Excerpt from the New Guide: David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D. and Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis (2024)
Forensic Evaluation of the JFK Post-mortem X-Rays within the Nationwide Archives Show Scientifically JFK Took Three Pictures to the Head: Two from the Entrance and One at a Low Angle From the Rear
In 2015, when Michael Chesser, M.D. visited the Nationwide Archives, he paid specific consideration to the fragment path close to the brow on the 2 lateral JFK post-mortem cranium X-ray movies. I [David Mantik] had beforehand famous the presence of metallic particles at that website in my survey of all metallic on the extant movies on the Archives. (See Determine 3.9.)
As seen in Determine 3.4, Chesser recognized a fraction path that entered the higher proper brow close to the hairline. The path seems to widen from entrance to again, in step with a frontal entry however not with a rear entry. The most important fragment lies on the rear, exactly the place it will be anticipated. There isn’t any apparent exit on the finish of the fragment path—as confirmed by each my OD information and a number of radiologists.
Determine 3.4
Steel Fragment Path from a Frontal Bullet—Proven Between the Two Blue Diverging Traces, with an Apex on the Brow.
This bullet entered the best brow close to the hairline; the fragment path widens to the rear.
The most important metallic fragment is circled.
Be aware: Figures 3.4 by 3.8 are excerpted from his lecture: Michael Z. Chesser, “The Application of Forensic Principles for the Analysis of the Autopsy Skull X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Review of Brain Photographs,” Kennedys and King (previously CTKA), November 27, 2017.
Chesser introduced this visible essay for the mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald on the South Texas School of Legislation in Houston, November 16-17, 2017.
Chesser recognized the purpose of entry of this frontal shot as two “white knobby” objects on the within of the best brow (Determine 3.5). He decided that these two “white knobby” objects had been metallic, and never bone. I had beforehand famous this as properly.
Determine 3.5
Entry Website (Throughout the Dotted Rectangle) into the Proper Brow. Discover the 2 “white knobby” objects simply contained in the frontal (brow) bone, close to the middle of the field.
Determine 3.6 is a close-up of the 2 “white knobby” objects simply inside the best brow.
Determine 3.6
Shut-up: The “Two “White Knobby” Objects Simply Contained in the Frontal (Brow) Bone.
On the entry website (Determine 3.7), Chesser simulated the tiny, virtually dust-like, particles. This was excessive in the best brow close to the hairline.
Determine 3.7
Chesser’s Simulated Fragment Path Close to the Proper Brow.
Fragments are additionally current on the entry website (to the best of the tiny purple arrowhead and inferior to the 2 “knobby” objects).
Determine 3.8 identifies the entry of this brow shot. Chesser clarified: “The fragment trail supports a right frontal entry site at approximately this location [referring to the dot placed on Kennedy’s forehead as shown on the photograph]. An entry wound at this location would have been covered by hair, and easily missed by the Parkland personnel, who focused on resuscitation and the profusely bleeding right occipital wound.”[1]
Determine 3.8
Proper Frontal Entry (Strong Blue Dot on JFK’s Brow within the {Photograph}).The {photograph} is from Love Area on November 22, 1963.
Chesser’s unbiased observations of the lateral X-ray movie exactly mirrored my observations and evaluation. In Determine 3.9, I’ve highlighted (by way of the lengthy blue line with the arrowhead) the fragment path from the frontal entry at JFK’s proper brow.[2]
Determine 3.9
Bullet Fragment Path from the Frontal Shot (Skinny Indirect Arrow).
That is my copy (finished on the Archives) of all metallic particles.
The bullet entered the best brow close to the hairline.
The most important ellipse represents an amorphous metallic opacity, probably mercury. This isn’t a single piece of strong metallic.
The vertical arrow (at the rear) identifies the authentic fragment described in their 302 report by the two FBI agents who attended the JFK autopsy, James Sibert and Francis O’Neill, (labeled in this book as SOF). This was not removed at the autopsy. It served as an anchor in 3D space for the 6.5 mm fake on the AP X-ray film. The fragments in the trail must lie within soft tissue in the right hemisphere. Note that SOF lies too far from the trail to be part of it. Most likely, it represents shrapnel (from the rear).
Copper residue was identified at the holes on the back of the coat and shirt; the holes were likely caused by shrapnel. SOF most likely represents metallic shrapnel from a bullet that struck Elm Street. There are at least three arguments for shrapnel, as follows: (1) at least five witnesses (including several in the Warren Commission [WC] volumes) reported such a bullet (or even bullets) glancing off Elm Street; (2) on the skull X-rays at the Archives, I have observed tiny metal fragments to be widely scattered on both sides of the skull—all government investigations have ignored these; and (3) low energy X-ray scattering[3] confirmed metallic on the holes on the rear of the shirt and coat; spectroscopic information confirmed that this metallic was copper, in step with a (partially) copper-jacketed fragment. However, no metallic was discovered on the entrance of the shirt. This damaging consequence for the shirt implies both (1) a non-metallic projectile or (2) an entry superior to the shirt collar. Moreover, as confirmed metallic on the holes on the rear of the shirt and coat; spectroscopic information[4] confirmed that this metallic was copper, in step with a (partially) copper-jacketed fragment. However, no metallic was discovered on the entrance of the shirt. This damaging consequence for the shirt implies both (1) a non-metallic projectile or (2) an entry superior to the shirt collar.[5] Moreover, as can be anticipated for shrapnel, the pathologists reported that the again wound was very shallow. For extra proof that shrapnel prompted the again wound, observe that the abrasion collar was positioned on the inferior fringe of this wound;[6] this means a rising projectile. In different phrases, the again wound was not brought on by a descending bullet, e.g., a sabot from the County Information Constructing.[7]
Stavis “Steve” Ellis, a Dallas Police Division solo bike officer, was in control of the bike escort. He supplied firsthand testimony:
Concerning the time I began on a curve on Elm, I had turned to my proper to present alerts to open up the intervals since we had been fixing to get on the freeway a brief distance away. That’s all I had on my thoughts. Simply as I rotated, then the primary shot went off. It hit again there.[8]
He noticed the shot hit the south aspect of the curb on Elm Road:
It regarded prefer it hit the concrete or grass there in only a flash, and a bunch of junk flew up like a white or grey colour mud or smoke popping out of the concrete.[9]
Ellis defined the concrete influence was from the primary shot. After that, he heard two extra photographs (three photographs altogether):
The sounds had been all clear and loud and sounded about the identical. From the place I used to be, they appeared like they had been coming from round the place the tall tree was in entrance of that constructing [the TSBD]. In fact, I’m forming an opinion primarily based on the place I noticed that stuff hit the road, so I knew that it needed to come from up that means, and I assumed the others got here from the identical place.[10]
Royce Skelton, a mail clerk on the Texas-Louisiana Freight Bureau, witnessed the assassination from the Triple Overpass. He testified to the WC:
After these two photographs, and the automotive got here on down nearer to the triple underpass, properly, there was one other shot—two extra photographs I heard, however one in all them—I noticed a bullet, or I assume it was a bullet—I take it as a right it was—hit in entrance of the President’s automotive on the cement, and when it did, the smoke carried with it—away from the constructing [the TSBD].[11]
Skelton testified that when the shot hit the pavement, it “scattered” right into a “spray.” He noticed spray go westward (within the downhill route that the limousine was transferring).[12]
Harry Holmes was an inspector for the US Put up Workplace Division. He noticed the scene by way of binoculars from his workplace window on the fifth ground of the terminal annex constructing on the nook of Houston and Commerce Streets. He testified to the WC about three firecracker-like sounds, one in all which prompted “dust fly up” that flew “off of President Kennedy.”[13]Mrs. Donald Baker, a bookkeeper within the TSBD, watched the motorcade from the entrance of the TSBD. She testified to the WC that she noticed “sparks” from an obvious firecracker that hit the road behind the limousine because it handed her on Elm Road.[14] Ira David Wooden III famous in his in depth JFK Assassination Chronology: “On hearing the first burst of firing, [Dallas County] Sheriff [Bill] Decker glances back and thinks sees a bullet bouncing off the street pavement.” Wooden added: “Motorcycle officer James Chaney will also tell newsmen this day [November 22, 1963] that
the first shot missed. It is suggested that JFK is hit by small pieces of the street pavement and stops waving for a moment.”[15]
Nevertheless, since copper residue was discovered on the coat and shirt (solely on the again), it’s unlikely that the clothes holes had been brought on by bits of road pavement, until the road was paved with copper.
Chesser summed up his conclusions in regards to the frontal shot to JFK’s proper brow as follows:
That is what I noticed on the unique proper lateral cranium x-ray on the archives. There’s a hole within the bone—not very huge, possibly 3 mm, however keep in mind that this can be a composite of all the fabric between the x-ray machine and the movie—when seen from the aspect, a gap within the frontal bone is probably not seen in any respect, and whether it is, it received’t seem as large as its precise width. I believe that this defect might be on account of a mix of an entry wound and related radial fracture line(s).[16]
He defined his findings:
A very powerful discovering right here is the proximity of those tiny metallic fragments to this bone defect. This location, on the intracranial aspect of the bony defect, is very suggestive of an entry wound. One of many ideas of cranium ballistics is that the biggest fragments journey the furthest from the entry website, with the smallest fragments touring the least distance, and that’s precisely what’s seen on this proper lateral cranium x-ray. Tiny fragments had been seen on the inside aspect of this proper entrance cranium defect, and the biggest fragments had been famous at the back of the cranium.[17]
Chesser concluded that the fragment path was on account of a bullet entry on the proper brow close to the hairline. He added that on the AP X-ray movie, the fragment path is positioned superiorly, trailing upward and backward on the best aspect. [18]
In James DiEugenio’s and Oliver Stone’s documentary JFK: Future Betrayed (the four-hour model of Stone’s 2021 JFK Revisited: Via the Trying Glass), there’s a phase during which Drs. Chesser, Aguilar, and I talk about the frontal shot to JFK’s proper brow.
Narrator [Whoopi Goldberg]: After the movie JFK was launched, a number of medical doctors went to the Nationwide Archives to view the X-rays of Kennedy’s cranium. They noticed particulars in these X-rays which introduced yet one more downside for the Warren Report’s declare that Kennedy was solely shot from the rear.
Dr. David Mantik: Properly, the federal government investigators did declare that there was no proof of a shot from the entrance. However they didn’t inform us a couple of issues that had been crucial, which now we have realized solely lately. We now have seen tiny metallic fragments proper on the brow.
Dr. Michael Chesser: Whenever you take a look at the X-rays which are saved on the archives now, on the lateral X-ray there’s a fragment path. It truly expands from entrance to again, and there are dozens of very tiny dustlike fragment particles up on this location.Dr. David Mantik: Now why is that vital? Properly, what we all know is that the bigger bullet fragments journey farther, whereas the smaller ones have a tendency to remain close to the entry website. That’s what we see on these X-rays. In different phrases, we will fairly interpret these as being in step with a frontal bullet, however being radically inconsistent with a posterior bullet.
Dr. Gary Aguilar: And that’s not proof you possibly can erase. You possibly can’t make that disappear, however that’s incontrovertible proof of a shot from the best entrance by a non-jacketed bullet.[19]
In my interview with DiEugenio for the 2021 Oliver Stone documentary is one other sequence in regards to the frontal shot to the best brow:
James DiEugenio: Now, did the Home Choose Committee say that one of many causes that they thought that the entire post-mortem supplies [were] real was as a result of there was no proof of a shot from the entrance?
Dr. David Mantik: On the lateral X-rays particularly, the findings of Dr. Chesser and myself are fairly exceptional. We now have seen tiny metallic fragments proper on the brow on these lateral X-rays and Chesser particularly has seen a small gap within the cranium in step with the passage of a bullet by the brow. Not one of the authorities investigations have ever advised us about these items.
Additional, many of the bullet fragments that we see on the lateral cranium X-rays are within the anterior half of the cranium. These are for probably the most half very, very tiny. A lot of them are just one millimeter or so in measurement. In different phrases, we will fairly interpret these as being in step with a frontal bullet, however being radically inconsistent with a posterior bullet.[20]
Kinetic vitality explains why bigger fragments journey farther than smaller fragments. Kinetic vitality = 1/2 mv2, the place m = mass and v = velocity. Thus, a particle with extra mass has extra kinetic vitality. Apart from that, although, smaller fragments decelerate sooner—the drag forces on them are comparatively larger. Therefore, the tiny particles close to the brow recommend an entry close to that website. The bigger fragment on the proper rear gives further proof for a frontal entry. As anticipated, bigger fragments journey farther.
WC Exhibit 387 is the official post-mortem report (see Appendix J), signed by Humes, Boswell, and Finck. The pathologists famous: “Roentgenograms of the skull reveal multiple minute metallic fragments along a line corresponding with a line joining the above-described small occipital wound and the right supra-orbital ridge.” [21] In his 2021 presentation to the Way forward for Freedom Basis,[22] Chesser referred to as this a “bald-faced lie.” He’s right; there isn’t any such path—no metallic fragments are seen alongside that low-lying path. This lie by the pathologists means that they felt they needed to acknowledge the metallic path, in order that they merely displaced it downward (by 10 cm) as a way to keep away from a second headshot.
In September 1977, immediately before the HSCA made the JFK X-ray films public for the first time, Russell Morgan, MD (the sole radiologist for the Clark Panel), almost surely to avert professional humiliation, essentially recanted his earlier opinion. In a statement reported in the newspapers[23] on the time, Morgan stated he was now not so sure that the only bullet that hit JFK’s head from the rear was a Mannlicher-Carcano spherical. As an alternative, he instructed that the fragmentation of the bullet (i.e., the fragment path) was so extreme that the bullet might need been a so-called “dum-dum” (hole level) spherical. With this assertion, Morgan had primarily exonerated Oswald. He had additionally thereby left the 6.5 mm object free-floating in fantasy land; he merely ignored it! In spite of everything, this 6.5 mm faux doesn’t lie on the fragment path. Nonetheless, it had been the keystone for the Clark Panel’s daft cowlick entry wound—which they’d elevated by 10 cm above the WC’s entry website. Morgan additionally admitted, for the primary time, that he now favored exhuming JFK’s physique to reply questions in regards to the bullet fragments.[24] Sadly, for the reality, he had withheld all of his new-found insights from the Clark Panel report, in order that (in 1977) he was 9 years too late. In any case, the HSCA ignored his new insights.
In his interview with DiEugenio for the 2021 Stone documentary, Chesser additionally commented on this sleight-of-hand elevation of the (proposed) rear entry website:
Dr. Michael Chesser: The [Warren] Fee positioned the entry of a bullet fired from the sixth ground of the Texas Faculty Guide Depository low at the back of the pinnacle, proper subsequent to the exterior occipital protuberance. The Clark Panel and the HSCA moved u[ this wound four inches, into the parietal bone. Four inches is quite a distance from the original location of the entrance wound. They did this for several reasons. They knew that an entry in the lower location would cause enormous damage to the cerebellum—and to their story. In the fake brain photograph the cerebellum is untouched. In the autopsy report, Commander Humes described a fragment trail beginning near the external occipital protuberance. The extant X-ray films disprove this.
James DiEugenio: So there is no diagonal that leads upward in the present X-rays?
Dr. Michael Chesser: The X-rays at the archives do not show a fragment trail extending from low up to here. They show a fragment trail from the back of the parietal bone to the frontal bone. But the fragment trail doesn’t fit the conclusions of the Clark Panel or the House Select Committee. For several reasons. I think the most important reason is that the tiniest fragments on that trail, and there are dozens of them, are very thin or just inside the frontal bone. And the largest fragments are at the back of the skull. This goes against all forensic evidence that the tiniest fragments are not going to travel that far. So it’s impossible for a shot here, in the back of the skull, to result in all of the tiniest bullet fragments in the frontal region.
James DiEugenio: You’re saying that the fact that there’s all these dustlike particles in the front of the skull would indicate a point of entry from the front.
Dr. Michael Chesser: Yes it does. It’s very strong evidence.
James DiEugenio: And you’re also saying that because the larger fragments were in the back, that would also indicate a shot from the front.
Dr. Michael Chesser: Yes.[25] [End of colloquy.]
Nevertheless, even after this unwarranted elevation by the HSCA, the particles path continues to be too excessive—the path truly lies noticeably above the HSCA’s entry website. Chesser concurred. In the course of the 2015 JFK Lancer Convention, he said: “I think that one of the reasons that they [the HSCA] moved the entry wound up was due to the fragment particle trail shown in the right lateral skull x-ray. If a line is drawn from the Warren Commission entry site to the proposed exit site, you’ll notice that the particle trail doesn’t correspond with these sites. The prominent particle trail is located in the upper portion of the skull.”[26]
The HSCA illustrated their hypothetical trajectory for the only headshot (Determine 3.10).
Determine 3.10
HSCA’s Imaginary Hypothetical Trajectory: From the TSBD to the Parietal Cranium.
Determine 3.10 is from Michael Z. Chesser, MD, “The Application of Forensic Principles for the Analysis of the Autopsy Skull X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Review of Brain Photographs,” Kennedys and King, November 27, 2017, op. cit.
[1] Michael Z. Chesser, MD, “The Application of Forensic Principles for the Analysis of the Autopsy Skull X-Rays of President Kennedy and a Review of Brain Photographs,” op. cit.
[2] My tedious, however exact, identification (carried out whereas on the Archives) of all obvious metallic particles on each the lateral and AP X-ray movies can also be proven in colour in my hardcover e-book, p. 379.
[3] Jerry McKnight, “Bugliosi Fails to Resuscitate the Single-Bullet Theory,” Mary Ferrell Basis, n.d., https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Bugliosi_Fails_to_Resuscitate_the_Single-Bullet_Theory.html.
[4] “Description of President Kennedy’s wounds,” Appendix to Hearings Earlier than the Choose Committee on Assassination of the U.S. Home of Representatives Ninety-Fifth Congress Second Session, vol. 7, op. cit., p. 83.
[5] Amongst different witnesses (e.g., Diana Bowron), Charles Carrico clearly implied that the throat wound lay above the collar (“Testimony of Dr. Charles James Carrico and Dr. Malcom Oliver Perry, “Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 3, op. cit., at pp. 361-362). For additional dialogue of its location, see my hardcover e-book, pp. 10-12.
Charles James Carrico and Dr. Malcom Oliver Perry, “Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 3, op. cit., at pp. 361-362). For additional dialogue of its location, see my hardcover e-book, pp. 10-12.
[6] “Summary of the forensic pathologists’ perspective of wound ballistics,” Appendix to Hearings Earlier than the Choose Committee on Assassination of the U.S. Home of Representatives Ninety-Fifth Congress Second Session, vol. 7, op. cit., p. 175. The trajectory was barely upward.
[7] This, nevertheless, can’t completely rule out a sabot. In spite of everything, extra bullets than CE 399 litter this farcical case.
[8] Larry A. Sneed, “Stavis Ellis,” in No Extra Silence: An Oral Historical past of the Assassination of President Kennedy (Dallas, TX: Three Forks Books, 1998), pp. 142-153, at p. 145.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
See additionally: Bonar Menninger, Mortal Error: The Shot That Killed JFK, op. cit., pp. 68-78. Howard Donahue was the protagonist on this e-book. In a simulation, he was the one uncommon marksman who succeeded in hitting a JFK-like goal inside the allotted time. I had the pleasure of assembly Howard Donahue and his spouse at their dwelling in Maryland.
[11] “Testimony of Royce G. Skelton,” Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 7, op. cit., pp. 236-239, at p. 238.
[12] Ibid.
[13] “Testimony of Harry D. Holmes,” Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 7, op. cit., pp. 289-308, at p. 291.
[14] “Testimony of Mrs. Donald Baker,” Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 7, op. cit., pp. 507-515.
[15] Ira David Wooden III, “22 November 1963: A Chronology,” in Homicide in Dealey Plaza, ed. James H. Fetzer, op. cit., pp. 17-118, at p. 36.
Wooden’s JFK Assassination Chronicle can also be accessible as a Kindle e-book, https://amzn.to/3NK5Moz.
[16] Michael Chesser, MD, “A Review of the JFK Cranial x-Rays and Photographs,” Assassination of JFK, n.d., https://assassinationofjfk.net/a-review-of-the-jfk-cranial-x-rays-and-photographs/. That is from Chesser’s lecture for the 2015 JFK Lancer Convention in Dallas, Texas.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] James DiEugenio, “JFK: Destiny Betrayed (Annotated Transcript of Four-Hour Film)” in JFK Revisited: Via the Trying Glass (New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2022), pp. 155-190, at p. 169.
[20] Ibid., “Interview Excerpts: Dr. David Mantik,” pp. 264-272, at p. 269.
[21] “Clinical record of autopsy protocol prepared by the Naval Medical School, Bethesda, Md., on the autopsy performed on President Kennedy,” in Hearings earlier than the President’s Fee on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 16, CE 387, op. cit., pp. 978-983. at p. 981. See Appendix J.
[22] Michael Chesser, “Reviewing the Autopsy X-Rays,” op. cit.
[23] Lansing State Journal (Lansing, Michigan), September 16, 1977, p. 9. Curiously, Voyager I used to be launched on September 5, 1977, simply eleven days earlier than Humes publicly seen the JFK X-ray movies with the HSCA. Regardless of his alarming feedback, Morgan was not additional interrogated by the HSCA, and nobody requested about Voyager both. The article was titled “Expert Backs Warren Report,” when it extra precisely ought to have been titled “Expert Questions Warren Report.”
[24] For the entire newspaper article about Morgan’s close to confession, see my hardcover e-book: The JFK Assassination Decoded: Prison Forgery within the Post-mortem Pictures and X-rays. The excerpted newspaper article seems instantly after the dedication to the e-book, JFK’s Head Wounds: A Closing Synthesis—and a New Evaluation of the Harper Fragment.
[25] James DiEugenio, “Interview Excerpts: Dr. Michael Chesser,” in JFK Revisited: Via the Trying Glass, op. cit., pp. 292-298, at pp. 293-294.
[26] Michael Chesser, MD, “A Review of the JFK Cranial x-Rays and Photographs,” op. cit.
