parietal bone was protruded up through the 
      scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior 
      half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its 
      lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such 
      a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself 
      and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, 
      posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been 
      blasted out ... [25]


     

     McClelland will not move the wound. Solution?  Move
McClelland, and give his reputation a nick: From Case Closed:





      [McClelland] wasn't in that position the way I remember it, as he was 
      on the other side of the table. As for Dr. McClelland saying he saw 
      cerebellum fall out on the table, I never saw anything like that 
      (Peters) [26]; I hate to say Bob is mistaken, but that is clearly not
      right (Jenkins) [27]. I am astonished that Bob would say that. It 
      shows such poor judgment ... (Perry) [28] As for the head 
      wound, they couldn't look at it earlier because I was standing with my 
      body against it, and they would only have looked at my pants. 
      (Jenkins) [29]


 
    While trying to save the President's life during 20 minutes of 
absolute pandemonium, they found the time to monitor McClelland's every 
move?




     They Saw It, But They Didn't Know Where 



     Films and testimony indicate the wound included the right temple, 
the right side, and the right side of the back. But Posner et al
want us to believe the wound was strictly on the side and front,
and not the back at all. The Chairman of the Department of Neurosurgery
doesn't know the terms and anatomy of his specialty? Experienced physicians
don't know the back of the head from the front side?





     It Was in the Back and Side



      The occipital and parietal bone join each other, so we are only 
      talking a centimeter or so in difference (Perry) [30] ... the 
      occipital and parietal region are so close together it is possible to 
      mistake one for the other. (Giesecke) [31]



    Please notice they don't tell you where parietal and occipital bone 
meet: at the back of the head. And a wound in parietal bone alone could be 
considered in the back if it lies between the ear and the occiput. An 
"avulsed" wound in the back and side still does not work with the official 
version.




More inportant, Perry and Giesecke seem to be forgetting that even the 
Navy pathologists say the wound included the occiput.



     Dr. Clark nailed down the location of the defect he saw when Arlen 
Specter asked if a wound 2.5cm and slightly above the EOP could have been 
present, but missed by Dr.Clark:




      Yes, in the presence of this much destruction of skull and scalp above 
      such a wound and lateral to it ... such a wound could be present. [32]





If the large defect included an area lateral to the small hole, the defect
had to be fairly low in the back. Where is slightly above the EOP?
Humes drew the small hole on a plastic skull. The hole appears to be no more
than a centimeter above the EOP.


     
One of the most misleading statements of all appears on page 312 of Case
Closed:


The only Parkland doctors who still believe they saw a wound in the rear
of the head, as well as seeing cerebellum, are Robert McClelland and Charles
Crenshaw.




NOTE: There is not one fresh quote from William Kemp Clark, not in 
Case Closed, and not in the Journal of the AMA
which featured the changed stories of some of the other doctors. As a
neurosurgeon, as the one Parkland physician who examined the head wound
carefully, Clark was the most qualified of all. Where does he say he no
longer believes his own report?


 
The Bullet Emerged from where?


 
    Obviously, the Parkland doctors are not confirming the findings of 
Bethesda, they are deferring to Bethesda. But deference can be 
intellectually dangerous. What if Bethesda had said the bullet exited from
Kennedy's face?





As nearly everyone knows, Kennedy's face was intact. No bullet came 
anywhere out of Kennedy's face. But critics who did not appreciate
the extent to which Kennedy's head was turned to the left had said a bullet
from behind should come out of the face. Had there been a short-lived plan
to claim the bullet did come out of his face? Why did Dr. Alfred Olivier,
who superivsed experiments to recreate the assassination with gelatin
filled skulls, make this statement: 




      ... We were aiming, as described in the autopsy report ... the point 
      2 centimeters to the right of the external occipital protuberance and 
      slightly above it. We placed a mark on the skull at that point, 
      according to the autopsy the bullet emerged through the superorbital 
      (sic) process, so we drew a line to give us the line of flight ...
      (emphasis added) [33]





Curiously, Olivier's experimental skull, with the right side of the face
blown out, superficially resembles the X-ray of Kennedy taken from the 
"modified Waters view: that gives the impression the upper right side of his
face is missing.




If Bethesda had ever presented this version, would the Parkland doctors
have deferred to their judgement, agreeing to move the large wound from 
back to front?




Notes

1.  Gerald L. Posner, Case Closed, Chapter 13, Random House, New 
York, page 313.

2.  Warren Commission Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 48. [Jenkins]

3.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 51. [Jenkins]

4.  Case Closed, p. n305 - 6.

5.  Case Closed, p. 308 [Posner]

6.  Case Closed, p. 309 [Jenkins]

7.  Case Closed, p. 309 [Carrico]

8.  Case Closed, p. 309 [Perry]

9.  Case Closed, p. 310 [Midgett]

10.  Case Closed, p. 312 [Perry]

11.  Case Closed, p. 312 [Baxter]

12.  Case Closed, p. 289 [Jenkins]

13.  Case Closed, p. 310 [Posner]

14.  Case Closed, p. 312 [Baxter]

15.  Case Closed, p. 311 [Jenkins]

16.  Case Closed, p. 291 [re Clark]

17.  Hearings, Vol. XVII, p. 10 [Clark]

18.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 26 [Clark]

19.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 6 [Carrico]

20.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 71 [Peters]

21.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 41 [Baxter]

22.  Hearings, Vol. XVII, p. 15 [Jenkins]

23.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 48 [Jenkins]

24.  Hearings, Vol. III, p. 372 [Perry]

25.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 33 [McClelland]

26.  Case Closed, p. 313 [Peters]

27.  Case Closed, p. 313 [Jenkins]

28.  Case Closed, p. 312 [Perry]

29.  Case Closed, p. 309 [Jenkins]

30.  Case Closed, p. 312 [Perry]

31.  Case Closed, p. 312 [Giesecke]

32.  Hearings, Vol. VI, p. 25 [Clark]

33.  Hearings, Vol. V, p. 89 [Olivier]











 

Return to Table of Contents


Return to Home Page