"I Killed Kennedy" -- the latest and very best TV docu provides a clear and reasonable explanation including the grassy knoll shooter and others,...
Kindly document the page number in the WR where it says that Humes had experience in gunshot wound autopsies. (Crickets Chirping)
Another un-sourced assertion. You have no source, no proof so you just make stuff up. Shameful.
Which, of course, you cannot prove.
The chief autopsy doc was Commander Humes. The Parkland docs had much more experience with gunshot wounds than did Humes who had none, zero, natta.
A large wound in the back of K's head certainly does not prove a shot from the back. Gunshot forensics postulate that an exit wound is large;...
The spray moving forward (splat) as would be expected in a shot from the front.
The only "detail" they need to agree on is the fact, that they observed a large blow-out wound in the back of K's head -- for you, a very...
A single witness could be mistaken or lying. But 40 plus each confirming the other is a slam dunk. The real unaltered autopsy photos (if they...
Only 40 plus medical witnesses who observed a large blow-out exit wound in the back of K's head proving a shot from the front which could not have...
Repeating it is a fact does not make it so. Calling an opponent a "liar" does not make it so. I have the Warren Report (which you claim you have...
Nonsense. There is nothing in the report about internal as versus external wounds. You just made that up. But if it does, then kindly provide the...
Oh, but you failed to answer the question. The autopsy report specifically states that the wound extended to the occipital and temporal lobes but...
[ATTACH] No, no. What I challenge you to do is to find even one witness that corroborates that phony baloney drawing your keep referring to as...
40 plus medical witnesses betray the autopsy report as a fraud as is the bogus drawing you continually refer to and you cannot produce a single...
You continue to cite a drawing the WC never even viewed. You continue to state your non-facts as facts with absolutely no supporting evidence or...
No. The drawing you uploaded was not done by an an autopsy pathologist. It was done by Ida Dox, a medical illustrator. Nor did the WC ever see...
The autopsy delivered an ambiguous narrative that does not refute anything that the other witnesses observed. All you have is that phony drawing...
Dr. McCelland merely described what he saw. It does not take a pathologist too view a head wound. A pathologist might try to interpret the cause...
Soupnazi: "None of the 40 witnesses you claimed had mopre than a casual glance at the FRONT of his head none were qualified autopsy doctors and a...
I provided you with the WC citation with testimony from Lt. Day that there were no prints found on those rifle shells. I provided it for your...
Whoa, Nelli! You've got a whole lot of stuff there but still nearly all "conclusions" unsupported by fact. Except for that paper trail of the...
Oh, but I just asked you for just one of your "overwhelming" facts. But you instead cite a whole bunch of underwhelming non-facts. Your claim the...
Overwhelming? That is a conclusion unsupported by any facts. Is there even one single overwhelming fact? I don't think so. Name just one.
Then you should be able to give just one example, but you can't because all you spout is empty blather unsupported by any facts.
Separate names with a comma.
