The Kings Cross Sting research for Q Plan: October 2013

Thursday, 31 October 2013

Why was Abe Saffron black mailed?

secretariat

Dear Sir,

I was asked tonight, if there was anywhere I thought from the police officer at Surry Hills.

There is differences on the plan to the building, one is in Room D behind the shower there is a triangle area which is quite big.

Abe Saffron's son, explained that Abe had been blackmailed. Was it to keep the brothel closed. By closing the brothel and the club at 38A Darlinghurst Road it would've cost a lot to move the facilities.

The ladies toilets is heaps holder than the rest of the tiling, thou the tiling is very 80's.

There are brick lentils built which could be an area in Room F which is unusual. Behind the mirror at the end of the hall way There could be a gap.

There is an area in the office that is different to plans.

The Police won't look Subject: Donald Mackay Murder Remains

The police wont even look, so why does Hells Angels want this brothel so much? Sparkling Chandeliers.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jennifer <take2looks@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 12:03 PM
Subject: Donald MacKay Murder Remains.
To: secretariat <secretariat@police.nsw.gov.au>

Dear Sirs,

Juanita Nielsen I have been advokating is in the brothel Sparkling Chandeliers 36A Darlinghurst Road Kings Cross.

I believe Detective Krabe who was accused of this murder and then discharged was following Juanita Nielsen's Murderer to Griffith when the reports that Krabe was in Griffith.

I have had the most highest people within the alleged Hells Angels and links to the *The Hells Angels Ltd coming for the brothel. Why?

To hide maybe a body that may uncover or expose this drug system that exists.

Donald MacKay, if he was put in a boot of a car, and murdered or shot at by Kings Cross renegrades back in 1977 could be where Juanita Nielsen's body is. The police have not searched the brothel and the fact that the President of Hells Angels Felix Lyle is behind the purchases.

I have been asking for a Royal Commission into the drug fuelled industry. Donald MacKay, Juanita Nielsen both knew too much about the system. Yet I feel like they did, where you go here and there it is time yet the mob still come.

The brothel was the secret brothel of the Pink Pussycat Club google Bobbi Sykes wikopedia reference to the club next door. Then you realise that this brothel was only accessed by the back fire escape for years to this went.

I believe the murderer of both of these people is the same. I believe that both were murdered to cover up the drug industry and did exist and still does exist. I believe the alleged killer came back to protect what he had hidden within the brothel terrorising me too I have already put into the police as a guy alleged Essam Nicola Gerges who told me I have worked for the Bayeh's for protection and picking up extortion money. He also tried to extort me, well I believe some was paid to keep the peace, it is devasting that the police had the file open on Juanita Nielsen since 7 December 2011 from Inspector MacDonald of Kings Cross and he told me he turns a blind eye up here to the drugs, it gives me a job. So where do you turn too.

I went to Cherie Burton's office today MP I was told everything in email, yet I still have the mob taking the control of the brothel. For What...TO HIDE THE EVIDENCE ? MAYBE?

I asked last night for a Royal Commission, I will send more emails as to why?

Juanita Nielsen and Donald Mackay are both inside the hidden brothel allegedly owned or utilised for a cover up as 1975 Juanita was murdered. 1977 the brothel was still shut and a good hiding spot if Juanita was found. You may even find the murder weapon. As Peter Schaffer told me there was a gun in the brothel I never found it. It could be with the body.

The brothel has been bought or being bought by allegedly Quentin Vertigan and Elias Elias with builders waiting to go on.

In the second hall way from the laundry to the bathroom. Why the two steps and why the levels in the floor raised? What else is there?

Please I beg please examine this brothel, there are differences to plans. The fact when ever it opens without the allegedly Hells Angels or links to other outlaw gangs it is extorted.

To hide a secret?

In the Cross Fire, the alleged Sabotage of Sparkling Chandeliers

In The Cross Fire The Kings Cross Sting Series continues

As you read through the events and information In The Cross Fire you may on occasion feel like I have jumped from one scenario to another non related scenario. This is because I’ve written the book in the way things were happening to me. I’ve kept it as close to the real event as I can recall and I hope as you go through my story you get an understanding of what I experienced.

Also how I felt when a selected few orchestrated, almost one hundred people to do numerous acts of sabotage on a daily basis over a twelve month period with the aim of eliminating any possibility of my business being even remotely competitive.

Each major incident and person that affected the running of the business was pulled apart and examined to expose the hidden secret or the raw persecution of jealousy.

There was also an avalanche of incidents aimed at discrediting me personally. The mention of my name would be enough reason for anyone anytime in the future and on any level to completely avoid me with the attitude of never having anything to do with me whatsoever. The mere mention of my name would have them running.

The brutality of what I believe they considered a campaign on me was almost unbelievable, and those close to me have all made the same comment, and asked the same question. Most people will not believe what you endured Jennifer, they have all said.

They have all asked with a look of bewilderment, why did they do this to you? Considering the lengths they went to, I would be safe in assuming that one or more individuals would be in some very serious trouble. They may well be asked questions that they wouldn’t be able to answer without incriminating themselves with a very real likelihood of a lengthy period of imprisonment. I have pondered why for many hours for more than a year now, and the above is the only thing which comes close to making sense. I hope you enjoy reading In The Cross Fire… Check out our online Bookstore www.sparklingchandeliers.com.au

Tuesday, 29 October 2013

Visitors to the website Sparkling Chandeliers.

Saturday, 26 October 2013

Richard Carr testimony President JFK, Court document

Richard Carr, he came to my attention when saw the evidence. It reminded me it was allegedly the Ritual Key “Bull notation”. Richard car was on the seventhfloor of the new courthouse watches as two men run from behind the Texas School Book Depository. The men enter a waiting station wagon then it was noted they speed off north on Houston Street.

Richard Carr describes the men he saw as “heavy set, wearing a hot, tan sport coat and horn rim glasses”. It was the horn, the tan jacket as the relationship of the Scorpion ritual where the Magician would wear a tan jumper, and the brown shoes that were noted.

CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT
PARISH OF ORLEANS
STATE OF LOUISIANA
STATE OF LOUISIANA vs. CLAY L. SHAW
198-059
1426 (30)
SECTION "C"
EXCERPT OF THE TESTIMONY TAKEN IN OPEN COURT
February 19, 1969
B E F O R E: THE HONORABLE EDWARD A. HAGGERTY, JR., JUDGE, SECTION "C"
THE COURT: Call your next witness.
MR. GARRISON: Your Honor, Mr. Carr is unable to walk because of a recent accident, and we understand the Defense has no objection, if the Court will permit, to have Mr. Carr wheeled right in front of the State Counsel table.
THE COURT: That's all right. He can testify from there.
RICHARD RANDOLPH CARR, having been first duly sworn by the Minute Clerk, was examined and testified as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Mr. Carr, we can hear you if you speak into the microphone, sir, and it is important that the Jury be able to hear you and Defense Counsel over here (indicating) and the Court Reporter. What is your full name?
A: Richard Randolph Carr.
Q: And in what City do you live?
A: Dallas, Texas.
Q: And what city were you living in during the month of November, 1963?
A: Dallas, Texas, 322 North Canden, Oak Cliff.
Q: Can you recall the day of November 22, 1963?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you recall what part of the City you were in around the middle of the day on November 22?
A: Yes, I was on the Seventh Floor of the New Courthouse Building that was under con- struction at that time, located on Houston and Commerce, facing Dealey Plaza.
Q: Approximately what time were you on the Seventh Floor of that building facing Dealey Plaza?
A: Sir, I can't recall the exact time, but it was at the time that the parade was coming down towards Dealey Plaza. I did not have a watch at the time.
Q: Were you in a position where you could see the parade?
A: Yes, sir.
Q: Do you recall seeing anything unusual happening?
A: Yes, I do.
Q: Would you tell us what happened.
A: At the time the parade came down towards -- going to the School Book Depository, Dealey Plaza would have been to my left where I was standing, and at the Fifth Floor of the School Book Depository I noticed a man at the third window, this man was dressed -- he had on a light hat, and I saw this man later going down Houston Street, to the corner of Commerce, and then turned toward town on Commerce, and at that time before this happened I heard a single shot which sounded like a small arms, maybe a pistol, and I immediately, immediately there was a slight pause and immediately after that I heard three rifle shots in succession, they seemed to be fired from an automatic rifle and they came --
MR. DYMOND: We object to the witness giving his conclusions on this.
THE COURT: Mr. Carr, do not give your conclusions on this point.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Go ahead and tell us what you heard.
A: I heard three rifle shots fired from a high-powered rifle --
MR. DYMOND: We object to that unless the man is qualified as an expert. I ask the Jury be instructed to disregard that.
THE COURT: It is a question whether or not an ordinary human being, whether he would know a rifle shot or not. I do not know --
MR. DYMOND: We don't know this man had rifles since he was a child, we don't know that he ever had been a hunter, and this man --
MR. GARRISON: We can clarify that very easily.
Q: Mr. Carr, have you ever heard rifle fire before?
A: I have.
Q: Where?
A: I was a member of the Fifth Ranger Battalion in World War II. I qualified as an expert with a bolt-action rifle which is called a thirty aught six, in the Army it is a 30-caliber rifle, since that time I was -- I used a 225 Winchester, I hunted with a 70 millimeter Remington, I have also loaded my own ammunition, which I do until this day.
Q: Were you ever wounded in action?
A: Yes.
Q: How many times?
MR. DYMOND: I object to that as irrelevant.
THE COURT: That is irrelevant. Why don't you tender Mr. Carr over to the Defense as an expert, at least in the field that he knows a rifle shot when he hears it?
MR. GARRISON: One other question.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Have you ever heard rifle fire in combat?
A: Yes, I have heard rifle fire in combat.
Q: On how many occasions?
A: I was in -- I landed in Casablanca, I went through North Africa, I was in two major offensives in Africa, and from there I went to Anzio beachhead and my battalion was annihilated, 13 men left in the Fifth Ranger Battalion.
Q: How many of these places did you hear rifle fire?
A: In all of them I heard rifle fire, sir.
MR. GARRISON: We tender the witness.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: Mr. Carr, when you were qualified in the Army as an expert with a rifle, did that, was that pertaining to marksmanship or the identification of the type of rifle being fired from the noise made?
A: Sir, clarify that.
Q: Your qualification as an expert rifleman in the Army, was that in marksmanship and the breaking down of rifles or the identification of rifle sounds?
A: I became an expert on the range in the act of firing a rifle.
Q: In other words, that would be marksmanship, would it not, sir?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, these various actions in which your battalion took place, do you know what type of rifles were being fired at you?
A: No, sir, I do not.
Q: Do you know whether there was more than one type of rifle being fired at me.
A: Yes, I do know there was more than one type of rifle being fired at me.
Q: But you can't name the different types. Is that correct?
A: Well, I did not see them, and without seeing, I could not name them.
MR. DYMOND: That's all.
THE COURT: Is the matter submitted?
MR. GARRISON: Yes, the State would add that Mr. Carr is about as expert in the sounds of gunfire as you could be and still be walking around.
MR. DYMOND: If the Court please, this gentleman may have been fired at many times, but he does not know what type of rifles were being fired, he was never called upon to distinguish as between sounds of various different rifles, and if you hold this man out as an expert, every many including myself who was in combat during World War II would be an expert. I certainly don't hold myself out as one.
THE COURT: I rule that Mr. Carr is qualified as an expert and can give his opinion on whether a shot or a noise he heard is from a rifle or not, but not what type rifle.
MR. DYMOND: To which ruling Counsel objects and reserves a bill of exception, making all the testimony up until this point, the Defense objection, the Court's ruling, and the entire record parts of the bill.
MR. GARRISON: The Judge has ruled that you can tell us whether or not the noise you heard was from a rifle but not what type rifle.
THE WITNESS: No, sir, I would not say what type of a rifle, I would not say it was a thirty aught six --
MR. DYMOND:
Objection, there was no question asked.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Let's go back to where we were and can you tell us what you heard?
A: Yes, a pipefitter and myself were standing on the Seventh Floor of the -- on the outside of the structure of this courthouse, we were looking, as I told before in my statement the FBI and everyone else --
MR. DYMOND: I object to his previous statements to the FBI, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Answer the question.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: You can go on and tell us what you observed, tell us what you observed and what you heard.
A: All right. As I stated before, I noticed this fellow in the window, and this gentleman, the pipefitter and myself, he made the statement to --
MR. DYMOND: I object to what the man made a statement concerning.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: You can say what you said.
A: I thought he was a Secret Agent man or an FBI man.
Q: What did the man in the window look like?
A: He had on a hat, a felt hat, a light hat, he had on heavy-rimmed glasses, dark, the glasses were heavy-rimmed, and heavy ear pieces on his glasses.
Q: Go ahead.
A: He had on a tie, he had on a light shirt, a tan sport coat.
Q: Now, you say you heard gunfire. Will you tell us again what you heard.
A: Yes, sir. The first I heard, I made the statement before the objection, I say it was small arms, a pistol --
MR. DYMOND: He has not been qualified --
THE COURT: Just say what kind of noise you heard.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: What kind of noise did you hear?
A: I heard a shot. There was a pause and immediately after that there were three shots in succession.
Q: Were you able to tell from where the first shot was coming?
A: No, sir, not the first one I could not tell the direction it come from.
Q: Were you able to tell from where the three shots came from which followed?
A: Yes, I was.
Q: Where did they come from?
A: They came from the -- from where I was standing at the new courthouse, they came from in this direction here, behind this picket fence, and one knocked a bunch of grass up along in this area here (indicating), this area here is flat, looking at it from here, but the actual way it is, it is on a slope up this way and you could tell from the way it knocked it up that the bullet came from this direction (indicating).
Q: Now, when you just touched the ruler to this mockup, what was the area which you were describing as the source of the three shots, can you describe it a little more precisely?
A: Yes, there was a picket fence along in this area here, it does not show it in here, and it seems the shots came from this direction, and underneath that slope there were people.
Q: And what happened?
A: The shots came from this direction, from behind this picket fence that I do not see here, and there is a slope here, there is a grassy slope down here and there were a lot of people, spectators down here, below on this grassy slope, but when those shots were fired the motorcycle policemen, the Secret Service and what-have-you, all came in this direction, the way the shots came from, some of the people that were sitting there or standing fell to the ground as if the shots were coming off of those --
MR. DYMOND: I object to his conclusion, Your Honor.
THE WITNESS: It is not a conclusion, Your Honor, I saw it.
MR. DYMOND: I ask the witness be instructed to wait for the Court's ruling.
THE COURT: I overrule the objection.
MR. DYMOND: To which ruling Counsel objects and reserves a bill of exception on the conclusions of the witness. I will make the Defense objection, all the questions propounded to this witness, the entire record and the Court's ruling, parts of the bill.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Now, of those shots, which of the three shots did you hear coming from that area you have just pointed out by the picket fence on the knoll?
A: The three shots, the last three shots came from this area.
Q: Did the three shots seem break apart in time or very close in time?
A: No, sir, they were fired from a semi-automatic or either --
MR. DYMOND: I object to this.
THE COURT: Just tell us the sequence, Mr. Carr.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: You can tell us whether they sounded close or separate.
A: Yes, they were very close together.
Q: If you were to say with your voice "BOOM" three times, could you give us the approximate separation as you recall it?
A: Well, BOOM-BOOM-BOOM, just in that order.
Q: All right. Now, I am not going into the whole thing there, but just so that we can see where the spot was on the photomap, now, "S-34," Mr. Carr, that you are looking at now, an aerial photograph of the scene --
A: Yes.
Q: -- could you orient yourself, can you identify everything by looking at the area photograph?
A: Yes.
Q: Can you show us the are from which you heard the three shots coming on the area photograph?
A: The three shots came from in this direction right here (indicating).
Q: Can you recognize the cement arcade in the area photograph?
A: Yes.
Q: Now, are you able to recall from which ends of the cement arcade the three shots came from, was it from the end towards the Depository or the end towards the overpass?
A: At the end towards the overpass, right here.
MR. GARRISON: Let the record show that Mr. Carr just indicated, would you point your ruler up there -- let the record show Mr. Carr is indicating an area on the grassy knoll in the vicinity of the picket fence.
THE COURT: Let it be noted on the record.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Now, after the shots, did you notice any movement of any kind --
A: Yes, I did.
Q: -- as unusual, that was unusual?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: Would you tell us what you observed.
A: Should I point it out, sir?
Q: Yes.
A: At this point right here, at this School Book Depository there was a Rambler Station Wagon there with a rack on the back, built on the top of this.
Q: Which way was the station wagon facing?
A: It was parked on the wrong side of the street, next to the School Book Depository heading north.
Q: North being the top of the photomap, north is the top as you have indicated?
A: North is the top, and it was headed in this direction towards the railroad tracks, and immediately after the shooting there was three men that emerged from behind the School Book Depository, there was a Latin, I can't say whether he was Spanish, Cuban, but he was real dark-complected, stepped out and opened the door, there was two men entered that station wagon, and the Latin drove it north on Houston. The car was in motion before the rear door was closed, and this one man got in the front, and then he slid in from the -- from the driver's side over, and the Latin got back and they proceeded north and it was moving before the rear door was closed, and the other man that I described to you being in this window which would have been one, two, the third window over here came across the street, he came down, coming towards the construction site on Houston Street, to Commerce, in a very big hurry, he came to Commerce Street and he turned toward town on Commerce Street and every once in a while he would look over his shoulder as if he was being followed.
Q: Now, Mr. Carr, did you have occasion to give this information to any law enforcement agencies?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: Did anyone tell you not to say anything about this?
A: Yes.
MR. DYMOND: I object to what anyone told him, Your Honor, on the grounds it's hearsay.
THE COURT: A moment ago you asked Mrs. Parker if anybody threatened her. Is it your question, Mr. Garrison, whether or not Mr. Carr was threatened by someone? Is your question to the witness a question of whether or not anyone threatened Mr. Carr?
MR. GARRISON: I will rephrase it.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Did anyone threaten you?
MR. DYMOND: At this time we object to the Court's suggesting questions to Counsel for the State. The suggested question is completely different from the question previously propounded by the State. This is not the function of a Trial Judge in any trail.
MR. GARRISON: May it please the Court, I will phrase my own questions on this.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Mr. Carr, did you talk to any FBI agents about this incident?
A: Yes, I did.
Q: Did they tell you to forget about it?
MR. DYMOND: I object to that as hearsay.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Were you threatened in any way --
THE COURT: I sustain the objection. You cannot tell us the words used by someone who spoke to you because of hearsay; however, you can state that you had conversations with them and what did you do as a result of the conversation, I will permit that.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: As the result of the conversations with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, what did you do?
A: I done as I was instructed, I shut my mouth.
Q: Were you called to testify before the Warren Commission?
A: No, sir.
MR. GARRISON: I tender the witness.
RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: When did you first notice that President Kennedy had been shot?
A: About an hour and 15 minutes after it happened, sir.
Q: Is it your testimony that you did not realize that anything had gone wrong in the Presidential motorcade?
A: I realized something had gone wrong but I did not know what.
Q: Did you realize that anyone had been shot?
A: No, sir, I did not.
Q: Until an hour and 15 minutes after it happened, is that your testimony?
A: Yes.
Q: I see. Now, wasn't it your testimony that you heard what you thought were gunshot --
A: Yes.
Q: -- noises?
A: Yes, I did not think it was gunshots, I knew it was gunshots.
Q: I see. Didn't you also testify that you saw people running up to the grassy knoll area?
A: I did.
Q: Did you draw any conclusions from that?
A: Your Honor, you asked me not to have any conclusions a while ago, did you not?
THE COURT: You can answer this question.
THE WITNESS: I have conclusions, yes, I did.
BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: Did you conclude that anybody had been shot?
A: I concluded someone had been shot or shot at, yes.
Q: Did you detect any commotion or unusual activities in the vicinity of the Presidential vehicle?
A: I detected the vehicles gathering speed and moving on, yes, I did.
Q: Did you attach any importance to that or think it was unusual?
A: I thought it was very unusual, yes.
Q: Now, when did you see the Presidential vehicle gathering speed in relation to the gunshots?
A: It was shortly after.
Q: Would I be fair in saying it was immediately after the gunshots?
A: I would say there was a pause and it looked like, it looked like somebody trying to get home from where I was at.
Q: By clapping your hands, first indicating the last gunshot, and then the time that you saw the unusual activity around the Presidential vehicle, clapping them again, so as to show us the space of time, would you please do that, sir.
A: That has been five years ago, and it seemed like minutes, which it was only seconds.
Q: In other words, it's your testimony now that it was only seconds between the last shot and your seeing commotion and unusual activity around the Presidential vehicle. Is that correct?
A: Well, now, I ain't said nothing about seeing commotion around the Presidential vehicle, what type of commotion I noticed mostly was people running to the area that I described, this area right here, sir.
Q: That happened right after the shots were fired?
A: Yes, that happened immediately.
Q: Would you say that happened before or after you saw the Presidential vehicle accelerate and start to go faster?
A: That happened before.
Q: All right. After seeing the people run up the grassy knoll, which happened right after you heard the shots, right after that you saw --
MR. ALCOCK: That is not what he said, that is not his testimony.
(Whereupon, the testimony pertinent to this point was ready by the Reporter.)
BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: Right after that you saw the Presidential vehicle accelerate. Is that correct?
A: Yes.
Q: All right. Now, when you saw the Presidential vehicle accelerate, did that attract your attention?
A: No, sir, not so much as I turned and looked back, as I told you before, I saw these people come out from behind the School Book Depository and I am going to try to make this clear to you so where you can understand it, from where I was at I could not tell whether they came out this side entrance here, there is a side entrance to the School Book Depository, or whether they came from behind it, but they came either from the side entrance or they came from behind it, and got into this station wagon.
Q: Now, how about the rest of the motorcade, did it accelerate along with the Presidential --
A: The crowd crowded in so fast until I could not tell anything about the rest of the motorcade or nothing else, there was a lot of commotion there from then on.
Q: Was there a great deal of traffic on Stemmons Freeway at that time?
A: Stemmons Freeway is on up here.
Q: I am talking about Elm Street going --
A: You said Stemmons Freeway, Elm Street is here, sir. No, sir, there was not much traffic on Elm Street.
Q: Not much traffic?
A: Elm Street had been blocked off for the motorcade.
Q: About how many automobiles were in the motorcade?
A: I don't know.
Q: Would you say plenty or just one or two?
A: Well, at the time this happened, I saw three.
Q: You only saw three vehicles, three automobiles in the Presidential motorcade. Is that correct?
A: At the time it happened I had only seen three, part of them were on back, had not got to that point yet.
Q: Did you ever see any more than these three?
A: Sir, I saw no more because I explained to you that the commotion was so great that everybody stopped there, there were a lot of people on the streets, on both sides, there were people up here, spectators, there were people lined everywhere along that route, all over there.
Q: Mr. Carr, weren't you interested in looking at this commotion and trying to see what was causing it?
A: Was I interested in knowing what was causing it?
Q: That is correct.
A: I would like to have known, but I could not have got through the crowd to find out it I had to.
Q: You had a pretty good spot from which to look, didn't you?
A: Yes.
Q: Were you looking to try to see what caused it?
A: I say were you looking to try to see what went on, what caused it?
A: To see what caused the commotion?
Q: That's right.
A: No, sir, not to see what caused it, I was looking to see what was going on.
Q: You were looking where, to see what was going on?
A: I was looking to see why all of the commotion down here and why these people were running.
Q: And at the same time you were looking up towards the Texas Book Depository seeing three men come out from behind it. Is that right?
A: Do you see these dots on this --
Q: Would you answer my question and then explain, please, sir. I say would you answer the question and then explain.
A: Yes, I will answer your question, repeat it, please.
THE COURT: Mr. Carr, when a question is put to you, you can answer it yes or no, but you have a right to explain your answer so you cannot be cut off, so if you wish to explain the answer, you are permitted by law to do so.
(Whereupon, the question was read back by the Reporter.)
A: Yes, that's right.
BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: And also at the same time you were watching the man whom you say you had seen on the Fifth Floor of the Book Depository walk on Houston Street towards Main. Is that right?
A: Yes, and I have -- may I explain that?
Q: Yes.
THE COURT: You may explain.
A: The same man that I saw here in this window was with the three men that I told you a minute ago, they came out from behind the School Book Depository, got in the station wagon, one man crossed the street and then came down this side of Houston Street and turned onto Commerce Street.
BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: And you were watching that procedure at the same time that you were watching what was going on in the grassy knoll area?
A: No, sir.
Q: And what was going on around the Presidential vehicle and in the motorcade, right?
A: No, sir, I was watching that man at that time, and I watched him until I could see him no longer, but that man acted as if he was in a hurry and someone was following him, and I would know that man if I ever saw him again.
Q: And right before the three successive shots you saw a bullet hit in the middle of Dealey Plaza, is that correct?
A: Repeat that, please.
Q: Right before hearing the three successive shots you saw a bullet hit in the middle of Dealey Plaza, right?
A: No, sir, upon hearing the three successive shots, sir, I saw one, one of those three hit in Dealey Plaza in the grass.
Q: I see. Did you ever go and look for the hole where it hit?
A: No, sir, I have not.
Q: Did you ever try to recover the pellet?
A: No, sir, I have not.
Q: Now, is it your testimony that the three, that is, the group of these three shots were equally spaced, that is, the space of time between the first and second was just about the same as that between the second and third?
A: The three shots were consecutively.
Q: I take it then that you would deny that there was one shot and then a relatively long period and then two fast shots. Is that correct?
A: Yes, I sure would.
Q: I take it -- go ahead, sir.
A: I am sorry, sir, go ahead. I said I heard one shot, there was a pause and then I heard three consecutive shots.
Q: I take it then that you would also deny that of those three successive shots, there were two rapid ones and then a relatively long period and then a third one. Is that right?
A: Yes, I would.
MR. DYMOND: That's all, sir.
FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: Just one more question, Mr. Carr. Would you just take your -- would you just take your time and in your own words describe with reference to the photomap the direc- tion of that shot which you observed furrowing on through the grass, from what area to what area, could you describe that, from what point to what point?
A: The shot was fired from somewhere in here.
Q: Just a minute, sir. This is going to be written down, what do you mean by "in here," from somewhere to where?
A: From this direction in here that shot was fired.
Q: You are indicating, to begin with, the grassy knoll area by the picket fence. Is that right?
A: Yes, sir, this is the first thing that attracted by attention as I explained to you before.
Q: But the direction would have been from there to where?
A: To in this vicinity right here (indicating).
Q: Well, if you carry the line down, would you identify some building or something on the map so that we will know precisely what you mean?
A: Yes, I will say the Criminal Courts Building right here (indicating).
Q: If the shot would have continued, you mean to say --
MR. DYMOND: I object to leading the witness, Your Honor.
BY MR. GARRISON:
Q: I will rephrase the question. If the shot had continued --
A: If the shot had not hit the grass, it would have hit the Criminal Courts Building, sir.
MR. GARRISON: That's all I have.
FURTHER RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DYMOND:
Q: Just a couple of questions. Mr. Carr, is it your testimony that you saw this bullet furrowing through the grass?
A: I saw the grass come up.
Q: You saw the grass come up?
A: Yes.
Q: And from that you are telling us from what direction the shot came and where it would have gone if it would have kept on going. Is that right?
A: Yes.
MR. DYMOND: That's all.
THE COURT: Is Mr. Carr released from the obligations of his subpoena?
MR. ALCOCK: Yes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: You are excused as a witness.
THE WITNESS: Thank you, Judge.
THE COURT: Let everybody have a seat, Sheriff. Now, you see, it is about one minute to 12:00. We are going to recess for lunch. Let everybody have a seat. Gentlemen of the Jury, as I have so many times, I must admonish you and instruct you not to discuss the case with one another or anyone else. It is very, very important that you adhere to my instructions. With those instructions, I will turn you over to the Sheriffs, and we will be in recess for lunch. You are released under your same bond, Mr. Shaw.
(Whereupon, a luncheon recess was taken.)
C E R T I F I C A T E
I, the undersigned, a Deputy Official Court Reporter, in and for the State of Louisiana, authorized and empowered by law to administer oaths and to take the depositions of witnesses under L.R.S. 13:961.1, as amended, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing deposition is true and correct as taken by me in the above-entitled and numbered cause(s). I further certify that I am not of counsel nor related to any of the parties to this cause or in anywise interested in the event thereof.
NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, on the 26th day of May, 1969.
/s/ Paul W. Williams
DEPUTY OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
STATE OF LOUISIANA

Wednesday, 23 October 2013

JFK, Gunshots on tape...

This information was found on the internet.  I do not know how accurate it is.

1/26/67

The undersigned physicians performed the autopsy on the body of late
President John F. Kennedy.  In charge was James J. Humes, M.D., at that
time Commander, Medical Corps, United States Navy, and Director of
Laboratories, Naval Medical School.  He was certified in 1955 by the
American Board of Pathology in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology.  Assisting
him were J. Thornton Boswell, M.D., and Pierre A. Finck, M.D.  Dr. Boswell
at that time was a Commander in the Medical Corps, United States Navy, and
Chief of Pathology, Naval Medical School.  He was certified in 1957 by the
American Board of Pathology in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology.  Dr.
Finck, a Lieutenant Colonel, Medical Corps, United States Army, was then
Chief of the Military Environmental Pathology Division, and Chief of the
Wound Ballistics Pathology Branch, Armed Forces Institute of Pathology,
Walter Reed Medical Center.  He was certified in 1956 by the American
Board of Pathology in Anatomic Pathology, and in 1961 in Forensic
Pathology. 

The Surgeon General of the Navy advised Dr. Humes that the purpose of the
autopsy was to determine the nature of the President's injuries and the
cause of death. 

The autopsy begain at approximately 8:00 P.M. on Friday, November 22,
1963, and was concluded approximately at 11:00 P.M.  The autopsy report,
written by Dr. Humes with the assistance of Dr. Boswell and Dr. Finck, was
written on November 23 and the morning of November 24, and delivered by
Dr. Humes to Admiral Burkley, the President's physician, on November 24 at
about 6:30 P.M. 

Dr. Humes was chosen to perform the autopsy because of the decision to
bring the body of the late President to the Naval Medical Center in
Bethesda, Maryland, where, as stated, he was Director of Laboratories. 

At the direction and under the supervision of Dr. Humes, x-rays and
photographs of the President's body were taken during the autopsy.  The
x-rays were examined that same evening.  However, the photographs were not
seen at that time.  All x-rays and photographic plates were delivered that
evening to Secret Service personnel.  Dr. Humes and Dr. Boswell first saw
the photographs on November 1, 1966, when requested by the Department of
Justice to examine, identify, and inventory them at the National Archives. 
Dr. Finck first saw the photographs on January 20, 1967. 

The undersigned physicians have been requested by the Department of
Justice to examine the x-rays and photographs for the purpose of
determining whether they are consistent with the autopsy report.  Pursuant
to this request, we met after our regular work day, January 20, 1967, at
the office of Dr. Robert H. Bahmer, Archivist of the United States, where
the x-rays and photographs were made available to us.  Our findings with
respect thereto follow. 

THE NECK WOUND

The Location

The autopsy report states that the "wound presumably of entry" was "in the
upper right posterior thorax."  In non-technical language, this wound was
located low in the back of the neck.  Photographs Nos. 11, 12, 38 and 39
verify the location of the wound, as stated in the report.  Warren
Commission Exhibit 397 includes a drawing (Vol. XVII, p. 45) which
purports to show the approximate location of the wound, and specifically
states that it was 14 cm. (5-1/2 inches) from the tip of the mastoid
process (behind the right ear), and 14 cm. from the tip of the right
acromion (the extreme tip of the right shoulder bone).  Photographs 11,
12, 38 and 39 confirm the accuracy of these measurements.  The drawing
itself may be somewhat misleading as to the location of the wound, making
it appear at a point lower than it actually was.  No one photograph shows
both the wound at the back of the neck and the wound in the throat, but by
comparing Photographs 11, 12, 38 and 39 with the side views in Photographs
1-4, inclusive, it is clear that Warren Commission Exhibits 385 and 386,
which also depict the location of the neck wound, are accurate. 
Photographs Nos. 26 and 38 show the wound in the back of the neck to be
higher from the horizontal plane than the wound in the throat. 

Entrance

Our finding, as stated in the autopsy report, that the wound low in the
back of the neck was an entrance wound is supported by Photographs Nos. 
11, 12, 38, and 39.  They show the edges of the wound to be inverted,
regular, and smooth.  At such a location and in such tissue these are the
principal characteristics of an entrance wound. 

The Size of the Entrance Wound

The autopsy report states that the wound was 7 by 4 mm. (0.275 inches by
0.137 inches); and Photographs Nos. 11, 12, 38 and 39 confirm the accuracy
of this measurement. 

Exit

The autopsy report states that the "wound presumably of exit" was that
described by Dr. Malcom O. Perry of Dallas.  This wound was used as the
site of a tracheotomy incision, and its character thus distorted. 
Photographs Nos. 1-6 inclusive, 13, 14, 26-28 inclusive, 40 and 41 show
the wound as being below the Adams apple. 

It should be noted that the morning after the autopsy, Saturday, November
23, 1963, Dr. Humes telephoned Dr. Perry at the Parkland Hospital in
Dallas.  Dr. Perry was the physician who attended President Kennedy
immediately after the shooting.  Dr. Perry advised Dr. Humes that he had
observed a missile wound below the Adams apple, and that the site of this
wound had been used as the site of the tracheotomy incision.  This
information made it clear to us that the missile which had entered the
back of the neck had exited at the site of the tracheotomy incision. 

THE HEAD WOUND

Entry

The autopsy report states that a lacerated entry wound measuring 15 by 6
mm. (0.59 by 0.24 inches) is situated in the posterior scalp approximately
2.5 cm. (1 inch) laterally to the right and slightly above the external
occipital protruberance (a bony protruberance at the back of the head). 
In non-technical language this indicates that a small wound was found in
the back of the head on the right side.  Photographs Nos.  15, 16, 42 and
43 show the location and size of the wound, and establish that the above
autopsy data were accurate.  Due to the fractures of the underlying bone
and the elevation of the scalp by manual lifting (done to permit the wound
to be photographed) the photographs show the wound to be slightly higher
than its actually measured site. 

The scalp wound shown in the photographs appears to be a laceration and
tunnel, with the actual penetration of the skin obscured by the top of the
tunnel.  From the photographs this is not recognizable as a penetrating
wound because of the slanting direction of entry.  However, as we pointed
out in the autopsy report, there was in the underlying bone a
corresponding wound through the skull which exhibited beveling of the
margins of the bone when viewed from the inner aspect of the skull.  This
is characteristic of a wound of entry in the skull. 

Exit

The autopsy report further states that there was a large irregular defect
of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone
but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions, with an
actual absence of scalp and bone measuring approximately 13 cm.  (5.12
inches) at the greatest diameter.  In non-technical language, this means
that a large section of the skull on the right side of the head was torn
away by the force of the missile.  Photographs Nos. 5-10 inclusive, 17,
18, 26-28, 32-37 inclusive, 44 and 45 portray this massive head wound, and
verify that the largest diameter was approximately 13 cm.  The report
further states that one of the fragments of the skull bone, received from
Dallas, shows a portion of a roughly circular wound presumably of exit
which exhibits beveling of the outer aspect of the bone, and the wound was
estimated to be approximately 2.5 to 3.0 cm.  (1 to 1.18 inches) in
diameter.  X-ray Nos. 4, 5 and 6 show this bone fragment and the embedded
metal fragments.  Photographs Nos. 17, 18, 44 and 45 show the other half
of the margin of the exit wound; and also show the beveling of the bone
characteristic of a wound of exit.  Photographs Nos. 44 and 45 also show
that the point of exit of the missile was much larger than the point of
entrance, being 30 mm. (1.18 inches) at its greatest diameter. 
Photographs 5-10 inclusive, 32-37 inclusive, 44 and 45 show the location
of the head wound, and verify the accuracy of the Warren Commission
drawings (Exhibits 386 and 388, Vol. XVI, pp. 977 and 984) which depict
the location of the head wound. 

NO OTHER WOUNDS

The x-ray films established that there were small metallic fragments in
the head.  However, careful examination at the autopsy, and the
photographs and x-rays taken during the autopsy, revealed no evidence of a
bullet or of a major portion of a bullet in the body of the President and
revealed no evidence of any missile wounds other than those described
above. 

SUMMARY

The photographs and x-rays corroborate our visual observations during the
autopsy and conclusively support our medical opinion as set forth in the
summary of our autopsy report. 

It was then and is now our opinion that the two missiles which struck the
President causing the neck wound and the head wound were fired from a
point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased. 

Our examination of the photographs and x-rays lasted approximately five
hours, and at its conclusion the photographs and x-rays were returned to
the Archivist of the United States. 

[signed by Humes, Boswell, and Finck]

President John F Kennedy's brain was kept for forensics...this went missing

The Kings Cross Sting was investigating the shooting of the President John F. Kennedy

The following is from Volume VII of the HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
ASSASSINATIONS.

---------------------------------------------------------------


PART III. SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF MATERIALS

      (114)  On April 22, 1965, then Senator Robert F. Kennedy
sent a letter to Dr. Burkley directing him to transfer in person
the autopsy material being kept at the White House to Mrs. Evelyn
Lincoln, the personal secretary of President Kennedy, for
safekeeping at the National Archives.  The letter also said that
Mrs. Lincoln was being instructed that the material was not to be
released to anyone without Robert Kennedy's written permission and
approval.  This demonstrates Robert Kennedy's firm control over
the disposition of the materials.

      (115)  In response to this directive, Dr. Burkley notified
the Protective Research Division of Senator Kennedy's request.
Before transferring the material, Bouck, Burkley and other Secret
Service personnel carefully inventoried all the items present. 
This was the first official inventory of these materials.

      (116)  On April 26, 1965, Burkley and Bouck transferred the
materials to Evelyn Lincoln.  A letter from Burkley to Lincoln
documenting the exchange included the inventory, which documented
that a stainless steel container 7 by 8 inches in diameter,
containing gross material was transferred.  On the last page of
the inventory, Lincoln wrote: "Received, April 26, 1965, in room
409, National Archives, Washington, D.C., from Dr. Burkley and
Robert Bouck."  At the time of the transfer, the items now
missing, which are those enumerated under item No. 9 of the
inventory, were allegedly present. 

      (117)  In his testimony before the committee, Bouck stated
that he is quite positive all the autopsy-related material that
came into his possession was given to Mrs. Lincoln at the time of
the 1965 transfer. He also stated that he was uncertain whether
Dr. Burkley had custody of the brain, but that if the brain was
part of the autopsy materials in the custody of the Secret
Service, it was transported to the National Archives. 

      (118)  Dr. Burkley clarified this issue, saying that the
stainless steel container mentioned in the inventory held the
brain and that he saw the bucket in April 1965, when he and Bouck
transferred the autopsy materials to Lincoln. Since this transfer,
Dr. Burkley maintains that he has had no further knowledge of or
association with these materials. 

      (119)  Mrs. Lincoln was not an employee of the National
Archives during this period; she was only assisting in the
transfer of the official papers and items of President Kennedy and
in this capacity occupied an office in the National Archives. 
Consequently, although the autopsy materials were in the confines
of the building the National Archives did not have authority or
responsibility for them. 

      (120)  The next documented transaction involving the
materials transferred to Mrs. Lincoln occurred on October 29,
1966, when Mr. Burke Marshall, on behalf of the executors of the
John F. Kennedy estate, sent a letter to Lawson B. Knott, the
Administrator of the General Services Administration, outlining
an agreement for formal transfer of materials related to the
autopsy to the U.S. Government. 

      (121)  Pursuant to this agreement, which constituted a deed
of gift, Burke Marshall met with various representatives of the
Government on October 31, 1966, in room 6-W-3 of the National
Archives to transfer formally the materials related to the
autopsy.  These materials were contained in a locked footlocker
for which Ms. Angela Novello, the personal secretary to Robert F.
Kennedy, produced a key. Others in attendance for the transfer
were William H. Brewster, special assistant to the general counsel
GSA, who unlocked and opened the footlocker; Harold F. Reis,
executive assistant to the Attorney General Robert H. Bahruer
Archivist of the United States; Herman Kahn, Assistant Archivist
for Presidential libraries and James Rhoads, the Deputy Archivist
of the United States.  After Brewster opened the footlocker,
Marshall and Novello departed. 

      (122) Bahmer, Reis, Rhoads, Kahn, and Brewster then removed
all the material from the footlocker and inspected it.  The
footlocker contained a carbon copy of the letter from Robert F.
Kennedy to Burkley on April 22, 1965, and the original letter from
Burkley to Lincoln on April 26, 1965, which also listed on the
itemized inventory list the materials present at that transfer. 

      (123)  Upon inspection, the officials realized that the
footlocker did not contain any of the material listed under item
No. 9 of the inventory.  This material included:

      1 plastic box, 9 by 6 1/2 by 1 inches, paraffin blocks of
            tissue sections.
      1 plastic box containing paraffin blocks of tissue sections
            plus 35 slides.
      A third box containing 84 slides.
      1 stainless steel container, 7 by 8 inches in diameter,
            containing gross material.
      3 wooden boxes, each 7 by 3 1/2 by 1 1/4 inches, containing
            58 slides of blood smears taken at various times
            during President Kennedy's lifetime. 
      
      (124) The last date these items were accounted for was the
April 26, 1965 transfer of the autopsy materials to Lincoln.

      (125) The committee contacted Lincoln to determine what
happened to the materials in item No. 9, the missing materials,
following their documented transfer to her in April 1965. She
informed the committee of an interview and subsequent affidavit
that Burkley and Bouck brought her some materials in the spring
of 1965 that Dr. Burkley identified as being related to the
autopsy of the President.  She recalled that these materials
arrived in a box or boxes, and that within 1 day she obtained a
flat trunk or footlocker from the Archives personnel to which she
transferred the materials.  She added that these materials were
kept in a security room in her office in the National Archives. 

      (126)  Mrs. Lincoln stated that within approximately 1
month, Robert F. Kennedy telephoned her and informed her that he
was sending Angela Novello, his personal secretary, to move the
footlocker that Dr. Burkley had transferred.  She believed they
wanted the materials moved to another part of the Archives,
presumably where Robert F. Kennedy was storing other materials. 
Angela Novello soon came to her office with Herman Kahn, Assistant
Archivist for Presidential Libraries, and one or more of his
deputies, to take the trunk. Lincoln believes she had Novello sign
a receipt for the materials, which was Lincoln's routine practice,
but she is uncertain where it would be today. Lincoln also said
that she gave Novello both keys to the trunk.  She added that the
trunk was never opened while it was in her office. 

      (127) Lincoln had no further direct contact with the
material, but did state that after the assassination of Robert
Kennedy, she began to wonder what happened to it.  Consequently,
she contacted Kenneth O'Donnell, former aide to President Kennedy,
to make sure the family was aware of its existence. Mrs. Lincoln
said it was her understanding that Mr. O'Donnell then called
Senator Edward Kennedy, subsequently calling her back to tell her
everything was under control. 

      (128)  Because of Lincoln's statement and other reports that
Novello produced the key to the footlocker in December 1966, the
committee interviewed Novello and also obtained an affidavit.  She
informed the committee that she had no recollection of handling
a footlocker, of possessing a key or keys to such a footlocker,
or of handling any of the autopsy materials. 

      (129)  The committee also contacted Burke Marshall and
Senator Edward Kennedy to determine their knowledge of the missing
materials. Senator Kennedy indicated that he did not know what
happened to the materials, or who last had custody of them. 

      (130)  While Burke Marshall also maintained that he had no
actual knowledge of the disposition of the materials, he said it
was his speculative opinion that Robert Kennedy obtained and
disposed of these materials himself, without informing anyone
else. Marshall said Robert Kennedy was concerned that these
materials would be placed on public display in future years in an
institution such as the Smithsonian and wished to dispose of them
to eliminate such a possibility. Marshall emphasized that he does
not believe anyone other than Robert Kennedy would have known what
happened to the materials and is certain that obtaining or
locating these materials is no longer possible. 

      (131)  Since Marshall offered the opinion without any
verification, the committee continued to search for the missing
materials and to examine any issue related to the autopsy
materials in general. The committee interviewed Harold F. Reis,
Executive Assistant to the Attorney General who attended the 1966
transfer of the autopsy materials to the National Archives, as
well as Ramsey Clark, the Attorney General in 1966, to determine
their knowledge of the missing materials. Clark stated that he
initiated the action to acquire the materials transferred in the
October 1966 deed of gift pursuant to Public Law 89-318, enacted
on November 2, 1965.  This law provided that the acquisition by
the United States of certain items of evidence pertaining to the
assassination of President Kennedy had to be completed within the
year.  When Clark learned the time limit for obtaining the
evidence was approaching, he contacted Robert Kennedy, who was not
sympathetic to the Government's need to acquire the autopsy
material. Rather heated negotiations ensued between Clark and
Burke Marshall, the Kennedy family representative, which resulted
in the October 29, 1966 agreement constituting the deed of gift.
Clark stated that he had only requested transfer of the autopsy
photographs and X-rays and did not recall any discussions with
Robert Kennedy about any other autopsy materials. Consequently,
the brain and the tissue segments were not an issue in the
procedures and negotiations during the October 1966 transfer. The
committee could not ascertain if the physical specimens were ever
discussed in the negotiations, what type of approval Robert
Kennedy gave for transforming the materials, or what procedure was
employed to separate the photographs and X-rays from the material
now missing.

      (132)  The next reference to the missing materials and the
other autopsy materials in the custody of the National Archives
occurred in 1968. Ramsey Clark, the Attorney. General, arranged
for an independent review of the autopsy evidence by a group of
pathologists-commonly referred to as the Clark panel--as a result
of growing skepticism concerning the assassination and Warren
Commission investigation.  In a memorandum to the files on
February 13,1969, Thomas J. Kelley, the Assistant Director of the
Secret Service, reflected on the report of the Clark panel, in
which the physicians had commented that the materials they
reviewed were included on the inventory list that accompanied the
letter from Burkley to Lincoln on April 26, 1965.  Kelley asserted
that this reference to the autopsy materials by the Clark panel
physicians was phrased in this manner because the doctors did not
have access to the materials listed as comprising item No. 9 on
the inventory list.  The memorandum also noted that after
discovering in October 1966 that these items were missing,
Archives personnel conducted a careful search but could not
determine their location. 

      (133)  After discussing the "missing" materials with Harry
R. Van Cleve, Jr., General Counsel to the General Services
Administration, and agreeing that they should attempt to ascertain
their disposition, Kelley said he would contact Dr. Burkley. 
Kelley's memorandum related the following:

            [T]hat after turning all of this material over
      to Mrs. Lincoln [on April 26] [Burkley] never saw nor
      heard anything about its disposition, and that he was
      surprised to hear that it was not with the remainder
      of the material he turned over to Mrs. Lincoln. After
      discussing the problem, Dr. Burkley offered to call
      Mrs. Lincoln. He did this in my presence and Mrs.
      Lincoln told him that all of the material he turned
      over to her was placed in a trunk or footlocker; that
      it was locked, and that to her knowledge it was never
      opened nor the contents disturbed by her. She said,
      however, that sometime after its receipt all of the
      material concerning the assassination, with which she
      was working, was turned over to Angie Novello, Robert
      Kennedy's secretary. 
      
      (134)  The memorandum further related that Dr. Burkley told
Kelley that Henry Giordano, a former White House driver, was
working with Lincoln at the time of the transfer and was then
employed in Senator Kennedy's office.                           
    
      (135)  After contacting Van Cleve again and advising him of
the contact with Burkley, Kelley related the following:

      I * * * further advised him that, in my opinion, we
      should not contact Giordano. He agreed with this and
      stated he felt that the inquiry would have to remain
      as it now stands; that perhaps we were borrowing
      trouble in exploring it any further, and assured me
      that the Archivist had made a thorough search of all
      of the material on hand to make sure that the
      material in question had not been received by the
      Archivist at another time or under other
      circumstances.

      (136)  Thus, the General Services Administration, which
oversees the National Archives, decided not to pursue the search
for the missing materials any further. The officials involved were
apparently satisfied with knowing that the National Archives did
not have any responsibility in their disappearance and did not
wish to instigate trouble by pursuing any investigation.

      (137)  In 1971, a controversy, not directly involving the
missing materials, arose over the chain of custody of the autopsy
materials being stored in the National Archives and who should
have access to them.  John Nichols, a pathologist, began court
proceedings in the Federal courts, challenging the agreement of
October 29, 1966, which contains several restrictions limiting
public access to the autopsy materials.  An issue raised by the
suit was whether the Kennedy family ever had any legal right to
control the autopsy materials at any time and, consequently,
whether any deed of gift from the family which contained
restrictions limiting public access could be valid.

      (138)  Both the Federal District Court and the Tenth Circuit
Court of Appeals upheld the agreement.  The Court of appeals
stated that the "letter of agreement of October 29, 1966 is a
valid, binding agreement and that the restrictions imposed thereby
are reasonable." 

      (139)  The legal department of the Congressional Research
Service analyzed the Nichols case for the committee. The CRS noted
that while the "Nichols decision represents only the determination
of one circuit until the question is addressed elsewhere it would
seem to represent 'the state of the law?'"  The CRS stated that
until the April 1965 transfer, the autopsy materials were "in
Government hands with no intervening transfer of like having
occurred." It then observed:

            At this point, however, as suggested in the
      November 4, 1966, Treasury Department memorandum * *
      * the transfer to the Kennedy family may have been
      interpreted by some as indication of U.S. recognition
      of Kennedy family rights in the items so transferred.
      At some point thereafter, either upon delivery to the
      Archives in 1965 or upon acceptance of the letter of
      gift of October 1966, the materials may be regarded
      as having been either (1) returned to their rightful
      owner, the United States Government, or (2) donated
      by properly executed deed of gift to the United
      States, thereby resulting in relinquishment of
      Kennedy family rights in them. 

      (140)  The CRS ended by saying that two conclusions are
irrefutable. First, the autopsy photographs and X-rays are now the
property of the United States; and second, the letter of agreement
between the Government and the Kennedy family remains enforceable. 
  
      (141)  The committee also interviewed Archives personnel to
ascertain their present position regarding the missing materials.
In response to committee requests, Trudy H. Peterson, Assistant
to the Deputy Archivist of the United States, prepared a written
statement.  In this document, Peterson noted that just prior to
the October 1966 transfer of the materials to the Archives, the
locked footlocker was brought to the National Archives building,
although she does not specify from where.  This suggests that
after Novello allegedly took the material from the office of Mrs.
Lincoln, it may have been moved from the Archives building as
opposed to only being moved to another part of the building as
Mrs. Lincoln speculated.) Peterson also says that Robert Bahmer,
the Archivist of the United States in 1966, believed that sometime
before the transfer of the materials as a gift, Herman Kahn, the
Assistant Archivist for Presidential Libraries supervised the
acceptance of the footlocker, along with several other boxes of
Robert Kennedy's materials, for courtesy storage in vault 6-W-3.
Peterson further stated that Herman Kahn, now dead, may have been
the only Archives employee present for the transfer and that no
record of delivery is available. 

      (142)  In response to a subsequent committee inquiry
concerning Herman Kahn, Peterson stated that Kahn dealt with
members and representatives of the Kennedy family during 1964-68
on numerous issues, including the courtesy storage of Robert
Kennedy materials.  He was present for the October 1966 transfer
and, according to Marion Johnson of the National Archives, was one
of the original holders of the combination to the safe cabinet in
which the autopsy material was stored.  Kahn also allegedly
accompanied Novello when Novello apparently removed the autopsy
materials from the office of Lincoln. 

      (143)  In response to another committee request, the Office
of Presidential Libraries conducted a thorough but unsuccessful
search of the office files for 1965-66 for documentation regarding
the transfer of the autopsy materials to the physical custody of
the Archives.  Additionally, two members of the Presidential
Libraries staff who worked under Herman Kahn at that time stated
in interviews and affidavits that they could not recall any
pertinent details concerning the autopsy materials. The staff of
the John F. Kennedy Library also reviewed their files, with
negative results.  Further, one Archives employee, Marion Johnson,
Archivist, Office of the National Archives, National Archives and
Records Service, remembered that he became aware of the footlocker
containing the autopsy materials shortly before the October 31,
1966 transfer, but was not aware of its contents until after the
transfer.  Additionally, at the request of the committee, on July
18, 1978, Clarence Lyons and Trudy Peterson conducted a thorough
but unsuccessful search of the security storage vault for the
tissue sections and the container of gross material. 

      (144)  Given these efforts and findings, it appears that
Kahn and Novello removed the autopsy material from the office of
Mrs. Lincoln shortly after April 1965. The material was then
either kept in another part of the Archives, probably a Robert
Kennedy courtesy storage area, or removed from the building to a
location designated by Robert Kennedy. The circumstantial evidence
would seem to indicate that Robert Kennedy then decided to retain
possession of all physical specimen evidence and transferred only
the autopsy photographs and X-rays to the Government. The
committee has not been able to verify how or when the item No. 9
materials were removed from the other autopsy materials or what
subsequently happened to them.
      
PART IV. ADDITIONAL EFFORTS TO ACQUIRE THE MISSING MATERIALS
      
      (145)  After failing to determine the fate of the missing
materials by tracing that chain of custody, the committee
investigated the possibility that someone had placed the missing
autopsy items all of which were physical specimens taken from the
body of President Kennedy, in the final grave on reinterment, on
March 14, 1967.  The persons contacted who were present for the
ceremony could not recall any additional package or material being
placed in the grave. The Superintendent of Arlington National
Cemetery from 1951 to 1972 John Metzler, informed the committee
that he attended the burial of the President and the reinterment. 
At the time of burial, the coffin was placed in a "Wilbur" vault,
which has a lid and vault that operate on a tongue and groove
system. Tar is placed on the points of contact of the grooves to
insure a tight fit and permanent seal. Metzler witnessed the
lowering of the lid and the sealing of the vault, and believed
that the only method to open the vault subsequently would be to
break the lid on the main portion of the vault. 

      (146)  Metzler supervised the reinterment in 1967 and was
present at all phases of the transfer: from the opening of the old
site through the transfer by crane of the vault to the closing of
the new site Metzler said there was no way anyone could have
placed anything in the coffin or vault during the transfer without
his seeing it.  Metzler also said that nothing could have been
placed in the vault since 1963 because there was no indication of
damage to the vault indicating any disturbance.  Metzler stated
further that no one placed anything in the new or old gravesite
besides the vault.  

      (147)  In the course of its investigation the committee
contacted numerous other people in an unsuccessful attempt to
locate the missing materials. They included:

      1. Dr. James J. Humes, autopsy pathologist;
      2. George Dalton, former White House aide and assistant to
            Mrs. Lincoln at the National Archives;
      3. Edith Duncan, administrative assistant to Robert Bouck,
            Protective Research Section, Secret Service;
      4. Joseph D. Giordano, former White House aide and
            assistant to Mrs. Lincoln at the National Archives;
      5. Frank Mankiewicz, former assistant to Robert F. Kennedy;
      6. Harry Van Cleve, former General Counsel of the General
            Services Administration;
      7. Lawrence O'Brien, former aide to President Kennedy;
      8. David Powers, former aide to President Kennedy;
      9. Ken Fienberg, aide to Senator Edward Kennedy;
      10. P.J. Costanzo, Superintendent of Arlington National
            Cemetery;
      11. Dr. James Boswell, autopsy pathologist;
      12. Dr. Pierre Finck, autopsy pathologist;
      13. Adm. George Galloway, commanding officer of the
            National Naval Medical Center in 1963;
      14. Capt. John H. Stover, commanding officer of the U.S.
            Naval  Medical School in 1963;
      15. Bruce Bromley, former Justice Department attorney who
            was called briefly from private practice to serve as
            counsel to the Clark panel;
      16. Carl Eardley, former Justice Department official;
      17. Harold Reis, former Justice Department official;
      18. Sol Lindenbaum, former Justice Department official;
      19. National Archives personnel; and
      20. Thomas J. Kelley, Assistant Director of the U.S. Secret
            Service.

PART V. CONCLUSIONS
 
      (148)  Despite these efforts, the committee was not able to
determine precisely what happened to the missing materials. The
evidence indicates that the materials were not buried with the
body at reinterment. It seems apparent that Angela Novello did
remove the footlocker containing to the materials from the office
of Mrs. Lincoln at the direction of Robert Kennedy, and that
Herman Kahn had knowledge of this transaction.  After the removal
from Lincoln's office, Robert Kennedy most likely acquired
possession of or at least personal control over these materials. 
Burke Marshall's opinion that Robert Kennedy obtained and disposed
of these items himself to prevent any future public display
supports this theory.

      (149)   There are least two possible reasons why Robert
Kennedy would not have retained the autopsy photographs and
X-rays.  First, the only materials retained were physical
specimens from the  body of his brother: Tissue sections, blood
smear slides, and the container of gross material.  He may have
understandably felt more strongly about preventing the misuse of
these physical materials than the photographs and X-rays.  Second,
the Justice Department under Ramsey Clark pushed hard to acquire
the photographs and X-rays but did not request the physical
materials. Even if Robert Kennedy had wished to prevent the
release of all the autopsy materials, he was not in a position to
do so when confronted with Justice Department demands.

      (150)   Consequently, although the committee has not been
able to uncover any direct evidence of the fate of the missing
materials, circumstantial evidence tends to show that Robert
Kennedy either destroyed these materials or otherwise rendered
them inaccessible.

Fatal wounding of President John F Kennedy 1968 Panel review The Kings Cross Sting is investigating

1968 Panel Review of Photographs, X-Ray Films,
Documents and Other Evidence Pertaining to the
Fatal Wounding of President John E Kennedy on
November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas




At the request of The Honorable Ramsay Clark, Attorney General of
the United States, four physicians (hereafter sometimes referred
to as The Panel) met in Washington, DC on February 26 and 27 to
examine various photographs, X-ray films documents and other
evidence pertaining to the death of President Kennedy, and to
evaluate their significance in relation to the medical
conclusions recorded in the Autopsy Report on the body of
President Kennedy signed by Commander J. J. Humes, Medical Corps,
US Navy; Commander J. Thornton Boswell, Medical Corps, US Navy
and Lt. Col. Pierre A. Finck, Medical Corps, US Army and in the
Supplemental Report signed by Commander Humes.

     These appear in the Warren Commission Report at pages 538 to
545.

     The four physicians constituting The Panel were:

     1) Carnes, William H., MD, Professor of Pathology,
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, Member of Medical
Examiner's Commission, State of Utah, nominated by Dr. J. E.
Wallace Sterling, President of Stanford University.

     2) Fisher, Russell S., MD, Professor of Forensic Pathology,
University of Maryland and Chief Medical Examiner of the State of
Maryland, Baltimore, MD, nominated by Dr. Oscar B. Hunter, Jr.,
President of the College of American Pathologists.

     3) Morgan, Russell H., MD, Professor of Radiology, School of
Medicine and Professor of Radiological Sciences, School of
Hygiene and Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University,
Baltimore, MD, nominated by Dr. Lincoln Gordon, President of The
Johns Hopkins University.

     4) Mortiz, Alan R., MD, Professor of Pathology, Case Western
Reserve University, Cleveland, OH and former Professor of
Forensic Medicine, Harvard University, nominated by Dr. John A.
Hannah, President of Michigan State University.

     Bruce Bromley, a member of the New York Bar who had been
nominated by the President of the American Bar Association and
thereafter requested by the Attorney General to act as legal
counsel to The Panel, was present throughout The Panel's
examination of the exhibits and collaborated with The Panel in
the preparation of this report.

     No one of the undersigned has had any previous connection
with prior investigations of, or reports on this matter, and each
has acted with complete and unbiased independence, free of
preconceived views as to the correctness of the medical
conclusions reached in the 1963 Autopsy report and Supplementary
Report.

PREVIOUS REPORTS

     The Autopsy Report stated that X-rays had been made of the
entire body of the deceased.  The Panel's inventory disclosed
X-ray films of the entire body except for the lower arms, wrists
and hands and the lower legs, ankles and feet.

     The Autopsy Report also described the decedent's wounds as
follows:

     "The fatal missile entered the skull above and to the right
of the external occipital protuberance. A portion of the
projectile traversed the cranial cavity in a posterior-anterior
direction (see lateral skull roentgenograms) depositing minute
particles along its path. A portion of the projectile made its
exit through the parietal bone on the right carrying with it
portions of cerebrum, skull and scalp.  The two wounds of the
skull combined with the force of the missile produced extensive
fragmentation of the skull, laceration of the superior sagittal
sinus and of the right cerebral hemisphere.

     The other missile entered the right superior posterior
thorax above the scapula and traversed the soft tissues of the
suprascapular and the supraclavicular portions of the base of the
right side of the neck. This missile produced contusions of the
right apical parietal pleura and of the apical portion of the
right upper lobe of the lung.  The missile contused the strap
muscles of the right side of the neck, damaged the trachea and
made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck. As far as
can be ascertained, this missile struck no bony structures in its
path through the body.

     In addition, it is our opinion that the wound of the skull
produced such extensive damage to the brain as to preclude the
possibility of the deceased surviving this injury."

     The medical conclusions of the Warren Commission Report (p.
19) concerning President Kennedy's wounds are as follows:         

     "The nature of the bullet wounds suffered by President
Kennedy and the location of the car at the time of the shots
establish that the bullets were fired from above and behind the
Presidential limousine, striking the President as follows:

     President Kennedy was first struck by a bullet which entered
at the back of his neck and exited through the lower front
portion of his neck, causing a wound which would not necessarily
have been lethal. The President was struck a second time by a
bullet which entered the right rear portion of his head, causing
a massive and fatal wound."


INVENTORY OF MATERIAL EXAMINED

Black and White and Colored Prints and transparencies

Head viewed from above

#5(9JB), 8(7JB), 13(6JB), 16(10JB), 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37

Head viewed from right and above to include part of face, neck,
shoulder and upper chest

#3(14JB), 4(13JB), 11(6JB), 12(5JB), 26, 27, 28, 40, 41

Head and neck viewed from left side
#6(3JB), 15(4JB), 17(2JB), 18(1JB), 29, 30, 31

Head viewed from behind
#7(16JB), 14(15JB), 42, 43

Cranial cavity with brain removed viewed from above and in front
#1(18JB), 2(17JB), 44, 45

Back of body including neck
#9(11JB), 10(12JB), 38, 39

Brain viewed from above
#50, 51, 52

brain viewed from below
#46, 47, 48, 49

     The black and white and color negatives corresponding to the
above were present and there were also seven black and white
negatives of the brain without corresponding prints. These were
numbered 19 through 25(JTB) and appeared to represent the same
views as #46 through 52.  All of the above were listed in a
memorandum of transfer, located in the National Archives, and
dated Apr. 26, 1965.

X-ray Films

     (The films bore the number 21296 and an inscription
indicating that they have been made at the US Naval Hospital,
Bethesda, MD on 11/22/63.)

Skull, A-P view
#1

Skull, left lateral
#2,3

Skull, fragments of
#4, 5, 6

Thoracolumbar region, A-P view
#7, 11

Chests, A-P view
#9

Right hemithorax, shoulder and upper arm, A-P view
#8

Left hemithorax, shoulder and upper arm, A-P view
#10

Pelvis, A-P view
#13

Lower femurs and knees, A-P view
#12

Upper legs, A-P view
#14


Bullets

CE 399--A whole bullet
CE 567--Portion of nose of a bullet
CE 569--Portion of base segment of a bullet
CE 840--3 fragments of lead

Motion Picture Films

CE 904--Zapruder film
CE 905--Nix film
CE 906--Muchmore film

Series of single frames (215 through 334) from Zapruder film

Clothing
CE 393--Suit coat
CE 394--Shirt
CE 395--Neck tie

Documents

     The Warren Commission's Report and the accompanying volumes
of Exhibits and Hearings. (Study of these Documents was limited
to those portions deemed pertinent by The Panel.)

EXAMINATION OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF HEAD

     Photographs 7, 14, 42, and 43 show the back of the head, the
contours of which have been grossly distorted by extensive
fragmentation of the underlying calvarium.  There is an
elliptical penetrating wound of the scalp situated near the
midline and high above the hairline. The position of this wound
corresponds to the hole in the skull seen in the lateral X-ray
film #2. (See description of X-ray films.) The long axis of this
wound corresponds to the long axis of the skull. The wound was
judged to be approximately six millimeters wide and 15
millimeters long. The margin of this wound shows an ill-defined
zone of abrasion.

     Photographs 5, 8, 13, 16, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37 show the
top of the head with multiple gaping irregularly stellate
lacerations of the scalp over the right parietal, temporal and
frontal regions.

     Photographs 1, 2, 44 and 45 show the frontal region of the
skull and a portion of the internal aspect of the back of the
skull. Due to lack of contrast of structures portrayed and lack
of clarity of detail in these photographs, the only conclusion
reached by The Panel from study of this series was that there was
no existing bullet defect in the supraorbital region of the
skull.

     Photographs 46, 47, 48 and 49 are of the inferior aspect of
the brain and show extensive deformation with laceration and
fragmentation of the right cerebral hemisphere. Irregularly
shaped areas of contusion with minor loss of cortex are seen on
the inferior surface of the first left temporal convolution. The
orbital gyri on the left show contusion with some underlying loss
of cortex.  The sylvian fissure on the right side has been
opened, revealing a rolled-up mass of arachnoid and blood clot
which is dark brown to black in color.  The mid-temporal region
is depressed and its surface lacerated. The peduncles have been
lacerated, probably incident to the removal of the contents from
the cranium.

     Photographs 50, 51 and 52 show the superior aspect of the
brain.  The left cerebral hemisphere is covered by a
generally-intact arachnoid with evidence of subarachnoid
hemorrhage especially over the parietal and frontal gyri and in
the sulci.  The right cerebral hemisphere is extensively
lacerated.  It is transected by a broad canal running generally
in a posteroanterior direction and to the right of the midline.
Much of the roof of this canal is missing, as are most of the
overlying frontal and parietal gyri.  In the central portion of
its base, there can be seen a gray-brown, rectangular structure
measuring approximately 13 x 20 mm.  Its identity cannot be
established by The Panel.  In addition to the superficial and
deep cortical destruction, it can be seen that the corpus
callosum is widely torn in the midline.

     These findings indicate that the back of the head was struck
by a single bullet travelling at high velocity, the major portion
of which passed forward through the right cerebral hemisphere,
and which produced an explosive type of fragmentation of the
skull and laceration of the scalp. The appearance of the entrance
wound in the scalp is consistent with its having been produced by
a bullet similar to that of exhibit CE 399. The photographs do
not disclose where this bullet emerged from the head although
those showing the interior of the cranium with the brain removed
indicate that it did not emerge from the supraorbital region.
Additional information regarding the course of the bullet is
presented in the discussion of the X-ray films.

     Examination of photographs of anterior and posterior views
of thorax, and anterior, posterior and lateral views of neck
(Photographs 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 17, 18, 26, 27, 28, 29,
30, 31, 38, 39, 40, 41).

     There is an elliptical penetrating wound of the skin of the
back located approximately 15 cm. medial to the right acromial
process, 5 cm. lateral to the mid-dorsal line and 14 cm. below
the right mastoid process. This wound lies approximately 5.5 cm.
below a transverse fold in the skin of the neck. This fold can
also be seen in a lateral view of the neck which shows an
anterior tracheotomy wound. This view makes it possible to
compare the levels of these two wounds in relation to that of the
horizontal plane of the body.

     A well defined zone of discoloration of the edge of the back
wound, most pronounced on its upper and outer margins, identifies
it as having the characteristics of the entrance wound of a
bullet. The wound with its marginal abrasion measures
approximately 7 mm. in width by 10 mm. in length. The dimensions
of this cutaneous wound are consistent with those of a wound
produced by a bullet similar to that which constitutes exhibit CE
399.

     At the site of and above the tracheotomy incision in the
front of the neck, there can be identified the upper half of the
circumference of a circular cutaneous wound the appearance of
which is characteristic of that of the exit wound of a bullet. 
The lower half of this circular wound is obscured by the
surgically produced tracheotomy incision which transects it. The
center of the circular wound is situated approximately 9 cm.
below the transverse fold in the skin of the neck described in a
preceding paragraph.  This indicates that the bullet which
produced the two wounds followed a course downward and to the
left in its passage through the body.


EXAMINATION OF X-RAY FILMS

     The films submitted included: an anteroposterior film of the
skull (#1), two left lateral views of the skull taken in slightly
different projections (#2 and 3), three views of a group of three
separate bony fragments from the skull (#4, 5 and 6), two
anteroposterior views of the thoracolumbar region of the trunk
(#7 and 11), one anteroposterior view of the right hemithorax,
shoulder and upper arm (#8), one anteroposterior view of the
chest (#9), one anteroposterior view of the left hemithorax,
shoulder and upper arm (#10), one anteroposterior view of the
lower femurs and knees (#12), one anteroposterior view of the
pelvis (#13) and one anteroposterior view of the upper legs
(#14).

Skull

     There are multiple fractures of the bones of the calvarium
bilaterally. These fractures extend into the base of the skull
and involve the floor of the anterior fossa on the right side as
well as the middle fossa in the midline. With respect to the
right frontoparietal region of the skull, the traumatic damage is
particularly severe with extensive fragmentation of the bony
structures from the midline of the frontal bone anteriorly to the
vicinity of the posterior margin of the parietal bone behind
Above the fragmentation extends approximately 25 mm. across the
midline to involve adjacent portions of the left parietal bone;
below, the changes extend into the right temporal bone.
Throughout this region, many of the bony pieces have bean
displaced outward; several pieces are missing.

     Distributed through the right cerebral hemisphere are
numerous small, irregular metallic fragments most of which are
less than 1 mm. in maximum dimension. The majority of these
fragments lie anteriorly and superiorly. None can be visualized
on the left side of the brain and none below a horizontal plane
through the floor of the anterior fossa of the skull.

     On one of the lateral films of the skull (#2), a hole
measuring approximately 8 mm. in diameter on the outer surface of
the skull and as much as 20 mm. on the internal surface can be
seen in profile approximately 100 mm. above the external
occipital protuberance. The bone of the lower edge of the hole is
depressed. Also there is, embedded in the outer table of the
skull close to the lower edge of the hole, a large metallic
fragment which on the anteroposterior film (#1) lies 25 mm. to
the right of the midline. This fragment as seen in the latter
film is round and measures 6.5 mm in diameter immediately
adjacent to the hole on the internal surface of the skull, there
is localized elevation of the soft tissues. Small fragments of
bone lie within portions of these tissues and within the hole
itself.  These changes are consistent with an entrance wound of
the skull produced by a bullet similar to that of exhibit CE 399.

     The metallic fragments visualized within the right cerebral
hemisphere fall into two groups. One group consists of relatively
large fragments, more or less randomly distributed. The second
group consists of finely divided fragments, distributed in a
posteroanterior direction in a region 45 mm. long and 8 mm. wide.
As seen on lateral film #2, this formation overlies the position
of the coronal suture; its long axis, if extended posteriorly,
passes through the above-mentioned hole. It appears to end
anteriorly immediately below the badly fragmented frontal and
parietal bones just anterior to the region of the coronal suture.

     The foregoing observations indicate that the decedent's head
was struck from behind a single projectile. It entered the
occipital region 25 mm to the right of the midline and 100 mm.
above the external occipital protuberance. The projectile
fragmented on entering the skull, one major section leaving a
trail of fine metallic debris as it passed forward and laterally
to explosively fracture the right frontal and parietal bones as
it emerged from the head.

     In addition to the foregoing, it is noteworthy that there is
no evidence of projectile fragments in the left cerebral tissues
or in the right cerebral hemisphere below a horizontal plane
passing through the floor of the anterior fossa of the skull.
Also, although the fractures of the calvarium extend to the left
of the midline and into the anterior and middle fossa of the
skull, no bony defect, such as one created by a projectile either
entering or leaving the head, is seen in the calvarium to the
left of the midline or in the base of the skull. Hence, it is not
reasonable to postulate that a projectile passed through the head
in a direction other than that described above.

     Of further note, when the X-ray films of the skull were
presented to The Panel, film #1 had been damaged in two small
regions by what appears to be the heat from a spotlight. Also, on
film #2, a pair of converging pencil lines had been drawn on the
film. Neither of these artifacts interfered with the
interpretation of the films.

Neck Region

     Films #8, 9 and 10 allowed visualization of the lower neck.
Subcutaneous emphysema is present just to the right of the
cervical spine immediately above the apex of the right lung.
Also, several, small metallic fragments are present in this
region. There is no evidence of fracture of either scapula or of
the clavicles, or of the ribs or of any of the cervical and
thoracic vertebrae.

     The foregoing observations indicate that the pathway of the
projectile involving the neck was confined to a region to the
right of she spine and superior to a plane passing through the
upper margin of the right scapula, the apex of the right lung and
the right clavicle. Any other pathway would have almost certainly
fractured one or more bones of the right shoulder girdle and
thorax.

Other Regions Studied
     No bullets or fragments of bullets are demonstrated in
X-rayed portions of the body other than those described above. On
film #13, a small round opaque structure a little more than 1 mm.
in diameter, is visible just to the right of the midline at the
level of the sacral segment of the spine. Its smooth
characteristics are not similar to those of the projectile
fragments seen in the X-rays of the skull and neck.

EXAMINATION OF THE CLOTHING

Suit Coat (CE 393)

     A ragged oval hole about 15 mm. long (vertically) is located
5 cm. to the right of the midline in the back of the coat at a
point about 12 cm. below the upper edge of the coal collar. A
smaller ragged hole, which is located near the midline and about
4 cm. below the upper edge of the collar, does not overlie any
corresponding damage to the shirt or skin and appears to be
unrelated to the wounds or their causation.

Shirt (CE 394)

     A ragged hole about 10 mm. long vertically and corresponding
to the first one described in the coat, is located 2.5 cm. to the
right of the midline in the back of the shirt at a point 14 cm.
below the upper edge of the collar. Two linear holes 15 mm. long
are found in the overlapping hems of the front of the shirt in a
position corresponding to the place where the knot of the necktie
would normally be.

Tie (CE 395)

     In the front component of the knot of the tie in the outer
layer of fabric, a ragged tear about 5 mm. in maximum diameter is
located 2.5 cm. below the upper edge of the knot and to the left
of the midline.


DISCUSSION

     The information disclosed by the joint examination of the
foregoing exhibits by the members of The Panel supports the
following conclusions;

     The decedent was wounded by two bullets, both of which
entered his body from behind.

     One bullet struck the back of the decedent's head well above
the external occipital protuberance. Based upon the observation
that he was leaning forward with his head turned obliquely to the
left when this bullet struck, the photographs and X-rays indicate
that it came from a site above and slightly to his right.  This
bullet fragmented after entering the cranium, one major piece of
it passing forward and laterally to produce an explosive fracture
of the right side of the skull as it emerged from the head.

     The absence of metallic fragments in the left cerebral
hemisphere or below the level of the frontal fossa on the right
side together with the absence of any holes in it  the skull to
the left of the midline or in its base and the absence of any
penetrating injury of the left hemisphere, eliminate with
reasonable certainty the possibility of a projectile having
passed through the head in any direction other than from back to
front as described in preceding sections of this report.

     The other bullet struck the decedent's back at the right
side of the base of the neck between the shoulder and spine and
emerged from the front of his neck near the midline. The
possibility that this bullet might have followed a pathway other
than one passing through the site of the tracheotomy wound was
considered. No evidence for this was found. There is a track
between the two cutaneous wounds as indicated by subcutaneous
emphysema and small metallic fragments on the X-rays and the
contusion of the apex of the right lung and laceration of the
trachea described in the Autopsy Report. In addition, any path
other than one between the two cutaneous wounds would almost
surely have been intercepted by bone and the X-ray films show no
bony damage in the thorax or neck.

     The possibility that the path of the bullet through the neck
might have been more satisfactorily explored by the insertion of
a finger or probe was considered. Obviously the cutaneous wound
in the back was too small to permit the insertion of a finger.
The insertion of a metal probe would have carried the risk of
creating a false passage in part, because of the changed
relationship of muscles at the time of autopsy and in part
because of the existence of postmortem rigidity. Although the
precise path of the bullet could undoubtedly have been
demonstrated by complete dissection of the soft tissue between
the two cutaneous wounds, there is no reason to believe that the
information disclosed thereby would alter significantly the
conclusions expressed in this report.
                                
                             SUMMARY

     Examination of the clothing and of the photographs and X-
rays taken at autopsy reveal that President Kennedy was struck by
two bullets fired from above and behind him, one of which
traversed the base of the neck on the right side without striking
bone and the other of which entered the skull from behind and
exploded its right side.

     The photographs and X-rays discussed herein support the
above-quoted portions of the original Autopsy Report and the
above-quoted medical concludions of the Warren Commission Report.

WILLIAM H. CARNES, MD
RUSSELL S. FISHER, MD
RUSSELL H. MORGAN, MD
ALAN R. MORITZ, MD

The Kings Cross Sting research for Q Plan

Thursday, 31 October 2013

Why was Abe Saffron black mailed?

The Police won't look Subject: Donald Mackay Murder Remains

In the Cross Fire, the alleged Sabotage of Sparkling Chandeliers

Tuesday, 29 October 2013

Visitors to the website Sparkling Chandeliers.

Most popular domain of this owner:

sparklingchandeliers.com.au - The Kings Cross Sting exposed Underworld Crime, Corruption, Murder, Extortion

Saturday, 26 October 2013

Richard Carr testimony President JFK, Court document

Wednesday, 23 October 2013

JFK, Gunshots on tape...

Tuesday, 22 October 2013

Jack Ruby speech, that JFK assassination was an ordered hit

Secret Service President John F Kennedy

Autopsy report that was given on President John F Kennedy

President John F Kennedy's brain was kept for forensics...this went missing

Fatal wounding of President John F Kennedy 1968 Panel review The Kings Cross Sting is investigating

Search This Blog

About Me

Pageviews last month