Background

A. The first issue to be examined is whether or not the Parkland doctors could (and did) observe the President's head wound in the emergency room between 12:38 and 1:00 on November 22.

Posner writes: "...it is questionable to rely on the Parkland doctors for any assertions about the head wound since, by their own admission, they did not examine it in detail." (p. 308)

As will be noted below, the previous record of statements by the doctors in question tells quite a different story about the degree of observation of the head wound.

B. The second issue concerns the nature of the head wound, its location and its character.

C. Are the statements made to Posner and included in his book "Case Closed" consistent with the previous statements, made under oath as parts of official investigations?

Dr. Marion Jenkins

A. The issue of observation and examination

1. Dr. Jenkins told Posner: "We were trying to save the President, and no one had time to examine the wounds." (p. 309)

2. BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:

a. On Friday afternoon, just hours after treating Kennedy, Jenkins wrote these words:

"These described resuscitative activities were indicated as of first importance, and after they were carried out attention was turned to all other evidence of injury." He then proceeds to describe the head wound. (CE 392, Warren Report, p. 530, emphasis added)

b. Testifying before the Warren Commission on March 25, 1964, Jenkins stated: "Almost by the time I was--had the time to pay more attention to the wound in the head, all these other activities were under way..." He then lists some of the activities he helped with before noting: "and then turned attention to the wound in the head." He also stated. "...my mental appreciation for a wound--a wound in the neck, I believe, was sort of-was overshadowed by recognition of the wound to the scalp and skull plate." (Hearings and Exhibits, Volume VI, p. 48)

c. In a deposition for the House Select Committee on Assassinations on November 10, 1977, this report is made:

He [Jenkins] said the President's thick shock of hair largely covered up the head wound. However, Dr. Jenkins was positioned at the head of the table so he had one of the clearest views of the head wound (believes he was "...the only one who knew the extent of the head wound.") His location was customary for an anesthesiologist. (HSCA Hearings, Volume VII, p. 286, emphasis added)

d. In addition to Dr. Jenkins' sworn statements concerning his ability to see the head wound, we have this from the Warren Commission testimony of Dr. Paul Peters, who was also present in the emergency room:

PETERS. "It was pointed out that an examination of the brain had been done. Dr. Jenkins had observed the brain and Dr. Clark had observed the brain and it was pointed out to Dr. Perry that it appeared to be a mortal wound." (Hearings and Exhibits, VI, p. 70)

B. The issue of the damaged cerebellum

1. Jenkins told Posner: "The description of the cerebellum was my fault. When I read my report over, I realized there could not be any cerebellum." (p. 311)

2. BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:

a. On Friday afternoon, in CE 392 Jenkins wrote that the brain was damaged "to the extent that the cerebellum had protruded from the wound." (Warren Report, p. 530, emphasis added)

b. Four months later, long after he had had time to "read his report over," Jenkins testified before the Warren Commission: "Part of the brain was herniated; I really think part of the cerebellum, as I recognized it, was herniated from the wound." (Hearings and Exhibits, Volume VI, p. 48)

c. Fourteen years later, in his HSCA deposition, Jenkins still had not corrected his "mistake." "He [Jenkins] noted that a portion of the cerebellum (lower rear brain) was hanging out from a hole in the right-rear of the head." (HSCA Hearings, Volume VII, p. 287)

d. Of further note: Jenkins has never stated, under oath, that his was not cerebellar tissue. Also, at the American Forum in Dallas in June, 1992, Jenkins did say that if there was one thing he would like to change about his testimony, it would be his statement identifying the cerebellum. In point of fact, he had ample opportunity to do so in 1977, but did not do so.

C. The issue of the location of the head wound

1. Jenkins, according to Posner "The autopsy photo, with the rear of the head intact and the protrusion in the parietal region, is the way I remember it. I never did say occipital." (p. 312 emphasis added)

2. BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:

a. CE 392, November 22, 1963: "There was a great laceration on the right side of the head (temporal and occipital). (Warren Report, p. 530, emphasis added)

b. In his HSCA deposition in 1977: "Regarding the head wound, Dr. Jenkins said that only one segment of bone was blown out--it was a segment of occipital or temporal bone." (HSCA, Volume VII, p. 287)

c. It is almost humorous that, of the bones of the sides and rear of the head, the parietal bone (where he now locates the wound for Posner), far from being where he had located the wound previously, is a bone that Jenkins did not even mention in his sworn testimony!

Dr. Charles Baxter

A. The issue of examination and observation

1. Dr. Baxter told Posner: "And when we realized he was dead, none of us had the heart to go and examine the head wound while Mrs. Kennedy was in the room. We all just made our way out of the room." (p. 309)

2. BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:

Dr. Baxter failed to mention examination which occurred during the treatment of the President. When he testified before the Warren Commission, Baxter told Arlen Specter:

[after a heartbeat could not be detected] "... we had an opportunity to look at the head wound and saw that the damage was beyond hope..." (6 H 41)

B. The issue of the damaged cerebellum When Baxter testified before the Warren Commission, he said "...the cerebellum was present--a large quantity of brain was present on the cart." (6 H 41)

C. The issue of the location of the head wound

1. Baxter told Posner: "I have been misquoted enough on this, some saying I claimed the whole back of his head was blown away. That's just wrong. I never even saw the back of his head. The wound was on the right side, not the back. (p. 312)

2. BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:

a. Within hours of attending the president, Baxter wrote:"...the right temporal and occipital bones were missing and the brain was lying on the table." (CE 392, Warren Report, p. 523)

b. Baxter was asked to read this same document, which was in his own handwriting, when he testified before the Warren Commission four months later. For some reason, Baxter substituted the term "parietal bones" for "occipital bones" when he read his report to Arlen Specter. "On first observation of the remaining wounds, the temporal and PARIETAL bones were missing and the brain lying on the table..." (6 H 44) In short, for some reason, Baxter read an account, purported to be his own which moved the head wound from the rear to the right side, a location more compatible with the autopsy findings.

Dr. Charles Carrico

A. The issue of observation and examination

1. Carrico told Posner: "We never had an opportunity to review his wounds in order to describe them accurately. We were trying to save his life." (p. 309)

2. BUT THE RECORD IS QUITE DIFFERENT:

a. In his appearance before the Warren Commission, Carrico told of examining the President's back and "then proceeded to the examination of his head. The large skull and scalp wound had been previously observed and was inspected a little more closely." (6 H 3)

b. Further evidence that Carrico observed the head wound in some detail is indicated by the fact that he assigned a specific size to the defect--"4-5 cm" when he first testified on March 25 (6 H 3), then "5 to 7 cm. in size" later in that same testimony. When he appeared again on March 30, he gave the dimensions of the wound as "5- by 71-cm [sic]" (3 H 361). [Clearly Carrico meant 5 x 7 centimeters in this latter statement.]

c. In his appearance before the HSCA investigators in 1977, Carrico stated the wound was "five by seven centimeters, something like that, 2 by 3 inches..." (HSCA, VII, p. 278)

B. The issue of the damaged cerebellum

1. Carrico admitted to Posner: "We did say we saw shattered brain, cerebellum, in the cortex area, and I think we were mistaken." (p. 311)

2. Carrico apparently did not see the body again after his initial observations, so it would appear that any decision of his that he erred would be based on either what his Parkland colleagues or some other person familiar with the medical evidence may have told him or upon examination of autopsy photographs.

3. CARRICO ON THE RECORD:

a. In his report written after examining the President, Carrico wrote of an "attempt to control oozing from cerebral and cerebellar tissue." (CE 392, Warren Report, p. 520)

b. When he testified before the Warren Commission, Carrico spoke of seeing "the skull was fragmented and bleeding cerebral and cerebellar tissue." (6 H 3).

c. As late as 1977, when he was interviewed by investigators by the HSCA, Carrico was still speaking of the cerebellar damage: "One could see blood and brains, both cerebellum and cerebrum fragments in that wound." (HSCA, VII, p. 268)

C. The issue of the location of the head wound

1. Dr. Carrico freely admitted to Posner that he had placed the large wound in the back of Kennedy's head. "We did say there was a parietal-occipital wound ... and I think we were mistaken ... We saw a large wound on the right side of the head. I don't believe we saw any occipital bone. It was not there. It was parietal bone. And if we said otherwise, we were mistaken.

2. Again, we must wonder how it is that Carrico can now be just as certain that damaged occipital bone "was not there" as he was that it WAS THERE on the afternoon of the assassination. It is easy to see the source of his original opinion: the body lay on a table before him. One must question the basis for this latest certainty, acquired 30 years after the event.

3. CARRICO ON THE RECORD:

a. When he testified before the Warren Commission, Carrico described "a large gaping wound, located in the right occipitoparietal region. I would estimate to be about 5 to 7 cm. in size, more or less circular, with avulsions of the calvarium and scalp tissue." (6 H 6)

Other Parkland Doctors Though Posner apparently did not interview either, two other Parkland doctors examined the rear head wound carefully. A study of the sworn testimony of Dr. Kemp Clark, a neurosurgeon, and Dr. Robert McClelland, who was at the head of the emergency room cart, reveals just how well the wound was observed at Parkland hospital.

Dr. Kemp Clark

1. Dr. Clark testified that after noting the President's deviated and dilated eyes, "I then examined the wound in the back of the President's head." (6 H 20). Later, he said, "As I was examining the President's wound, I felt for a carotid pulse and felt none." (6 H 20). As has been noted [Dr. Paul Peters' testimony, see page 3 of this memorandum], it was this examination by Clark and Dr. Jenkins which led to the decision not to open the chest and to end resuscitative efforts.

2. And what did this neurosurgeon observe? "A large wound in the right occipitoparietal region .... Both cerebral and cerebellar tissue were [sic] extruding from the wound." (CE 392) "There was a large gaping wound in the right posterior part, with cerebral and cerebellar tissue being damaged and exposed." (6 H 20)

Dr. Robert McClelland

1. McClelland made it clear that he saw the head wound very well: "As I took my position at the head of the table ... to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound." (6 H 33)

2. In McClelland's careful examination,
"I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered apparently by the force of the shot so that 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 so 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. (6 H 33)

3. It is difficult to imagine how anyone could read McClelland's detailed observations and still contend that the Parkland doctors did not see the head wound well enough to locate it accurately. In point of fact, Dr. McClelland pinpoints the damage to the occipital and parietal bones more specifically than did Dr. Humes in his detailed autopsy examination! And McClelland's estimate of lost brain tissue comports quite well with Humes's supplementary autopsy conclusions.

SUMMARY

1. A considerable amount of research has been done, comparing the observations of the head wound by Parkland doctors to the later autopsy report and the Bethesda X-rays and photographs. Serious contradictions are obvious.

2. However, less attention has been given to the question of just how well the Parkland doctors saw the wound. The current "trend" among the Parkland doctors is to claim that they did not see the head wound very well and took little note of it. THESE ASSERTIONS ARE REFUTED BY THEIR OWN SWORN TESTIMONY. THE RECORD CLEARLY SHOWS THAT SEVERAL OF THESE DOCTORS GAVE SPECIFIC, DETAILED TESTIMONY CONCERNING THE NATURE AND LOCATION OF THE WOUND.

3. IT IS AN IRREFUTABLE FACT THAT MOST OF THESE MEN WERE ASKED BY EITHER THE WARREN COMMISSION OF THE HSCA (OR BOTH) TO LOCATE AND DESCRIBE THIS WOUND. NOT ONE OF THE DOCTORS EVER SAID, "I COULD NOT SEE THE WOUND WELL ENOUGH TO OFFER AN OPINION," OR "I REALLY AM NOT CERTAIN," OR "I WAS NOT ABLE TO OBSERVE THE WOUND IN ANY DETAIL AND WOULD PREFER NOT TO SPECULATE." THESE MEN WERE UNDER OATH AND CLEARLY KNEW THE IMPORTANCE OF THE QUESTIONS THEY WERE BEING ASKED. WITHOUT EXCEPTION, THE PARKLAND DOCTORS CHOSE TO LOCATE THE WOUND--AND TO LOCATE IT WITH A CONSISTENCY WHICH CAN ONLY BE CALLED REMARKABLE.