[
Excerpt from the New Guide: David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D. and Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: The Ultimate Evaluation (2024)
Forensic Evaluation of the JFK Post-mortem X-Rays within the Nationwide Archives Show Scientifically JFK Took Three Photographs to the Head: Two from the Entrance and One at a Low Angle From the Rear
In 2015, when Michael Chesser, M.D. visited the Nationwide Archives, he paid specific consideration to the fragment path close to the brow on the 2 lateral JFK post-mortem cranium X-ray movies. I (David Mantik) had beforehand famous the presence of metallic particles at that web site in my survey of all metallic on the extant movies on the Archives. (See Determine 3.9.)
As seen in Determine 3.4, Chesser recognized a fraction path that entered the higher proper brow close to the hairline. The path seems to widen from entrance to again, per a frontal entry however not with a rear entry. The biggest fragment lies on the rear, exactly the place it could be anticipated. There is no such thing as a apparent exit on the finish of the fragment path—as confirmed by each my OD knowledge and a number of radiologists.
Determine 3.4
Steel Fragment Path from a Frontal Bullet—Proven Between the Two Blue Diverging Traces, with an Apex on the Brow.
This bullet entered the proper brow close to the hairline; the fragment path widens to the rear.
The biggest metallic fragment is circled.
Word: Figures 3.4 via 3.8 are excerpted from his lecture: Michael Z. Chesser, “The Software of Forensic Rules for the Evaluation of the Post-mortem Cranium X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Overview of Mind Images,” Kennedys and King (previously CTKA), November 27, 2017.
Chesser introduced this visible essay for the mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald on the South Texas Faculty of Regulation in Houston, November 16-17, 2017.
Chesser recognized the purpose of entry of this frontal shot as two “white knobby” objects on the within of the proper brow (Determine 3.5). He decided that these two “white knobby” objects have been metallic, and never bone. I had beforehand famous this as effectively.
Determine 3.5
Entry Website (Inside the Dotted Rectangle) into the Proper Brow. Discover the 2 “white knobby” objects simply contained in the frontal (brow) bone, close to the middle of the field.
Determine 3.6 is a close-up of the 2 “white knobby” objects simply inside the proper brow.
Determine 3.6
Shut-up: The “Two “White Knobby” Objects Simply Contained in the Frontal (Brow) Bone.
On the entry web site (Determine 3.7), Chesser simulated the tiny, nearly dust-like, particles. This was excessive in the proper brow close to the hairline.
Determine 3.7
Chesser’s Simulated Fragment Path Close to the Proper Brow.
Fragments are additionally current on the entry web site (to the proper of the tiny crimson arrowhead and inferior to the 2 “knobby” objects).
Determine 3.8 identifies the entry of this brow shot. Chesser clarified: “The fragment path helps a proper frontal entry web site at roughly this location (referring to the dot positioned on Kennedy’s brow as proven on the {photograph}). An entry wound at this location would have been coated by hair, and simply missed by the Parkland personnel, who targeted on resuscitation and the profusely bleeding proper occipital wound.”(1)
Determine 3.8
Proper Frontal Entry (Stable Blue Dot on JFK’s Brow within the {Photograph}).The {photograph} is from Love Discipline on November 22, 1963.
Chesser’s impartial observations of the lateral X-ray movie exactly mirrored my observations and evaluation. In Determine 3.9, I’ve highlighted (through the lengthy blue line with the arrowhead) the fragment path from the frontal entry at JFK’s proper brow.(2)
Determine 3.9
Bullet Fragment Path from the Frontal Shot (Skinny Indirect Arrow).
That is my replica (carried out on the Archives) of all metallic particles.
The bullet entered the proper brow close to the hairline.
The biggest ellipse represents an amorphous metallic opacity, probably mercury. This isn’t a single piece of strong metallic.
The vertical arrow (on the rear) identifies the genuine fragment described of their 302 report by the 2 FBI brokers who attended the JFK post-mortem, James Sibert and Francis O’Neill, (labeled on this e book as SOF). This was not eliminated on the post-mortem. It served as an anchor in 3D area for the 6.5 mm pretend on the AP X-ray movie. The fragments within the path should lie inside smooth tissue in the proper hemisphere. Word that SOF lies too removed from the path to be a part of it. Most probably, it represents shrapnel (from the rear).
Copper residue was recognized on the holes on the again of the coat and shirt; the holes have been seemingly brought on by shrapnel. SOF most definitely represents metallic shrapnel from a bullet that struck Elm Avenue. There are at the very least three arguments for shrapnel, as follows: (1) at the very least 5 witnesses (together with a number of within the Warren Fee (WC) volumes) reported such a bullet (and even bullets) glancing off Elm Avenue; (2) on the cranium X-rays on the Archives, I’ve noticed tiny metallic fragments to be extensively scattered on either side of the cranium—all authorities investigations have ignored these; and (3) low power X-ray scattering(3) confirmed metallic on the holes on the rear of the shirt and coat; spectroscopic knowledge confirmed that this metallic was copper, per a (partially) copper-jacketed fragment. Alternatively, no metallic was discovered on the entrance of the shirt. This unfavorable outcome for the shirt implies both (1) a non-metallic projectile or (2) an entry superior to the shirt collar. Moreover, as confirmed metallic on the holes on the rear of the shirt and coat; spectroscopic knowledge(4) confirmed that this metallic was copper, per a (partially) copper-jacketed fragment. Alternatively, no metallic was discovered on the entrance of the shirt. This unfavorable outcome for the shirt implies both (1) a non-metallic projectile or (2) an entry superior to the shirt collar.(5) Moreover, as could be anticipated for shrapnel, the pathologists reported that the again wound was very shallow. For added proof that shrapnel brought about the again wound, notice that the abrasion collar was positioned on the inferior fringe of this wound;(6) this means a rising projectile. In different phrases, the again wound was not brought on by a descending bullet, e.g., a sabot from the County Information Constructing.(7)
Stavis “Steve” Ellis, a Dallas Police Division solo motorbike officer, was answerable for the motorbike escort. He provided firsthand testimony:
Concerning the time I began on a curve on Elm, I had turned to my proper to present indicators to open up the intervals since we have been fixing to get on the freeway a brief distance away. That’s all I had on my thoughts. Simply as I rotated, then the primary shot went off. It hit again there.(8)
He noticed the shot hit the south facet of the curb on Elm Avenue:
It seemed prefer it hit the concrete or grass there in only a flash, and a bunch of junk flew up like a white or grey shade mud or smoke popping out of the concrete.(9)
Ellis defined the concrete impression was from the primary shot. After that, he heard two extra photographs (three photographs altogether):
The sounds have been all clear and loud and sounded about the identical. From the place I used to be, they gave the impression of they have been coming from round the place the tall tree was in entrance of that constructing (the TSBD). In fact, I’m forming an opinion based mostly on the place I noticed that stuff hit the road, so I knew that it needed to come from up that manner, and I assumed the others got here from the identical place.(10)
Royce Skelton, a mail clerk on the Texas-Louisiana Freight Bureau, witnessed the assassination from the Triple Overpass. He testified to the WC:
After these two photographs, and the automobile got here on down nearer to the triple underpass, effectively, there was one other shot—two extra photographs I heard, however certainly one of them—I noticed a bullet, or I suppose it was a bullet—I take it without any consideration it was—hit in entrance of the President’s automobile on the cement, and when it did, the smoke carried with it—away from the constructing (the TSBD).(11)
Skelton testified that when the shot hit the pavement, it “scattered” right into a “spray.” He noticed spray go westward (within the downhill path that the limousine was shifting).(12)
Harry Holmes was an inspector for the US Put up Workplace Division. He noticed the scene through binoculars from his workplace window on the fifth flooring of the terminal annex constructing on the nook of Houston and Commerce Streets. He testified to the WC about three firecracker-like sounds, certainly one of which brought about “mud fly up” that flew “off of President Kennedy.”(13)Mrs. Donald Baker, a bookkeeper within the TSBD, watched the motorcade from the entrance of the TSBD. She testified to the WC that she noticed “sparks” from an obvious firecracker that hit the road behind the limousine because it handed her on Elm Avenue.(14) Ira David Wooden III famous in his in depth JFK Assassination Chronology: “On listening to the primary burst of firing, (Dallas County) Sheriff (Invoice) Decker glances again and thinks sees a bullet bouncing off the road pavement.” Wooden added: “Bike officer James Chaney may even inform newsmen at the present time (November 22, 1963) that
the primary shot missed. It’s prompt that JFK is hit by small items of the road pavement and stops waving for a second.”(15)
Nonetheless, since copper residue was discovered on the coat and shirt (solely on the again), it’s unlikely that the clothes holes have been brought on by bits of road pavement, except the road was paved with copper.
Chesser summed up his conclusions concerning the frontal shot to JFK’s proper brow as follows:
That is what I noticed on the unique proper lateral cranium x-ray on the archives. There’s a hole within the bone—not very huge, perhaps 3 mm, however do not forget that this can be a composite of all the fabric between the x-ray machine and the movie—when considered from the facet, a gap within the frontal bone will not be seen in any respect, and whether it is, it gained’t seem as vast as its precise width. I feel that this defect might be resulting from a mix of an entry wound and related radial fracture line(s).(16)
He defined his findings:
A very powerful discovering right here is the proximity of those tiny metallic fragments to this bone defect. This location, on the intracranial facet of the bony defect, is extremely suggestive of an entry wound. One of many rules of cranium ballistics is that the biggest fragments journey the furthest from the entry web site, with the smallest fragments touring the least distance, and that’s precisely what’s seen on this proper lateral cranium x-ray. Tiny fragments have been seen on the internal facet of this proper entrance cranium defect, and the biggest fragments have been famous behind the cranium.(17)
Chesser concluded that the fragment path was resulting from a bullet entry on the proper brow close to the hairline. He added that on the AP X-ray movie, the fragment path is positioned superiorly, trailing upward and backward on the proper facet. (18)
In James DiEugenio’s and Oliver Stone’s documentary JFK: Future Betrayed (the four-hour model of Stone’s 2021 JFK Revisited: By way of the Trying Glass), there’s a section through which Drs. Chesser, Aguilar, and I focus on the frontal shot to JFK’s proper brow.
Narrator (Whoopi Goldberg): After the movie JFK was launched, a number of medical doctors went to the Nationwide Archives to view the X-rays of Kennedy’s cranium. They noticed particulars in these X-rays which introduced yet one more drawback for the Warren Report’s declare that Kennedy was solely shot from the rear.
Dr. David Mantik: Properly, the federal government investigators did declare that there was no proof of a shot from the entrance. However they didn’t inform us a number of issues that have been crucial, which now we have realized solely in recent times. We’ve seen tiny metallic fragments proper on the brow.
Dr. Michael Chesser: Once you have a look at the X-rays which are saved on the archives now, on the lateral X-ray there’s a fragment path. It really expands from entrance to again, and there are dozens of very tiny dustlike fragment particles up on this location.Dr. David Mantik: Now why is that necessary? Properly, what we all know is that the bigger bullet fragments journey farther, whereas the smaller ones have a tendency to remain close to the entry web site. That’s what we see on these X-rays. In different phrases, we are able to fairly interpret these as being per a frontal bullet, however being radically inconsistent with a posterior bullet.
Dr. Gary Aguilar: And that’s not proof you possibly can erase. You may’t make that disappear, however that’s incontrovertible proof of a shot from the proper entrance by a non-jacketed bullet.(19)
In my interview with DiEugenio for the 2021 Oliver Stone documentary is one other sequence concerning the frontal shot to the proper brow:
James DiEugenio: Now, did the Home Choose Committee say that one of many causes that they thought that all the post-mortem supplies (have been) real was as a result of there was no proof of a shot from the entrance?
Dr. David Mantik: On the lateral X-rays particularly, the findings of Dr. Chesser and myself are fairly exceptional. We’ve seen tiny metallic fragments proper on the brow on these lateral X-rays and Chesser particularly has seen a small gap within the cranium per the passage of a bullet via the brow. Not one of the authorities investigations have ever instructed us about this stuff.
Additional, many of the bullet fragments that we see on the lateral cranium X-rays are within the anterior half of the cranium. These are for essentially the most half very, very tiny. A lot of them are just one millimeter or so in dimension. In different phrases, we are able to fairly interpret these as being per a frontal bullet, however being radically inconsistent with a posterior bullet.(20)
Kinetic power explains why bigger fragments journey farther than smaller fragments. Kinetic power = 1/2 mv2, the place m = mass and v = velocity. Thus, a particle with extra mass has extra kinetic power. Moreover that, although, smaller fragments decelerate quicker—the drag forces on them are comparatively higher. Therefore, the tiny particles close to the brow counsel an entry close to that web site. The bigger fragment on the proper rear gives extra proof for a frontal entry. As anticipated, bigger fragments journey farther.
WC Exhibit 387 is the official post-mortem report (see Appendix J), signed by Humes, Boswell, and Finck. The pathologists famous: “Roentgenograms of the cranium reveal a number of minute metallic fragments alongside a line corresponding with a line becoming a member of the above-described small occipital wound and the proper supra-orbital ridge.” (21) In his 2021 presentation to the Way forward for Freedom Basis,(22) Chesser known as this a “bald-faced lie.” He’s appropriate; there is no such thing as a such path—no metallic fragments are seen alongside that low-lying path. This lie by the pathologists means that they felt they needed to acknowledge the metallic path, in order that they merely displaced it downward (by 10 cm) so as to keep away from a second headshot.
In September 1977, instantly earlier than the HSCA made the JFK X-ray movies public for the primary time, Russell Morgan, MD (the only radiologist for the Clark Panel), nearly absolutely to avert skilled humiliation, primarily recanted his earlier opinion. In an announcement reported within the newspapers(23) on the time, Morgan stated he was not so sure that the only bullet that hit JFK’s head from the rear was a Mannlicher-Carcano spherical. As an alternative, he prompt that the fragmentation of the bullet (i.e., the fragment path) was so extreme that the bullet might need been a so-called “dum-dum” (hole level) spherical. With this assertion, Morgan had primarily exonerated Oswald. He had additionally thereby left the 6.5 mm object free-floating in fantasy land; he merely ignored it! In any case, this 6.5 mm pretend doesn’t lie on the fragment path. Nonetheless, it had been the keystone for the Clark Panel’s daft cowlick entry wound—which they’d elevated by 10 cm above the WC’s entry web site. Morgan additionally admitted, for the primary time, that he now favored exhuming JFK’s physique to reply questions concerning the bullet fragments.(24) Sadly, for the reality, he had withheld all of his new-found insights from the Clark Panel report, in order that (in 1977) he was 9 years too late. In any case, the HSCA ignored his new insights.
In his interview with DiEugenio for the 2021 Stone documentary, Chesser additionally commented on this sleight-of-hand elevation of the (proposed) rear entry web site:
Dr. Michael Chesser: The (Warren) Fee positioned the entry of a bullet fired from the sixth flooring of the Texas College Guide Depository low behind the top, proper subsequent to the exterior occipital protuberance. The Clark Panel and the HSCA moved u( this wound 4 inches, into the parietal bone. 4 inches is kind of a distance from the unique location of the doorway wound. They did this for a number of causes. They knew that an entry within the decrease location would trigger monumental harm to the cerebellum—and to their story. Within the pretend mind {photograph} the cerebellum is untouched. Within the post-mortem report, Commander Humes described a fraction path starting close to the exterior occipital protuberance. The extant X-ray movies disprove this.
James DiEugenio: So there is no such thing as a diagonal that leads upward within the current X-rays?
Dr. Michael Chesser: The X-rays on the archives don’t present a fraction path extending from low as much as right here. They present a fraction path from the again of the parietal bone to the frontal bone. However the fragment path doesn’t match the conclusions of the Clark Panel or the Home Choose Committee. For a number of causes. I feel an important motive is that the tiniest fragments on that path, and there are dozens of them, are very skinny or simply contained in the frontal bone. And the biggest fragments are in the back of the cranium. This goes in opposition to all forensic proof that the tiniest fragments usually are not going to journey that far. So it’s unattainable for a shot right here, behind the cranium, to lead to all the tiniest bullet fragments within the frontal area.
James DiEugenio: You’re saying that the truth that there’s all these dustlike particles within the entrance of the cranium would point out a degree of entry from the entrance.
Dr. Michael Chesser: Sure it does. It’s very sturdy proof.
James DiEugenio: And also you’re additionally saying that as a result of the bigger fragments have been within the again, that will additionally point out a shot from the entrance.
Dr. Michael Chesser: Sure.(25) (Finish of colloquy.)
Nonetheless, even after this unwarranted elevation by the HSCA, the particles path remains to be too excessive—the path really lies noticeably above the HSCA’s entry web site. Chesser concurred. Throughout the 2015 JFK Lancer Convention, he acknowledged: “I feel that one of many causes that they (the HSCA) moved the entry wound up was because of the fragment particle path proven in the proper lateral cranium x-ray. If a line is drawn from the Warren Fee entry web site to the proposed exit web site, you’ll discover that the particle path doesn’t correspond with these websites. The distinguished particle path is positioned within the higher portion of the cranium.”(26)
The HSCA illustrated their hypothetical trajectory for the only headshot (Determine 3.10).
Determine 3.10
HSCA’s Imaginary Hypothetical Trajectory: From the TSBD to the Parietal Cranium.
Determine 3.10 is from Michael Z. Chesser, MD, “The Software of Forensic Rules for the Evaluation of the Post-mortem Cranium X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Overview of Mind Images,” Kennedys and King, November 27, 2017, op. cit.
(1) Michael Z. Chesser, MD, “The Software of Forensic Rules for the Evaluation of the Post-mortem Cranium X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Overview of Mind Images,” op. cit.
(2) My tedious, however exact, identification (carried out whereas on the Archives) of all obvious metallic particles on each the lateral and AP X-ray movies can be proven in shade in my hardcover e book, p. 379.
(3) Jerry McKnight, “Bugliosi Fails to Resuscitate the Single-Bullet Idea,” Mary Ferrell Basis, n.d., https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Bugliosi_Fails_to_Resuscitate_the_Single-Bullet_Theory.html.
(4) “Description of President Kennedy’s wounds,” Appendix to Hearings Earlier than the Choose Committee on Assassination of the U.S. Home of Representatives Ninety-Fifth Congress Second Session, vol. 7, op. cit., p. 83.
(5) Amongst different witnesses (e.g., Diana Bowron), Charles Carrico clearly implied that the throat wound lay above the collar (“Testimony of Dr. Charles James Carrico and Dr. Malcom Oliver Perry, “Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 3, op. cit., at pp. 361-362). For additional dialogue of its location, see my hardcover e book, pp. 10-12.
Charles James Carrico and Dr. Malcom Oliver Perry, “Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 3, op. cit., at pp. 361-362). For additional dialogue of its location, see my hardcover e book, pp. 10-12.
(6) “Abstract of the forensic pathologists’ perspective of wound ballistics,” Appendix to Hearings Earlier than the Choose Committee on Assassination of the U.S. Home of Representatives Ninety-Fifth Congress Second Session, vol. 7, op. cit., p. 175. The trajectory was barely upward.
(7) This, nevertheless, can’t completely rule out a sabot. In any case, extra bullets than CE 399 litter this farcical case.
(8) Larry A. Sneed, “Stavis Ellis,” in No Extra Silence: An Oral Historical past of the Assassination of President Kennedy (Dallas, TX: Three Forks Books, 1998), pp. 142-153, at p. 145.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Ibid.
See additionally: Bonar Menninger, Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK, op. cit., pp. 68-78. Howard Donahue was the protagonist on this e book. In a simulation, he was the one uncommon marksman who succeeded in hitting a JFK-like goal inside the allotted time. I had the pleasure of assembly Howard Donahue and his spouse at their residence in Maryland.
(11) “Testimony of Royce G. Skelton,” Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 7, op. cit., pp. 236-239, at p. 238.
(12) Ibid.
(13) “Testimony of Harry D. Holmes,” Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 7, op. cit., pp. 289-308, at p. 291.
(14) “Testimony of Mrs. Donald Baker,” Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 7, op. cit., pp. 507-515.
(15) Ira David Wooden III, “22 November 1963: A Chronology,” in Homicide in Dealey Plaza, ed. James H. Fetzer, op. cit., pp. 17-118, at p. 36.
Wooden’s JFK Assassination Chronicle can be obtainable as a Kindle e-book, https://amzn.to/3NK5Moz.
(16) Michael Chesser, MD, “A Overview of the JFK Cranial x-Rays and Images,” Assassination of JFK, n.d., https://assassinationofjfk.internet/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/. That is from Chesser’s lecture for the 2015 JFK Lancer Convention in Dallas, Texas.
(17) Ibid.
(18) Ibid.
(19) James DiEugenio, “JFK: Future Betrayed (Annotated Transcript of 4-Hour Movie)” in JFK Revisited: By way of the Trying Glass (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2022), pp. 155-190, at p. 169.
(20) Ibid., “Interview Excerpts: Dr. David Mantik,” pp. 264-272, at p. 269.
(21) “Medical file of post-mortem protocol ready by the Naval Medical College, Bethesda, Md., on the post-mortem carried out on President Kennedy,” in Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 16, CE 387, op. cit., pp. 978-983. at p. 981. See Appendix J.
(22) Michael Chesser, “Reviewing the Post-mortem X-Rays,” op. cit.
(23) Lansing State Journal (Lansing, Michigan), September 16, 1977, p. 9. Curiously, Voyager I used to be launched on September 5, 1977, simply eleven days earlier than Humes publicly considered the JFK X-ray movies with the HSCA. Regardless of his alarming feedback, Morgan was not additional interrogated by the HSCA, and nobody requested about Voyager both. The article was titled “Professional Backs Warren Report,” when it extra precisely ought to have been titled “Professional Questions Warren Report.”
(24) For the entire newspaper article about Morgan’s close to confession, see my hardcover e book: The JFK Assassination Decoded: Prison Forgery within the Post-mortem Images and X-rays. The excerpted newspaper article seems instantly after the dedication to the e-book, JFK’s Head Wounds: A Ultimate Synthesis—and a New Evaluation of the Harper Fragment.
(25) James DiEugenio, “Interview Excerpts: Dr. Michael Chesser,” in JFK Revisited: By way of the Trying Glass, op. cit., pp. 292-298, at pp. 293-294.
(26) Michael Chesser, MD, “A Overview of the JFK Cranial x-Rays and Images,” op. cit.