From: gjjmail1202@gmail.com   
      
   On Thursday, December 7, 2023 at 7:46:02 AM UTC-5, JE Corbett wrote:   
   > On Thursday, December 7, 2023 at 5:43:20 AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:    
   > > On Tuesday, December 5, 2023 at 8:15:02 AM UTC-5, JE Corbett wrote:    
   > > > You also ignore the fact that no bullet remained in JFK's throat. No   
   bullet was found anywhere in JFK''s body.    
   > >    
   > > Xrays showed no bullet in the body.    
   > > At what time were the Xrays taken ?   
   > Does it matter? Do you think bullets just dissolve after a few hours?    
   >    
   > Since the back wound was provably an entrance, process of elimination would   
   dictate the throat wound was an exit.    
      
   Forensic pathology doesn't depend on "process of elimination". The prosectors   
   never even saw the bullet hole in the throat.   
   They came to a conclusion about a wound they never even saw. But that's   
   evidence to knuckleheads like you.   
      
   > You also ignore the fact that after the internal organs were removed at   
   autopsy, a trail of tissue damage was observed from the entrance wound    
   > to the contusion on the pleura, to the perforation of the strap muscles, to   
   the nick on the trachea, all leading to the incision    
   > that was made over the bullet wound in the throat.    
      
   Source ?   
      
   > It doesn't matter to you that a bullet striking JFK in the back and exiting   
   from his throat is the simplest and most straight forward explanation for what   
   the medical evidence indicates,   
      
   Really ? You're basing your conclusions on a "straightforward explanation" ?   
      
   What did the prosectors say ? You remember, your "forensic pathological   
   experts" ?   
      
   Dr. Humes told the Warren Commission that, "we were unable to take probes and   
   have them satisfactorily fall through any definite path at this point." ( 2 H   
   361 )   
      
   When asked if they inserted a probe into the back wound, Dr. Finck told the   
   ARRB that, "we tried at the time. It was unsuccessful." ( ARRB deposition of   
   Pierre Finck, 5.24.96, pg. 92 )   
      
   Dr. Boswell told the ARRB that the probe only went in a "very short distance.   
   Only three inches about". ( ARRB deposition of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell   
   2.26.96, pg. 119 )   
      
   The Siebert/ O'Neill report states on page 5 that, "Further probing determined   
   that the distance travelled by this missile was a short distance inasmuch as   
   the END OF THE OPENING COULD BE FELT WITH THE FINGER."  The report goes on to   
   say that, "THERE WAS    
   NO POINT OF EXIT."   
      
   Is that the "what the medical evidence indicates" that you were talking about ?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)